## Report on Re ductions Achieved from I nc entive-Based Emission Re duction Meas ures in the San Joaquin Valley

AP PE NDIX A .4 : 2005 Carl Moyer Me mo rial Air Quality Standards Attai nm ent Pr og ram Guidelines Part IV

Release D ate: Se pt em ber 22, 20 14 He ari ng Dat e: Octo ber 2 3

, 2 014



# Calif or ni a E nvironme nt a l Protection Agen cy 

# Air Resources Board

# THE CARL MOYER PROGRAM GUIDELINES

PART IV



# APPENDICES

Approved

November 17, 2005TABLE OF CONTENTS

Appendix A – Acronyms

Appendix B – Tables for Emission Reduction and Cost -Effectiveness Calculations

Appendix C – Cost-Effectiveness Calculation Methodo logy

Appendix D – Example Calculations

Appendix E – Description of Certification and Verif ication Executive Orders

Appendix F – Retrofit Emission Control Strategies

Appendix G – Description of Functional Equivalency of Non-Original Equipment

Manufacturer Repowers and Rebuilt Engines for use i n Repowers

## APPENDIX A

ACRONYMSA-1 ACRONYMS APPENDIX A

ACRONYMS

AAP Agricultural Assistance Program AB Assembly Bill ABT Average Banking and Trading AC Alternating Current AECP Alternative Emission Control Plan AESS Automatic Engine Start-Stop Ah Amp-hour APCD Air Pollution Control District APCO Air Pollution Control Officer APU Auxiliary Power Unit AQMD Air Quality Management District ARB California Air Resources Board ASM Acceleration Simulation Mode ATCM Airborne Toxic Control Measure ATE Advanced Travel Center Electrification AVL Automatic Vehicle Locator BACT Best Available Control Technology BAR Bureau of Automotive Repair bhp Brake Horsepower BNSF Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad BTU British Thermal Unit C/E Cost Effectiveness CAF Confined Animal Facility CCR California Code of Regulations CI Compression Ignition CNG Compressed Natural Gas CO Carbon Monoxide COG Council of Governments CRF Capital Recovery Factor DC Direct Current DDHS Diesel Driven Heating System DECS Diesel Emission Control Strategy DMV Department of Motor Vehicles DOC Diesel Oxidation Catalyst DOE Department of Energy DPF Diesel Particulate Filter E/S Electric Standby ECF Energy Consumption Factor ECF Energy Consumption Factor EF Emission Factor EGR Exhaust Gas RecirculationA-2 ACRONYMS

EMFAC ARB’s On-Road Motor Vehicle Emission Inventor y Model EMU Electronic Monitoring Unit EO Executive Order EQIP Environmental Quality Incentives Program ERCs Emission Reduction Credits ES Emission Standards FBC Fuel-Borne Catalyst FCF Fuel Correction Factor FEL Family Emission Limit FTA Federal Transit Administration FTF Flow-Through Filter FY Fiscal Year g gram g/bhp-hr gram per brake horsepower-hour gal Gallon GPS Geographic Positioning System GSE Ground Support Equipment GTL Gas-to-Liquid GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating HC Hydrocarbons HD Heavy-Duty HDDE Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine HDT Heavy-Duty Truck HDV Heavy-Duty Vehicle HEB Hybrid-Electric Bus HHDV Heavy Heavy-Duty Vehicle hp Horsepower hr Hour HSC California Health and Safety Code HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning IC Internal Combustion ICE Internal Combustion Engine ILD Idle Limiting Device IMO International Maritime Organization IPI Team Incentive Program Implementation Team IRS Internal Revenue Service ISO International Standards Organization kW Kilowatt lbs Pounds LETRU Low Emission Transport Refrigeration Unit LF Load Factor LHD Light Heavy-Duty LNG Liquefied Natural Gas LPG Liquefied Propane Gas LSI Large Spark Ignited MDO Marine Diesel OilA-3 ACRONYMS

MGO Marine Gas Oil MHDV Medium Heavy-Duty Vehicle mi Mile MOA Memorandum of Agreement MOU Memorandum of Understanding MV Fee Motor Vehicle Registration Fee MY Model Year NADA National Automotive Dealership Association NMHC Non-Methane Hydrocarbons NOFA Notice of Funds Available NOx Oxides of Nitrogen OBD II On-Road Diagnostics, Phase II OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons PEM Proton Exchange Membrane PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric PM Particulate Matter PM10 Inhalable Particulate Matter RFP Request for Proposals ROG Reactive Organic Gas RSD Remote Sensing Device SB Senate Bill SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCE Southern California Edison SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction SIP State Implementation Plan SMAQMD Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Manageme nt District SOF Soluble Organic Fraction SOFC Solid Oxide Fuel Cell SOP Statement of Principles SORE Small Off Road Engine STB Surface Transportation Board STD Standard SULEV Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle SUV Sport-Utility Vehicle SWCV Solid Waste Collection Vehicle TAC Toxic Air Contaminant TFV Transit Fleet Vehicle THC Total Hydrocarbon TIP Transportation Implementation Plan tpd Tons Per Day TRU Transport Refrigeration Unit TSE Truck Stop Electrification U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency UB Urban BusA-4 ACRONYMS

ULETRU Ultra Low Emission Transport Refrigeration Unit ULEV Ultra Low Emission Vehicle UP Union Pacific Railroad V Volt VAVR Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement VIN Vehicle Identification Number VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOC Volatile Organic Compound VVR Voluntary Vehicle Repair yr Year ZEB Zero Emission Bus

## APPENDIX B

TABLES FOR EMISSION REDUCTION AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONSB-1 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES APPENDIX B

TABLES FOR EMISSION REDUCTION AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS

This appendix presents tables summarizing the data needed to calculate the emission reductions and cost-effectiveness of potential proj ects. Included are data such as engine emission factors, load factors, and other co nversion factors used in the calculations discussed in Appendix C: Cost-Effecti veness Calculation Methodology and Appendix D: Example Calculations.

The emission factors in the tables reflect prelimin ary data on emission rates developed by ARB staff as part of a comprehensive effort to u pdate the emissions models used for on-road motor vehicles and off-road mobile sources. These draft data were made available on ARB's website in early 2005, but are s ubject to change as staff completes its analyses and the associated model development. ARB staff will issue Carl Moyer Program Advisories to update the tables as necessary.B-2 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES

CRF FOR ALL PROJECTS Table B-1

HEAVY-DUTY ON-ROAD VEHICLES Tables B-2 – B-8

HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK IDLE REDUCTION Tables B-9 – B-10

TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION UNITS Table B-11

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT AND STATIONARY AND PORTABLE AGRICULTURAL ENGINES Tables B-12 – B-13

LARGE SPARK IGNITION ENGINES Table B-14

AIRPORT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT Table B-15

LOCOMOTIVES Tables B-16 – B-17

MARINE VESSELS Tables B-18 – B-23

LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES Table B-21

REFERENCE Tables B-25 – B-28B-3 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### ALL PROJECTS

Table B-1 Capital Recovery Factors (CRF) for Various Project Life

At Four Percent Discount Rate

Project Life CRF

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0.360

0.275 0.225 0.191 0.167 0.149 0.134 0.123 0.114 0.107 0.100 0.095 0.090 0.086 0.082 0.079 0.076 0.074B-4 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### HEAVY-DUTY ON-ROAD VEHICLES

Table B-2 Heavy-Duty Engines 2004-2006 Converted Emission Standards

(g/bhp-hr)

a – 2004-2006 emission standard for all on-road hea vy duty engines except diesel urban buses. b – 2004-2006 optional emission standards for all o n-road heavy duty engines except diesel urban buses. c – 2004-2006 emission standard for all on-road hea vy duty engines except urban buses. d – 2004-2006 emission standard for all urban buses

. e - Emission standards were converted where appropr iate, using the NMHC and NOx fraction default values and the ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel correction factors listed in Appendix B, Tables B-22 and B-24, respectively

Table B-3

Heavy-Duty Alternative Fuel Engines Converted Emission Standards

(g/bhp-hr)

Model Year NOx PM10
1988 – 1989 6.0 0.60 1990 6.0 0.60 1991 – 1993 5.0 0.25 1994 – 1997 5.0 0.10 1998 - September 2002 4.0 0.10 October 2002 – 2006 2.0 0.10 2007 1.2 0.01 2010 0.2 0.01 EO Certification Level Converted Emission Standards

NOx + NMHC Diesel NOx (e) Diesel ROG (e) Alternative Fuel NOx
2.5 (a) 2.21 0.12 2.00 1.8 (b) 1.59 0.09 1.44 1.5 (b) 1.33 0.07 1.20 1.2 (b) 1.06 0.06 0.96 0.9 (b) 0.80 0.04 0.72 0.6 (b) 0.53 0.03 0.48 0.3 (b) 0.27 0.01 0.24

PM10 Diesel PM10 Alternative Fuel PM10
0.10 (c) 0.072 0.100 0.03 (b) 0.022 0.030 0.02 (b) 0.014 0.020 0.01 (b,d) 0.007 0.010B-5 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES Table B-4 Medium Heavy-Duty Vehicles 14,001-33,000 lbs GVWR NOx, ROG, and PM10 Emission Factors

(g/mile) (a)

Model Year NOx ROG PM10 Pre-1984 1984 – 1986 1987 – 1990 1991 – 1993 1994 – 1997 1998 – 2002 2003+ 2004 – 2006 2007+ 17.21

16.65 14.60 12.18 10.70 9.77 5.39 5.12 0.51 0.29

0.29 0.18 0.16 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.792

0.720 0.504 0.288 0.216 0.144 0.216 0.216 0.024 a - Emission factors were converted using the ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel correction factors listed in table B-24.

Table B-5 Diesel Heavy Heavy-Duty Vehicles 33,000+ lbs GVWR NOx, ROG, and PM10 Emission Factors

(g/mile) (a)

Model Year NOx ROG PM10 Pre-1987 1987 – 1990 1991 – 1993 1994 – 1997 1998 – 2002 2003 – 2006 2007 – 2009 2010+ 21.39

21.11 18.23 17.95 17.58 11.63 6.36 1.06 1.04

0.81 0.54 0.40 0.51 0.26 0.23 0.18 1.249

1.354 0.562 0.367 0.403 0.252 0.028 0.028 a - Emission factors were converted using the ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel correction factors listed in table B-24.B-6 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES Table B-6 Diesel Urban Buses NOx, ROG, and PM10 Converted Emission Standards (g/bhp-hr)

Model Year NOx ROG PM10
1987 – 1990 (a)
1991 – 1993 (a)
1994 – 1995 (a)
1996 – 2002 (a)
2003 (a,b)
2004 – 2006 (c)
2007 – 2009 2010 5.58

4.65 4.65 3.72 2.21

- 1.20 0.20 1.17

1.17 1.17 1.17 0.12

- 0.19 0.19 0.432

0.072 0.050 0.036 0.007

- 0.010 0.010 a - Emission standards were converted where appropr iate, using the NMHC and NOx fraction default values and the ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel correction factors listed in Appendix B, Tables B-22 and B-24, respectively. b - NOx+NMHC emission standard converted to NOx and ROG. c - As of the date of publication, no diesel buses have been certified to the 0.5 g/bhp-hr 2004-2006 model year emission standard.

Table B-7 Natural Gas Urban Buses NOx and PM10 Converted Emission Standards

(g/bhp-hr)

Model Year NOx PM10
1991 – 1993 1994 – 1995 1996 – 1997 1998 – 2002 (b)
2003 – 2006 (a,b,c)
2007 – 2009 2010+ 5.00

5.00 4.00 2.50 1.44 1.20 0.20 0.100

0.070 0.050 0.050 0.020 0.010 0.010
a - NOx+NMHC emission standard converted to NOx onl y. b - A majority of the natural gas urban buses have been certified to the optional standards. Therefore, these values are based on th e optional standards. c - Many natural gas urban buses have been certifie d to optional standards below this level.B-7 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES Table B-8 Conversion Factors for NOx, ROG and PM10 Heavy-Duty Vehicle Projects (bhp-hr/mile)

Model Year Medium HeavyDuty 14,001-33,000 lbs. Heavy HeavyDuty 33,000 lbs. + Urban Bus

33,000 lbs.

+ Pre-1978 2.3 2.9 4.3 1978 – 1981 2.3 2.8 4.3 1982 – 1983 2.3 2.8 4.3 1984 – 1990 2.3 2.7 4.3 1991 – 1995 2.3 2.7 4.3 1996+ 2.3 2.6 a 4.3 a - 2.6 bhp-hr/mile is for all heavy-duty line haul trucks (class 8).B-8 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### HEAVY-DUTY TRUCK IDLE REDUCTION

Table B-9 Heavy Heavy-Duty Vehicle Idling Emission Factors* (g/hr)

Model Year NOx ROG PM10
Pre-1975 54.50 186.85 25.30 1975 – 1976 63.45 164.42 21.05 1977 – 1979 74.65 139.65 16.70 1980 – 1983 90.35 111.32 12.11 1984 – 1986 106.00 88.29 8.77 1987 – 1989 121.50 70.42 6.34 1991 – 1993 120.50 65.61 6.11 1994 – 1997 136.00 52.26 4.43 1998 164.50 37.77 2.62 1999 – 2002 171.00 34.28 2.28 2003 187.00 27.24 1.65 2004 – 2006 191.50 25.56 1.50 2007 – 2009 191.50 25.56 0.83 2010+ 191.50 25.56 0.15 *Factors are for truck idling at a RPM >800

Table B-10 Emission Factors for Small Off-Road Diesel Engines

(g/bhp-hr) (a)

Horsepower Model Year NOx ROG PM10
< 11 Pre-1995 9.30 1.26 0.720 < 11 1995 – 1999 8.70 0.88 0.410 < 11 2000 – 2004 5.76 0.57 0.376 < 11 2005 – 2007 4.14 0.41 0.304 < 11 2008 – 2020 4.14 0.41 0.152 11 – <25 Pre-1995 6.44 1.54 0.550 11 – <25 1995 – 1999 6.44 0.75 0.413 11 – <25 2000 – 2004 5.49 0.54 0.306 11 – <25 2005 – 2007 4.33 0.43 0.306 11 – <25 2008 – 2020 4.33 0.43 0.152 a - Emission factors were converted using the ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel correction factors listed in table B-25.B-9 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION UNITS

Table B-11 TRU Engine Load Factors (Default Values)

Horsepower Load Factor
<25 0.64 25 – 50 0.53B-10 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT

AND STATIONARY AND PORTABLE AGRICULTURAL ENGINES

Table B-12 Emission Factors for Off-Road Diesel Engines (g/bhp-hr) (a)

Horsepower Tier NOx ROG PM10 25 – 49 Uncontrolled pre-1988 6.51 2.21 0.547 Uncontrolled 1988 + 6.42 2.17 0.547 1 5.26 1.74 0.480 2 4.63 0.29 0.280 4 Interim 4.55 0.12 0.128 4 Final 2.75 0.12 0.008 50 – 74 Uncontrolled pre-1988 12.09 1.73 0.605 Uncontrolled 1988+ 8.14 1.19 0.497 1 6.54 1.19 0.552 2 4.75 0.23 0.192 3 2.74 0.12 0.192 4 Interim 2.74 0.12 0.064 4 Final 2.74 0.12 0.008 75 – 99 Uncontrolled pre-1988 12.09 1.73 0.605 Uncontrolled 1988+ 8.14 1.19 0.497 1 6.54 1.19 0.552 2 4.75 0.23 0.192 3 2.74 0.12 0.192 4 Interim 2.15 0.11 0.008 4 Final 0.26 0.06 0.008 100 – 174 Uncontrolled pre-1970 13.02 1.59 0.554 Uncontrolled 1970 – 1971 12.09 1.32 0.475 Uncontrolled 1972 – 1979 11.16 1.20 0.396 Uncontrolled 1980 – 1984 10.23 1.13 0.396 Uncontrolled 1985 – 1987 10.23 1.06 0.396 Uncontrolled post-1987 7.60 0.82 0.274 1 6.54 0.82 0.304 2 4.17 0.19 0.128 3 2.32 0.12 0.112 4 Interim 2.15 0.11 0.008 4 Final 0.26 0.06 0.008 175 – 299 Uncontrolled pre-1970 13.02 1.52 0.554 Uncontrolled 1970 – 1971 12.09 1.26 0.475 Uncontrolled 1972 – 1979 11.16 1.14 0.396 Uncontrolled 1980 – 1984 10.23 1.08 0.396B-11 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES a - Emission factors were converted using the ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel correction factors listed in table B-25. Horsepower Tier NOX ROG PM10
Uncontrolled 1985 – 1987 10.23 1.01 0.396 Uncontrolled post-1987 7.60 0.82 0.274 1 5.93 0.38 0.120 2 4.15 0.12 0.088 3 2.32 0.12 0.088 4 Interim 1.29 0.08 0.008 4 Final 0.26 0.06 0.008 300 – 750 Uncontrolled pre- 1970 13.02 1.52 0.533 Uncontrolled 1970 – 1971 12.09 1.26 0.454 Uncontrolled 1972 – 1979 11.16 1.14 0.382 Uncontrolled 1980 – 1984 10.23 1.08 0.382 Uncontrolled 1985 – 1987 10.23 1.01 0.382 Uncontrolled post- 1987 7.60 0.82 0.274 1 5.93 0.38 0.120 2 3.79 0.12 0.088 3 2.32 0.12 0.088 4 Interim 1.29 0.08 0.008 4 Final 0.26 0.06 0.008 >750 Uncontrolled pre- 1970 13.02 1.52 0.533 Uncontrolled 1970 – 1971 12.09 1.26 0.454 Uncontrolled 1972 – 1979 11.16 1.14 0.382 Uncontrolled 1980 – 1984 10.23 1.08 0.382 Uncontrolled 1985 – 1987 10.23 1.01 0.382 Uncontrolled post- 1987 7.60 0.82 0.274 1 5.93 0.38 0.120 2 3.87 0.12 0.088 4 Interim 2.24 0.12 0.048 4 Final 2.24 0.06 0.016B-12 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES Table B-13 Default Load Factors for Off-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines

Category Equipment Type Load Factor Agriculture Agricultural Mowers 0.43

Agricultural Tractors 0.70 Balers 0.58 Combines 0.70 Hydro Power Units 0.48 Sprayers 0.50 Swathers 0.55 Tillers 0.78 Other Agricultural Equipment 0.51 Construction Cranes 0.43 Crawler Tractors 0.64 Crushing/Processing 0.78 Excavators 0.57 Graders 0.61 Off-Highway Tractors 0.65

Off-Highway Trucks 0.57 Pavers 0.62 Other Paving Equipment 0.53 Rollers 0.56 Rubber-Tired Dozers 0.59 Rubber-Tired Loaders 0.54 Scrapers 0.72 Signal Boards 0.78 Skid Steer Loaders 0.55 Surfacing Equipment 0.45 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.55 Trenchers 0.75 Other Construction Equipment 0.62 Cargo Handling Container Handling Equipment 0.59 Cranes 0.43 Excavators 0.57 Forklifts 0.30 Other,

General Industrial Equipment 0.51

Sweeper/Scrubber 0.68 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.55 Yard Trucks 0.65 Stationary and Portable Agricultural Engines Stationary Irrigation Pump 0.65

Portable Irrigation Pump 0.65 Other 0.51 Other All 0.43B-13 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### LARGE SPARK IGNITION ENGINES

Table B-14a Emission Factors for Off-Road LSI Engines by Model Year (g/bhp-hr)

Horsepower Fuel Model Year NOx ROG PM10
25
– 49 Gasoline Uncontrolled – all years 8.01 3.81 0.060

2001 6.91 3.00 0.060 2002 5.52 2.37 0.060 2003 4.52 1.64 0.060 2004
– 2006 1.33 0.72 0.060 2007
– 2009 0.89 0.48 0.060 2010+ 0.27 0.14 0.060 Alt Fuel Uncontrolled – all years 13.00 1.25 0.060

2001 10.40 1.05 0.060 2002 7.79 0.84 0.060 2003 5.19 0.64 0.060 2004
– 2006 1.95 0.13 0.060 2007
– 2009 1.30 0.08 0.060 2010+ 0.39 0.03 0.060 50
– 120 Gasoline Uncontrolled – all years 11.84 2.66 0.060

2001 9.58 2.11 0.060 2002 7.32 1.56 0.060 2003 5.06 1.00 0.060 2004
– 2006 1.78 0.26 0.060 2007
– 2009 1.19 0.18 0.060 2010+ 0.36 0.05 0.060 Alt Fuel Uncontrolled – all years 10.51 1.40 0.060

2001 8.54 1.16 0.060 2002 6.56 0.92 0.060 2003 4.57 0.68 0.060 2004
– 2006 1.58 0.14 0.060 2007
– 2009 1.05 0.10 0.060 2010+ 0.32 0.03 0.060 >120 Gasoline Uncontrolled – all years 12.94 1.63 0.060

2001 10.29 1.35 0.060 2002 7.64 1.07 0.060 2003 4.98 0.79 0.060 2004
– 2006 1.94 0.16 0.060B-14 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES

Horsepower Fuel Model Year NOx ROG PM10
2007
– 2009 1.29 0.11 0.060 2010+ 0.39 0.03 0.060 Alt Fuel Uncontrolled – all years 10.51 1.25 0.060

2001 8.53 1.05 0.060 2002 6.54 0.85 0.060 2003 4.56 0.64 0.060 2004
– 2006 1.58 0.13 0.060 2007
– 2009 1.05 0.08 0.060 2010+ 0.32 0.03 0.060



### LARGE SPARK IGNITION ENGINES

Table B-14b Off-Road Equipment Default Load Factors

Equipment Load Factor Agricultural LSI Agricultural Tractors 0.62 Balers and other Ag Equip. 0.55 Sprayers 0.50 Stationary and Portable Engines 0.65

Swathers 0.52
Construction Asphalt Pavers 0.66 Bore/Drill Rigs 0.80 Paving Equipment 0.60 Rollers 0.60 Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.60 Rubber Tired Loaders 0.55 Skid Steer Loaders 0.60 Trenchers 0.65
Lawn and Turf Turf Equipment 0.60 Light Commercial
Forklift 0.30 Other Industrial Equip. 0.50B-15 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### AIRPORT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Table B-15 Default Load Factors for LSI and Diesel Equipment

Equipment Load Factor

Belt Loader 0.50 Baggage Tug 0.55 Cargo Loaders 0.50 A/C Tugs wide body 0.80 A/C Tugs narrow body 0.80

Lifts 0.50 Ground Power Units 0.75 Forklift 0.30B-16 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### LOCOMOTIVES

Table B-16 Locomotive Emission Factors a

(g/bhp-hr)

Engine Model Year Type NOx ROG b PM10 b

Pre-1973 (Uncontrolled) Line-haul 11.70 0.47 0.288 Switcher 15.66 0.99 0.396 1973-2001 (Tier 0) Line-haul 7.74 0.47 0.288

Switcher 11.34 0.99 0.396 2002-2004 (Tier 1) Line-haul 6.03 0.47 0.288

Switcher 8.91 0.99 0.396 2005 and later (Tier 2) Line-haul 4.50 0.26 0.153

Switcher 6.57 0.51 0.189

a - Emission factors from U.S. EPA Technical Highlights - Emission Factors fo r Locomotives , December 1997, with fuel correction factors (FCF) applied. NOx and PM10 FCFs for all Carl Moyer Program categories is 0.9.
b - HC and PM standards are less stringent than act ual emission rates. Emission factors reflect actual emission rates per U.S. EPA document cited above.

Table B-17 Locomotive Idle-Limiting Device Factors

Type Factor Switchers 0.90 Line-Haul 0.97 Passenger 0.97 Note: Factors based on assumption ILD reduces locom otive engine idling by 50 percent.B-17 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### MARINE VESSELS

Table B-18 Harbor Craft Propulsion and Auxiliary Engine Emissi on Factors (g/bhp-hr) Horsepower Year NOx ROG PM10

pre-1988 12.09 1.73 0.605
1988 - 2004 8.14 1.19 0.497 50

– 99

2005+ 4.22 0.54 0.320

pre-1970 13.02 1.59 0.554
1970 - 1971 12.09 1.32 0.475 1972 - 1979 11.16 1.20 0.396 1980 - 1984 10.23 1.13 0.396 1985 - 1987 10.23 1.06 0.396 1988 - 2003 7.60 0.82 0.274 100

– 174

2004+ 4.17 0.39 0.240 a

pre-1970 13.02 1.52 0.554
1970 - 1971 12.09 1.26 0.475 1972 - 1979 11.16 1.14 0.396 1980 - 1984 10.23 1.08 0.396 1985 - 1987 10.23 1.01 0.396 1988 - 2003 7.60 0.82 0.274 175

– 299

2004+ 4.17 0.39 0.160 b

pre-1970 13.02 1.52 0.533 1970 - 1971 12.09 1.26 0.454 1972 - 1979 11.16 1.14 0.382 1980 - 1984 10.23 1.08 0.382 1985 - 1987 10.23 1.01 0.382 1988 - 2003 7.60 0.82 0.274 300

– 750

2004+ 4.17 0.39 0.160

pre-1970 13.02 1.52 0.533
1970 - 1971 12.09 1.26 0.454 1972 - 1979 11.16 1.14 0.382 1980 - 1984 10.23 1.08 0.382 1985 - 1987 10.23 1.01 0.382 1988 - 2006 7.60 0.82 0.274 2007+ (1.2 < D < 5.0 c ) 4.17 0.39 0.160

2007+ (5 < D < 15 c ) 4.60 0.44 0.216

2007+ (15 < D < 20 c ) 5.03 0.48 0.400

2007+ (20 < D < 25 c ) 5.77 0.54 0.400 >750

2007+

(25 < D < 30 c ) 6.35 0.59 0.400

a - If engine displacement < 0.9 liters/cyl, PM10 = 0.320 g/bhp-hr; If engine displacement > 1.2 liters/cyl.,PM10 =0.160 g/bhp-hr. b – If engine displacement < 1.2 liters/cyl., PM10 = 0.24 g/bhp-hr. c – Engine displacement in liters per cylinder.B-18 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES Table B-19 Harbor Craft Load Factors

Engine Vessel Type Factor

Commercial Fishing 0.27

Charter Fishing 0.52 Ferry/Excursion 0.76 Crew & Supply 0.45
Pilot 0.51
Tow 0.68 Tug 0.50 Work 0.45 Propulsion

Other 0.52

Tug 0.31 Auxiliary Other 0.43

Table B-20 Harbor Craft Fuel Consumption Rate Factors

(bhp-hr/gal)

Engine Displacement Fuel Consumption Rate < 5 liters/cylinder 18.5

> 5 liters/cylinder 20.8B-19 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES

Table B-21 Voluntary Accelerated Light-Duty Vehicle Retirement Program Emission Reductions for Calendar Year 2006*
Total Pounds Per Vehicle Over 3 Year Credit Life Emission Reductions (pounds) – 3 Year Credit Life Model Year NOx ROG** CO PM10 65 and earlier 151 496 2,757 0.68 66 145 471 2,552 0.67 67 148 477 2,611 0.65 68 156 492 2,731 0.81 69 162 504 2,841 0.56 70 169 438 2,971 0.99 71 172 449 2,990 0.95 72 177 458 3,037 0.83 73 180 469 3,082 0.64 74 159 401 2,859 1.20 75 145 345 2,861 1.17 76 130 222 2,673 1.04 77 108 183 2,546 1.13 78 107 186 2,493 1.10 79 95 168 1,625 0.90 80 85 129 1,373 1.13 81 62 108 1,092 1.22 82 66 101 1,085 1.36 83 73 85 934 1.22 84 73 74 883 1.05 85 69 59 575 0.89 86 71 61 527 0.91 87 67 71 468 0.92 88 67 65 430 0.85 89 50 46 492 0.84 90 38 45 529 0.81 91 38 42 514 0.76 92 40 41 510 0.71 93 35 31 279 0.64 94 19 17 21 0.54 * Table is repeated in the Light-Duty Vehicle Chapt er, Table 11-2 ** Includes exhaust and evaporative emissions Source: EMFAC2002, Version 2.2, statewide, annual average . Assumes average 1965 through 2006 vehicle as replacement vehicle for veh icles retired in calendar year 2006.

This table updates the emission reductions provided in ARB’s VAVR regulation consistent with the methodology in the staff report

, Proposed Regulations for Voluntary Accelerated Light-Duty Vehicle Retirement Enterpris es , released October 23, 1998, and approved by ARB on December 10, 1998.B-20 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES 

### REFERENCES

The information in these tables has already been in corporated into the preceding emission factor tables. These tables are included for informational purposes.

Table B-22 NOx and NMHC Fraction Default Values For All Engines Except TRUs

Diesel Engines Alternative Fuel Engines NOx NMHC NOx NMHC
0.95 0.05 0.80 0.20

Table B-23 NOx and NMHC Fractions for TRUs

Horsepower Model Year NOx NMHC
< 25 All 0.80 0.20 25 – 50 2004 and earlier 0.80 0.20 25 – 50 2005 to 2008 0.90 0.10 25 – 50 2008 and later 0.95 0.05

Table B-24 Fuel Correction Factors for On-Road Diesel Engines

Model Year NOx PM10 HC
Pre- 2007 2007+ 0.93

0.93 0.72 0.80 0.72 0.72B-21 EMISSION REDUCTION TABLES Table B-25 Fuel Correction Factors for Off-Road Diesel Engines

Model Year NOx PM10

Pre-Tier 1 0.930 0.720 Tier 1+ 0.948 0.800

## APPENDIX C

COST-EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATION METHODOLOGYCOST-EFFECTIVENESS C-1 APPENDIX C

COST-EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATION METHODOLOGY

I. Introduction

To receive Carl Moyer Program funding, each project must meet the maximum costeffectiveness limit of $14,300 per weighted ton of surplus NOx, ROG, and PM10 (PM10 means combustion PM) emissions reduced. Only Carl Moyer Program funding, funding under the district’s fiduciary budget authority, or funding provided by a port authority (to meet the match fund requirement) are included in de termining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions. For more details see Part 1, Chapter 2: Administration of the Carl Moyer Program.

II. General Cost-Effectiveness Calculations

The cost-effectiveness of a project is determined b y dividing the annual cost of the potential project by the annual weighted surplus em ission reductions that will be achieved by the project as shown in formula C-1 bel ow.

Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions ($/ton):

Annualized Cost ($/yr) Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions (tons/y r)

Descriptions on how to calculate annual emission re ductions and annualized cost are provided in the following sections.

A. Calculating the Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions

Annual weighted emission reductions are estimated b y taking the sum of the project’s annual surplus pollutant reductions following formu la C-2 below. This will allow projects that reduce one, two, or all three of the covered p ollutants to be evaluated for eligibility to receive Carl Moyer Program funding. While NOx a nd ROG emissions are given equal weight; emissions of combustion PM10 (such as diesel exhaust PM10 emissions) have been identified as a toxic air contaminant and thus carry a greater weight in the calculation.

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions:

NOx reductions (tons/yr) + ROG reductions (tons/yr) + [20 * (PM10 reductions (tons/yr)]

The result of formula C-2 is used to complete formu la C-1 to determine the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions.COST-EFFECTIVENESS C-2 In order to determine the annual surplus emission r eductions by pollutant, formula C-3 below must be completed for each pollutant (NOx, RO G, and PM10), for the baseline technology and the reduced technology, totaling up to 6 calculations:

1. Annual emissions of NOx for the baseline technol ogy 2. Annual emissions of NOx for the reduced technolo gy 3. Annual emissions of ROG for the baseline technol ogy 4. Annual emissions of ROG for the reduced technolo gy 5. Annual emissions of PM10 for the baseline techno logy 6. Annual emissions of PM10 for the reduced technol ogy

These calculations are completed for each pollutant by multiplying the engine emission factor or converted emission standard by the annual activity level and by other adjustment factors as specified for the calculation methodologies presented.

The baseline technology is the technology applied under normal business practi ces, such as, an engine certified by ARB to the current emission standards for new purchases; or the existing engine in a vehicle or e quipment for repowers and retrofits.

The reduced technology is the newer technology used by the applicant to o btain surplus emission reductions. The newer technology may be one of the following:



### • For a new purchase it would be the engine certified by ARB to reduce NOx emissions by at least 30 percent less than the curr ent NOx emission standard, or certified by ARB to the optional NOx or NOx+NMHC em ission standard. Locomotive and marine vessel new purchases have slightly diffe rent criteria. Please see the specific source category cost-effectiveness criteri a for more information.



### • For a repower it would be the replacement engine ce rtified by ARB (for locomotives and marine vessels it would be EPA verified) to a m inimum of 15 percent less than the NOx emissions from the baseline technology (exi sting engine).



### • For a NOx retrofit it would be an ARB-verified retr ofit technology that will reduce NOx emissions by a minimum of 15 percent from the N Ox emissions of the baseline technology.



### • For a PM retrofit it would be the ARB-verified dies el emission control strategy (DECS) that reduces PM emissions as level 1 (25 per cent reduction), level 2 (50 percent reduction), or level 3 (85 percent redu ction).

Since the emission factor or converted standard is given in units of grams, a conversion from grams to tons is also required, as described i n formula C-3 below.

Formula C-3: Estimated Annual Emissions by Pollutan t (tons/yr):

Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standard (g/b hp-hr) * Annual Activity * Adjustment Factor(s) * Percent Operation in CA * to n/907,200gCOST-EFFECTIVENESS C-3 The Carl Moyer Program allows the emissions reducti ons from a project to be calculated using the following activity factors on an annual basis:



### • Hours of operation,



### • Fuel consumption, or



### • Miles traveled.

Specific activity factors allowed for each project category may differ and are identified in the source category chapters of the Carl Moyer Prog ram Guidelines.

1. Calculating Annual Emissions Based on Hours of O peration

When actual annual hours of equipment operation are the basis for determining emission reductions, the equipment activity level m ust be based on a properly functioning hour meter. (See Part 1, Program Overv iew and Administrative Requirements, Chapter 2 Administration of the Carl Moyer Program, section VII and the relative source category chapter for additional inf ormation on this topic). In addition, the horsepower rating of the engine and an engine load factor found in Appendix B must be used. A default load factor of 0.43 is used for th ose projects where no specific equipment load factor is available in Appendix B. The method for calculating emission reductions based on hours of operation is described in formula C-4 below.

Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on ho urs of Operation (tons/yr):

Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standard (g/b hp-hr) * Horsepower * Load Factor * Activity (hrs/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

The engine load factor is an indicator of the nomin al amount of work done by the engine for a particular application. It is given as a fra ction of the rated horsepower of the engine and varies with engine application. For pr ojects in which the horsepower of the baseline technology and reduced technology are diff erent by more than 25 percent, the load factor must be adjusted following formula C-5 below. It is important to understand the replacement load factor must never exceed 100 p ercent in cases where the reduced technology engine is significantly smaller than the baseline technology engine.

Formula C-5: Replacement Load Factor:

Load Factor baseline

* hp baseline

/hp reduced

2. Calculating Annual Emissions Based on Fuel Consu mption

When annual fuel consumption is used for determinin g emission reductions, the equipment activity level must be based on annual fu el usage within California provided by the applicant. Fuel records must be maintained by the engine owner as described in Part 1, Chapter 2: Administration of the Carl Moye r Program, section VII.COST-EFFECTIVENESS C-4 An energy consumption factor (ECF) must be used to convert emissions given in g/bhp-hr to units of grams of emissions per gallon of fuel used (g/gal). The ECF is a number that combines the effects of engine efficien cy and the energy content of the fuel used in that engine into an approximation of the am ount of work output by an engine for each unit of fuel consumed. Formula C-6 below is t he formula for calculating annual emissions based on annual fuel consumed.

Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Fu el Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr):

Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standard (g/b hp-hr) * ECF (hp-hr/gal) *

Activity (gal/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

For on-road projects, if the emission factor is in g/mile, a unit conversion factor (bhp-hr/mile) found in Table B-8 in Appendix B must be used to convert from g/mile to g/bhp-hr. This is completed by dividing the emissi on factor (g/mile) by the conversion factor (bhp-hr/mile) resulting in (g/bhp-hr). Form ula C-7 below is used to calculate annual emissions for fuel based on-road calculation s.

Formula C-7: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Fu el Consumed using On-Road Emission Factors (tons/yr):

[On-Road Emission Factor (g/mile)/Unit Conversion F actor (bhp-hr/mile)] * ECF (hp-hr/gal) * Activity (gal/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

3. Calculating Annual Emissions Based on Annual Mil es Traveled

Calculations based on annual miles traveled are onl y used for on-road projects. Mileage records must be maintained by the engine ow ner as described in Part 1, Chapter 2: Administration of the Carl Moyer Progra m, section VII, and the relative source category chapter.

Calculations Using Emission Factors: There is no conversion since the emission factors for on-road projects provided are given in units of g/mile. Formula C-8 describes the method for calculating pollutant emis sions based on emission factors and miles traveled.

Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Mi leage using Emission Factors (tons/yr):

Emission Factor (g/mile) * Activity (miles/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

Calculating Annual Emissions Based on Converted Sta ndards : The unit conversion factor found in Table B-8 in Appendix B is used to convert the units of the converted emission standard (g/bhp-hr) to g/mil e. Formula C-9 describes the method for calculating pollutant emissions using co nverted emission standards.COST-EFFECTIVENESS C-5 Formula C-9: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Mi leage using Converted Emission Standards (tons/yr):

Converted Emission Standard (g/bhp-hr) * Unit Conve rsion (bhp-hr/mile) * Activity (miles/yr)

* Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

4. Calculating Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant

The final step in this portion of the calculations is to determine the annual surplus emission reductions by pollutant. For new purchase s and repower projects, subtract the annual emissions for the reduced technology from th e annual emissions for the baseline technology following formula C-10 below.

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases:

Annual Emissions for the Baseline Technology – Annual Emissions for the Reduced Technology

For retrofits, multiply the baseline technology pol lutant emissions by the percent of emission reductions that the ARB-verified reduced t echnology is verified to following formula C-11 below.

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits:

Annual Emissions for the Baseline Technology * Reduced Technology Verification Percent

Calculations must be done for each pollutant, NOx, PM10, and ROG, giving a total of three calculations.

For a repower + retrofit calculation the baseline t o be used for the retrofit portion of the calculation will be the repower’s reduced technolog y emissions. For fleet modernization projects the baseline will be the newer vehicle emi ssions.

The annual surplus emission reductions by pollutant would be used in Formula C-2 to calculate the annual surplus emission reductions.

B. Determining the Annualized Cost

Annualized cost is the amortization of the one-time incentive grant amount for the life of the project to yield an estimated annual cost. The annualized cost is calculated by multiplying the incremental cost by the capital rec overy factor (CRF). The resulting annualized cost is used to complete formula C-12 to determine the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions.COST-EFFECTIVENESS C-6 Formula C-12: Annualized Cost ($):

CRF * incremental cost ($)

1. Calculating the CRF

The CRF is the level of earnings reasonably expected by invest ing state funds in various financial instruments over the length of a Carl Moyer Program project. The CRF uses an interest rate and project life to d etermine the rate at which earnings could reasonably be expected if the same funds were invested over a length of time equaling the project life. The CRF is calculated f ollowing formula C-13 below.

Formula C-13: Capitol Recovery Factor (CRF):

[(1 + i) n (i)] / [(1 + i) n

- 1]

Where i = discount rate (4 percent)

n = project life (at least 3 years see specific proj ect criteria for default maximums)

The discount rate of 4 percent reflects the prevail ing earning potential for state funds that could reasonably be expected by investing stat e funds in various financial instruments over the length of the minimum project life of Carl Moyer Program projects.

Table B-1 in Appendix B lists the CRF for various p roject lives using a discount rate of 4 percent. Use the result from formula C-13 to com plete formula C-12 to determine the annualized cost of a project.

2. Calculating the Incremental Cost

The incremental cost is determined by subtracting t he cost of the baseline technology from the cost of the reduced technology, as describ ed in formula C-14 below.

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost ($):

Cost of Reduced Technology ($) – Cost of Baseline T echnology ($)

Generally the cost of the baseline technology for a new purchase is the price of a new piece of equipment meeting the current emission sta ndards. The cost of the baseline technology for a repower is the cost of rebuilding the existing engine. For retrofits, there is no baseline technology cost; hence the entire co st of the retrofit is eligible for funding.COST-EFFECTIVENESS C-7 For fleet modernization projects, the incremental c ost is determined by adjusting the value given to the vehicle by the National Automoti ve Dealership Association (N.A.D.A.), as described in formula C-15 below.

Formula C-15: Incremental Cost for Fleet Moderniza tion Projects ($):

When the replacement vehicle is not new: N.A.D.A value

where the N.A.D.A value is the retail value of the used vehicle * 72 percent

.
When the replacement vehicle is new: Invoice of the New Vehicle * 80 percent

Use the results from formula C-14 or C-15 to comple te formula C-12 to determine the annualized cost of a project.COST-EFFECTIVENESS C-8 III. List of Formulas

For an easy reference, the necessary formulas to ca lculate the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions for a project funded th rough the Carl Moyer Program are provided below.

Formula C-1 : Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplus Emission R eductions ($/ton):

Annualized Cost ($/yr) Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions (tons/y r)

Formula C-2 : Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions:

NOx reductions (tons/yr) + ROG reductions (tons/yr) + [20 * PM10 reductions (tons/yr)]

Formula C-3 : Estimated Annual Emissions by Pollutant (tons/yr) :

Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standard (g/b hp-hr) * Annual Activity * Adjustment Factor(s) * Percent Operation in CA* (to n/907,200g)

Formula C-4 : Estimated Annual Emissions based on hours of Oper ation (tons/yr):

Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standard (g/b hp-hr) * Horsepower * Load Factor * Activity (hrs/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

Formula C-5 : Replacement Load Factor:

Load Factor baseline * hp baseline /hp reduced

Formula C-6 : Estimated Annual Emissions based on Fuel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr):

Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standard (g/b hp-hr) * ECF (hp-hr/gal) *

Activity (gal/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

Formula C-7 : Estimated Annual Emissions based on Fuel Consumed using On-Road Emission Factors (tons/yr):

[On-Road Emission Factor (g/mile)/Unit Conversion F actor (bhp-hr/mile)] * ECF (hp-hr/gal) * Activity (gal/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

Formula C-8 : Estimated Annual Emissions based on Mileage using Emission Factors (tons/yr):

Emission Factor (g/mile) * Activity (miles/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200gCOST-EFFECTIVENESS C-9 Formula C-9 : Estimated Annual Emissions based on Mileage using Converted Emission Standards (tons/yr):

Converted Emission Standard (g/bhp-hr) * Unit Conve rsion Factor (bhp-hr/mile) *

Activity (miles/yr) * Percent Operation in CA * ton/907,200g

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (t ons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases:

Annual Emissions for the Baseline Technology – Annual Emissions for the Reduced Technology

Formula C-11 : Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant ( tons/yr) for Retrofits:

Annual Emissions for the Baseline Technology * Reduced Technology Verification Percent

Formula C-12 : Annualized Cost ($):

CRF * incremental cost ($)

Formula C-13 : Capitol Recovery Factor (CRF):

[(1 + i) n (i)] / [(1 + i) n - 1]

Where i = discount rate (4 percent) and n = project life (at least 3 years see specific project criteria for default maximums)

Formula C-14 : Incremental Cost ($):

Cost of Reduced Technology ($) – Cost of Baseline T echnology ($)

Formula C-15: Incremental Cost for Fleet Modernization Projects ($):

When the replacement vehicle is not new: N.A.D.A value

where the N.A.D.A value is the retail value of the used vehicle * 72 percent

.
When the replacement vehicle is new: Invoice of the New Vehicle * 80 percent

## APPENDIX D

EXAMPLE CALCULATIONSD-1 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS APPENDIX D

EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles

II. On-Road Heavy-Duty Fleet Modernization

III. Heavy-Duty Truck Idle Reduction

IV. Transport Refrigeration Units

V. Off-Road Compression Ignition Equipment

VI. Large Spark-Ignition Off-Road Equipment (pendin g Board action)

VII. Ground Support Equipment (pending Board action )

VIII. Locomotives

IX. Marine Vessels

X. Agricultural Sources

XI. Light-Duty Vehicles

XII. Zero-Emission TechnologiesD-2 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

I. On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles

This section provides several examples of calculati ons for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions f or on-road projects.

A. General Criteria for On-Road Cost-Effectiveness Calculations

• Funded projects must have a minimum project life o f 3 years. Project life is the number of years that a Carl Moyer Program project w ill operate in California under the conditions specified in the grant funding agree ment.

• The default project life for on-road projects are as follows: School buses > 33,000 GVWR - New 20 years Buses > 33,000 GVWR - New 12 years Other On-Road - New 10 years Repowers + Retrofits 5 years Retrofits 5 years Applicants must provide documentation to justify a longer project life.

• Only the minimum verified levels of NOx and PM10 e mission reductions will be used to calculate cost-effectiveness for retrofit projec ts.

• In these calculations, PM10 refers to combustion p articulate matter.

• ROG reductions cannot be counted in projects where the new engine or retrofit device are not verified or certified for ROG.

• When the model year of the vehicle chassis and the model year of the existing engine are different, the newer of the two model ye ars, either the vehicle or the engine, shall be used to determine the baseline emi ssions for calculations.

• When calculating the baseline emissions for a glid er kit repower project, the baseline for the project is the chassis year or the old engi ne model year, whichever is newer.

• The incremental emission difference between the lo wer FEL level to the required emission standard cannot be used for the purpose of calculating Carl Moyer Program emission benefits. The maximum amount of e mission reduction that can be claimed is the difference between the applicable required emission standard for the replacement engine (not the FEL level) and the baseline emission level of the existing engines.

• Most on-road calculations will be based on mileage . Refuse haulers and street sweepers may have fuel based calculations if fuel r eceipts can be provided to document previous usage. Other vehicles may also u se fuel based calculations on a case-by-case basis.D-3 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Refuse vehicles and street sweepers often have two engines, one for motive power and one for auxiliary operations. Emission benefit s are calculated individually for each engine using fuel consumption rates for each u nit if available. If individual engine fuel consumption information is not availabl e, the applicant must provide and document an estimate for the typical activities of each engine based on best engineering judgment so that emissions can be deter mined. Factors such as fuel economy, typical operating loads, and hours of oper ation for each engine must be provided.

• Table D-1 provides the source of emission factors to be used in on-road cost-effectiveness calculations.

Table D-1

On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Calculations Source of Emission Factors

New Repower Retrofit Vehicle Type Baseline

Factor Reduced

Factor Baseline

Factor Reduced

Factor Baseline

Factor Reduced

Factor
Medium Heavy Duty Vehicle B-4 B-2 or B-3 B-3 or B-4 B-3 or B-4 B-4 % verified as shown on Executive Order
Heavy Duty Vehicle B-5 B-2 or B-3 B-3 or B-5 B-3 or B-5 B-5 % verified as shown on Executive Order

Urban Bus (Alternative Fuel) B-2 or B-7 B-2 or B-3 B-7 B-7 B-7 % verified as shown on Executive Order

Urban Bus (Diesel) B-2 or B-6 B-2 or B-3 B-6 B-6 or B-7 B-6 % verified as shown on Executive Order

• The energy consumption factor to be used for all o n-road fuel based calculations is 18.5 bhp/hr-gal.

• The baseline cost for retrofit projects is zero ($ 0). The full cost of a retrofit is potentially eligible for funding.

• For retrofit projects that only take credit for NO x reductions from a Level 3 DECS (because the PM10 reductions are required by regula tion) the baseline cost is one-half the project cost.D-4 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• School bus calculations shall use the MHD or HHD v ehicle emission factors and conversion factors depending on GVWR to calculate c ost-effectiveness.

• Applicants may claim ROG emission reductions from DECS if hydrocarbon emission reductions for that technology are obtained from th e ARB’s retrofit website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm . For the Carl Moyer Program, ROG emission reductions will be credited at the 25 perc ent, 50 percent, and 85 percent reduction levels. To calculate emission reductions of ROG for the Carl Moyer Program, applicants should use the percentage reduc tion of hydrocarbons from the ARB’s retrofit website to determine the appropriate "level" of emission reductions. For example, a technology that provides a 40 percen t emission reduction of hydrocarbons would be permitted to apply a 25 perce nt reduction in ROG emissions for determining eligibility and grant amount in the Carl Moyer Program.

• Although electronic monitoring units are not requi red by the ARB, when an EMU is required by a district, it is an eligible expense f or any category.

• FTA provides up to an 80 percent grant for new urb an bus purchases. For these projects the incremental cost would be the differen ce between the FTA grant amount and the cost of the reduced technology or baseline technology.

• The cost of alternative fuel projects must be base d on the total amortized cost of hardware (i.e., new engine or repower), and fuel, i f applicable.

• If all Carl Moyer Program criteria are met and the project is not a “fuel-only” project, the incremental cost of alternative fuel can be con sidered a qualified matching contribution from a district.

B. Examples

Example 1 – New Purchase of LNG Heavy-Duty Truck A trucking company proposes to purchase a new 2005 model year heavy heavy-duty truck equipped with a LNG engine certified to the o ptional standard of 1.8 g/bhp-hr NOx + NMHC and 0.03 g/bhp-hr PM10 instead of a new heav y heavy-duty truck equipped with a diesel engine. This vehicle operates 100 pe rcent of the time in California.

Baseline Technology Information :

• Baseline technology (application): 2005 diesel he avy heavy-duty on road truck

• Cost (quote provided with application): $180,000

• New diesel vehicle emission rates (Table B-5): 11 .63 g/mi NOx, 0.26 g/mi ROG, 0.252 g/mi PM10

• Activity (application): 100,000 mi/yr

• Percent operate in California (application): 100 percent

Reduced Technology Information :

• Reduced technology (application): 2005 heavy-duty LNG truckD-5 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Cost (quote provided with application): $220,000

• New LNG vehicle emission standard (Table B-2): 1. 44 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.030 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Conversion factor to convert g/bhp-hr to g/mi (Tab le B-8): 2.6 bhp-hr/mi

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions based on M ileage using Emission Factors (use for baseline calculations) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.63 g/mi * 100,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 1.28 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.252 g/mi * 100,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.028 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-9: Estimated Annual Emissions based on M ileage using a Converted Emission Standards

(use for reduced calculations) 3. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (1.44 g/bhp-hr * 2.6 bhp-hr/mi * 100,000 mi/yr)(ton /907,200 g) = 0.41 tons/yr NOx 4. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.030 g/bhp-hr * 2.6 bhp-hr/mi * 100,000 mi/yr)(to n/907,200 g) = 0.009 tons/yr PM10

ROG emission factors not available for reduced tech nology therefore ROG emission reductions cannot be calculated.

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 1.28 tons/yr – 0.41 tons/ yr = 0.87 tons/yr NOx

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.028 tons/yr – 0.009 ton s/yr = 0.019 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.87 + 20(0.019) = 1.25 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $220,000 – $180,000 = $40,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $40,000 * 0.123 = $4,920/yrD-6 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surpl us Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($4,920/yr)/(1.25 weighted tons/yr) = $3,936/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The weighted cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 2 – Diesel to Diesel Heavy-Duty Truck Repow er + Retrofit A line haul trucking company proposes to repower a 1994 heavy heavy-duty diesel truck with a model year 2003 certified diesel engine and retrofit the engine with a Level 3 retrofit that is verified for both PM10 and NOx red uctions. This vehicle operates 90 percent of the time in California.

Baseline Technology Information :

• Baseline technology (application): 1994 diesel he avy heavy-duty engine

• Cost rebuild (quote provided with application): $ 8,000

• Baseline cost of retrofit: $0

• Emission rates (Table B-5): 17.95 g/mi NOx, 0.40 g/mi ROG, 0.367 g/mi PM10

• Activity (application): 60,000 mi/yr

• Percent operated in California (application): 90 percent

Reduced Technology Information :

• Reduced technology (application): 2003 diesel hea vy heavy-duty engine

• Repower cost (quote provided with application): $ 35,000

• Retrofit cost (quote provided with application): $18,000 + $600 annual filter maintenance

• Emission rates (Table B-5): 11.63 g/mi NOx, 0.26 g/mi ROG, 0.252 g/mi PM10

• Retrofit verification emission levels (EO): 25 pe rcent reduction of NOx and 85 percent reduction of PM10. ROG is not counted s ince the retrofit device is not verified for ROG.

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions based on M ileage using Emission Factors 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (17.95 g/mi * 0.90 * 60,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 1.07 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (11.63 g/mi * 0.90 * 60,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.69 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.40 g/mi * 0.90 * 60,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.02 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.26 g/mi * 0.90 * 60,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.02 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.367 g/mi * 0.90 * 60,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.022 tons/yr PM10D-7 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.252 g/mi * 0.90 * 60,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.015 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 1.07 tons/yr – 0.69 tons/ yr = 0.38 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.02 tons/yr – 0.02 tons/y r = 0 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission benefits= 0.022 tons/yr – 0.015 tons /yr = 0.007 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits 0.69 tons/yr NOx * 0.25 = 0.17 tons/yr NOx 0.015 tons/yr PM10 * 0.85 = 0.013 tons/yr PM10

Total NOx Emission Benefits 0.38 + 0.17 = 0.55 tons/yr NOx

Total PM10 Emission Benefits 0.007 + 0.013 = 0.02 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.55 + 20(0.02) = 0.95 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $35,000 + $18,000 + ($600*5) – $8,000 = $48,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $48,000 * 0.225 = $10,800/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($10,800/yr)/(0.95 weighted tons/yr) = $11,368/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per ton of weighted pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 3 – Diesel Heavy-Duty Truck Retrofit A trucking company proposes to retrofit a 2005 heav y heavy-duty diesel truck with a Level 3 retrofit that is verified for both PM and N Ox reductions. This vehicle operates 80 percent of the time in California.D-8 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Baseline Technology Information :

• Baseline technology (application): 2005 heavy hea vy-duty diesel truck

• Cost (retrofits are eligible for full cost unless being installed to meet regulatory requirements): $0

• New diesel vehicle emission rates (Table B-5): 11 .63 g/mi NOx; 0.252 g/mi of PM10

• Activity (application): 100,000 mi/yr

• Percent operated in California (application): 80 percent

Reduced Technology Information :

• Retrofit verification emission levels (EO): 25 pe rcent reduction of NOx and 85 percent reduction of PM10. ROG is not counted s ince the retrofit device is not verified for ROG.

• Retrofit cost (quote provided with application): $18,000 + $600 annual filter maintenance

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions based on M ileage using Emission Factors 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.63 g/mi * 0.80 * 100,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 1.03 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.252 g/mi * 0.80 * 100,000 mi/yr)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.022 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits 1.03 * 0.25 = 0.26 tons/yr NOx 0.022 * 0.85 = 0.019 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.26 + 20(0.019) =0.64 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $18,000 + ($600*5) – $0 = $21,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.225 * 21,000 =$4,725/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($4,725/yr)/(0.64 weighted tons/yr) = $7,383/ton of weighted surplus emissions reducedD-9 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

For retrofit projects that only take credit for NOx reductions from a Level 3 DECS (because the PM reductions are required by regulati on) the baseline cost is one-half the project cost.

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum am ount of grant funds requested.

Example 4 –Purchase of a New CNG Street Sweeper A company proposes to purchase a new CNG street swe eper instead of a diesel sweeper. The GVWR of the new vehicle is 24,000 lbs . The CNG engine is certified to the optional emission standard of 1.2 g/bhp-hr for NOx+NMHC and 0.01 g/bhp-hr PM10. This vehicle operates 100 percent of the time in Ca lifornia.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 2005 medium he avy-duty diesel vehicle

• Cost (quote provided with application): $125,000

• New diesel vehicle emission rates (Table B-4): 5. 12 g/mi NOx, 0.08 g/mi ROG, 0.216 g/mi PM10

• Conversion factor to convert g/mile to g/bhp-hr (T able B-8): 2.3 bhp-hr/mi

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

• Activity (application): 5,000 gal/yr

• Percent operated in California (application): 100 percent

Reduced Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): 2005 medium hea vy-duty CNG vehicle

• Cost (quote provided with application): $160,000

• New CNG vehicle emission standard (Table B-2): 0. 96 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.01 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-7: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using On-Road Emission Factors (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (5.12 g/mi / 2.3 bhp-hr/mi)(5,000 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp- hr/gal)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.23 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.216 g/mi / 2.3 bhp-hr/mi)(5,000 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp -hr/gal)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.01 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factor or Converted Emission Standards (tons/yr) 3. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (0.96 g/bhp-hr)(5,000 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp-hr/gal)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.10 tons/yr NOxD-10 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

4. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.01 g/bhp-hr)(5,000 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp-hr/gal)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.001 tons/yr PM10

ROG emission factors not available for reduced tech nology therefore

ROG emission reductions cannot be calculated.

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 0.23 tons/yr – 0.10 tons/ yr = 0.13 tons/yr NOx

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.01 tons/yr – 0.001 tons /yr = 0.009 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.13 + 20(0.009) = 0.31 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $160,000 – $125,000 = $35,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.123 * $35,000 = $4,305/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surpl us Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($4,305/yr)/(0.31 weighted tons/yr) = $13,887/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum am ount of grant funds requested.

Example 5 - Repower + Retrofit of Street Sweeper A company proposes to repower a 2001 diesel street sweeper with a 2006 CNG engine certified to the optional heavy-duty engine standar d of 1.8 g/bhp-hr NOx + NMHC and 0.03 g/bhp-hr PM10. The company will also retrofit the engine with a Level 3 retrofit that is verified for both PM and NOx reductions. T his vehicle has a GVWR of 19,000 lbs. and operates 100 percent of the time in California.

Baseline Technology Information :

• Baseline technology (application): 2001 diesel me dium heavy-duty engine

• Cost of rebuild (quote provided with application): $14,000

• Emission rates (Table B-4): 9.77 g/mi NOx, 0.08 g /mi ROG, 0.144 g/mi PM10

• Conversion factor to convert g/mile to g/bhp-hr (T able B-8): 2.3 bhp-hr/miD-11 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

• Activity (application): 7,667 gal/yr

• Percent operated in California (application): 100 percent

Reduced Technology Information :

• Reduced technology (application): 2006 CNG medium heavy-duty engine

• Cost (quote provided with application): $47,750

• Converted emission standard (Table B-2): 1.44 g/b hp-hr NOx; 0.030 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Retrofit Cost (quote provided with application): $18,000 + $600 annual filter maintenance

• Retrofit verification emission levels (EO): 25 pe rcent reduction of NOx and 85 percent reduction of PM10. ROG is not counted s ince the retrofit device is not verified for ROG.

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standards (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (9.77 g/mi / 2.3 bhp-hr/mi)(7,667 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp- hr/gal)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.66 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.144 g/mi / 2.3 bhp-hr/mi)(7,667 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp -hr/gal)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.010 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-7: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using On-Road Emission Factors (tons/yr) 3. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (1.44 g/bhp-hr)(7,667 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp-hr/gal)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.23 tons/yr NOx 4. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.030 g/bhp-hr)(7,667 gal/yr)(18.5 bhp-hr/gal)(ton /907,200 g) = 0.005 tons/yr PM10

ROG emission factors not available for reduced tech nology therefore

ROG emission reductions cannot be calculated.

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 0.66 tons/yr – 0.23 tons/y r = 0.43 tons/yr NOx

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.010 tons/yr – 0.005 ton s/yr = 0.005 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits 0.23 tons/yr NOx * 0.25 = 0.06 tons/yr NOx 0.005 tons/yr PM10 * 0.85 = 0.004 tons/yr PM10D-12 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Total NOx Emission Benefits 0.43 + 0.06 = 0.49 tons/yr NOx

Total PM10 Emission Benefits 0.005 + 0.004 = 0.009 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.49 +20(0.009) = 0.67 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost : Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $47,750 + $18,000 + ($600 * 5) – $14,000 = $54,750

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.225 * $54,750 = $12,319/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surpl us Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($12,319/yr)/(0.67 weighted tons/yr) = $18,387/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for this example is greater than the $14,300 per ton weighted cost-effectiveness requirement. In order to meet t he $14,300 per ton weighted cost-effectiveness requirement, this project would only qualify for a fraction of the incremental cost – $42,582. This amount is determi ned by multiplying the maximum allowed cost-effectiveness by the estimated annual emission reductions and dividing by the capital recovery factor:

($14,300 * 0.67)/0.225 = $42,582

Example 6 –Purchase of a New CNG Bus A transit agency proposes to purchase a new 2005 CN G bus certified to the alternative fuel optional standard of 1.2 g/bhp-hr NOx + NMHC a nd 0.01 g/bhp-hr PM10 instead of a new CNG bus certified to the current alternative fuel standard of 2.5g/bhp-hr NOx+NMHC. The baseline cost for this project is ba sed on a diesel engine. This new CNG bus is surplus to the ARB transit bus fleet rul e. The new bus will operate 100 percent of the time in California.

Baseline Technology Information :

• Baseline technology (application): 2005 CNG urban bus

• Cost (quote provided with application): $350,000

• Emission standard (Table B-2): 2.0 g/bhp-hr NOx a nd 0.010 g/bhp-hr PM10D-13 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Activity (application): 50,000 mi/yr

• Percent operated in California (application): 100 percent

Reduced Technology Information :

• Reduced technology (application): 2005 CNG urban bus certified to optional standard

• Cost (quote provided with application): $390,000

• Converted emission standard (Table B-2): 0.96 g/b hp-hr NOx and 0.010 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Conversion factor to convert the standard in g/bhp -hr to g/mi (Table B-8): 4.3 bhp-hr/mi

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-9: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Mileage using a Converted Emission Standards 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (2.00 g/bhp-hr *4.3 bhp-hr/mi)(50,000 mi/yr)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.47 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (0.96 g/bhp-hr * 4.3 bhp-hr/mi)(50,000 mi/yr)(ton/9 07,200 g) = 0.23 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.010 g/bhp-hr *4.3 bhp-hr/mi)(50,000 mi/yr)(ton/9 07,200 g) = 0.002 tons/yr PM10 4. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.010 g/bhp-hr * 4.3 bhp-hr/mi)(50,000 mi/yr)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.002 tons/yr PM10

ROG emission factors not available for reduced tech nology therefore

ROG emission reductions cannot be calculated.

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 0.47 tons/yr – 0.23 tons/y r = 0.24 tons/yr NOx

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.002 tons/yr – 0.002 ton s/yr = 0 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.24 + 20(0) = 0.24 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 12 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.107

Transit agencies receive an 80 percent grant from t he Federal Transportation Agency for most new vehicle purchases. This grant must be subtracted before calculating the incremental cost.

Transit agency’s cost for baseline technology: $350 ,000 * 0.20 = $70,000D-14 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Transit agency’s cost for reduced technology: $390, 000 * 0.20 = $78,000

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $78,000 – $70,000 = $8,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.107 * $8,000 = $856/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($856/yr)/(0.24 weighted tons/yr) = $3,566/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum am ount of grant funds requested.

C. Auxiliary Engine Calculations

To calculate the emission benefits of an auxiliary engine, see the Example #3 in the off-road section of this Appendix.D-15 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

II. On-Road Heavy-Duty Fleet Modernization

This section provides examples of calculations for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions for fleet modernization projects.

A. General Criteria for Fleet Modernization Cost-Ef fectiveness Calculations

• Target vocations are eligible for a five year proj ect life.

• Applicants may claim ROG emission reductions from DECS if hydrocarbon emission reductions for that technology are obtained from th e ARB’s retrofit website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm . For the Carl Moyer Program, ROG emission reductions will be credited at the 25 perc ent, 50 percent, and 85 percent reduction levels. To calculate emission reductions of ROG for the Carl Moyer Program, applicants should use the percentage reduc tion of hydrocarbons from the ARB’s retrofit website to determine the appropriate "level" of emission reductions. For example, a technology that provides a 40 percen t emission reduction of hydrocarbons would be permitted to apply a 25 perce nt reduction in ROG emissions for determining eligibility and grant amount in the Carl Moyer Program.

• For these calculations, PM10 refers to combustion PM10.

B. Examples

Example 1 – Replacement of a Heavy-Heavy Duty Truck from a Targeted Vocation A participant wants to scrap an old, heavy heavy-du ty truck used to haul cargo from the Port of Long Beach and replace it with a newer, use d truck. The participant has provided conclusive documentation that for the last three years the old truck operated 100 percent of the time in and around the Port area . The replacement truck will be equipped with a Level 1 diesel emission control sys tem (DECS) and an electronic monitoring unit (EMU). The replacement truck is re quired to continue operating in the same vocation and location for the life of the proj ect.

Baseline Technology Information

• Baseline technology (application): 1983 heavy hea vy-duty diesel truck

• Emission rates (Table B-5): 21.39 g/mi NOx, 1.04 g/mi ROG, 1.249 g/mi PM10

• Activity (application): 42,000 miles/year

• Percent operated in California (application): 100 percent

• Vocation (application): Port hauling

Reduced Technology Information :

• Reduced technology (application): 2000 heavy heav y-duty diesel truck

• Emission rates (Table B-5): 17.58 g/mi NOx, 0.51 g/mi ROG, 0.403 g/mi PM10D-16 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Retrofit verification emission levels (EO): 25 pe rcent NOx; 85 percent PM reduction

• Cost (quote provided with application): $40,000

• DECS cost (quote provided with application): $18, 300

• EMU cost: $1,150 (Includes installation and monit oring for five years)

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on M ileage Using Emission Factors 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (21.39 g/mi * 42,000 mi)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.990 t ons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (17.58 g/mi * 42,000 mi)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.814 to ns/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.04 g/mi * 42,000 mi) (ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.048 t ons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.51 g/mi * 42,000 mi)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.024 ton s/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (1.249 g/mi * 42,000 mi)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.058 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.403 g/mi * 42,000 mi)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.019 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases:

• NOx Emission Benefits = 0.990 tons/yr - 0.814 to ns/yr = 0.176 tons/yr NOx

• ROG Emission Benefits = 0.048 tons/yr - 0.024 ton s/yr = 0.024 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 Emission Benefits = 0.058 tons/yr - 0.019 ton s/yr = 0.039 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits: Emission benefits of the replacement truck with the DECS providing an additional 25 percent NOx and 85 percent PM reduction 0.814 tons/yr NOx * 0.25 = 0.204 tons/yr NOx 0.019 tons/yr PM10 * 0.85 = 0.016 tons/yr PM10

Total NOx Emission Benefits 0.176 tons/yr + 0.204 tons/yr = 0.380 tons/yr NOx

Total PM10 Emission Benefits 0.039 tons/yr + 0.016 tons/yr = 0.055 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.380 tons/yr + 0.024 tons/yr + 20(0.055 tons/yr) = 1.504 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost Project Life = 5 Years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225D-17 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-15: Incremental Cost NADA Value of Replacement Truck: 0.72 * $40,000 = $28,800 Replacement Truck + DECS + EMU: $28,800 + $18,300 + $1,150 = $48,250 Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $48,250 * 0.225 = $10,856/yr

Cost-Effectiveness Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions =($10,856/yr) / (1.504 weighted tons/yr) = $7,218 weighted tons/yr

In this example, the cost-effectiveness is less tha n threshold of $14,300 per weighted ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for $28,800, the maximum amount of grant funds requested. The applicant will take out a loan to pay the remaining $12,000 for the replacement truck.

Example 2 – Tiered Transaction The owner of a 2000 model year, heavy heavy-duty tr uck wants to purchase a new 2005 model year truck meeting the optional NOx stan dard. He has proposed a tiered transaction where he will buy a new truck and contr ibute his 2000 model year truck to the owner of a 1990 truck. The owner of the old tr uck has agreed to scrap the old, heavy heavy-duty truck that is used exclusively to haul agricultural commodities. The old truck owner has provided conclusive documentati on that for the last three years the truck operated 100 percent of the time in the Centr al Valley region. The replacement truck will be equipped with a Level 3 diesel emissi on reduction system (DECS) and an electronic monitoring unit (EMU). The replacement truck is required to continue operating in the same vocation and location for the life of the project.

a. Fleet Modernization Transaction

Old Vehicle Information (Baseline Technology) :

• Model: 1990 heavy heavy-duty diesel truck

• Activity: 65,000 miles/year

• Vocation: Agriculture (qualifies as a target voc ation)

• Percent Operation in California: 100 percent

• Emission Rates (Table B-5): 21.11 g/mi NOx , 0.81 g/mi ROG, 1.354 g/mi PM10

Replacement Truck Information (Reduced Technology) :

• Model: 2000 heavy heavy-duty diesel truck

• Cost (quote provided with application): $50,000

• Emission Rates (Table B-5): 17.58 g/mi NOx, 0.51 g/mi ROG, 0.403 g/mi PM10

• DECS Cost: $19,100 (Level 3, 25 percent NOx + 85 percent PM Reduction)

• EMU Cost: $1,150 (Includes installation and monit oring for five years)D-18 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on M ileage Using Emission Factors 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (21.11 g/mi * 65,000 mi) / (ton/907,200 g) = 1.51 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (17.58 g/mi * 65,000 mi) / (ton/907,200 g) = 1.26 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.81 g/mi * 65,000 mi) / (ton/907,200 g) = 0.06 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.51 g/mi * 65,000 mi) / (ton/907,200 g) = 0.04 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (1.354 g/mi * 65,000 mi) / (ton/907,200 g) = 0.0 97 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.403 g/mi * 65,000 mi) / (ton/907,200 g) = 0.02 9 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant

• NOx Emission Benefits = (1.51 -1.26) tons/yr = 0.25 tons/yr NOx

• ROG Emission Benefits = (0.06 - 0.04) tons/yr = 0.02 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 Emission Benefits = (0.097 - 0.029) tons/yr = 0.068 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions w ith DECS Emission Benefits of the Replacement Truck with the DECS providing an additional 25 percent NOx and 85 percent PM reduction

• NOx Emission Benefits = (1.26 tons/yr * 0.25) = 0.32 tons/yr NOx

• PM10 Emission Benefits = (0.029 tons/yr * 0.85) = 0.025 tons/yr PM10

Total NOx Emission Benefits 0.25 tons/yr + 0.32 tons/yr = 0.57 tons/yr NOx

Total PM10 Emission Benefits 0.068 tons/yr + 0.025 tons/yr = 0.093 tons/yr PM10

Formula C.2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.57 tons/yr + 0.02 tons/yr + 20(0.093 tons/yr) = 2.45 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost Project Life = 5 Years (target vocations are eligib le for 5 year project life) Capital Recovery Factor = 0.225 (Table B-1)

Incremental Cost NADA Value of Replacement Truck: $36,000

Replacement Truck + DECS + EMU = $36,000 + $19,100 + $1,150 = $56,250D-19 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost Incremental Cost * Capital Recovery Factor $56,250 * 0.225 = $12,656

Cost-Effectiveness Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($12,656/yr) / (2.45 weighted ton/yr)

= $5,166/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

b. New Vehicle Transaction

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline Technology: 2005 heavy heavy-duty diesel truck

• Cost (quote provide with application): $110,000

• Emission Rates (Table B-5): 11.63 g/mi NOx, 0.252 g/mi PM10

• Percent operation in California (application): 10 0 percent

Reduced Technology Information (New, Low Emission, Optional Standard Truck):

• Reduced technology (application): 2005 heavy-duty LNG truck certified to the 1.8 NOx + NMMC + 0.030 PM Standard

• Cost (quote provided with application): $150,000

• New LNG vehicle emission standard (Table B-2): 1. 44 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.030 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Conversion factor to convert the standard to g/mi (Table B-8): 2.6 bhp-hr/mi

• Activity: 75,000 mi/year

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-8: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on M ileage Using Emission Factors (used for baseline calculations)

Formula C-9: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on M ileage Using Converted Emission Standards (used for reduced calculations)

1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.63 g/mi * 75,000 mi/yr)(ton / 907,200 g) = 0 .96 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (1.44 g/bhp-hr * 2.6 bhp-hr/mi * 75,000 mi/yr)(ton / 907,200 g) = 0.31 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.252 g/mi * 75,000 mi/yr)(ton / 907,200 g) = 0.0 21 tons/yr PM10 4. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.030 g/bhp-hr * 2.6 bhp-hr/mi * 75,000 mi/yr)(ton /907,200 g) = 0.006 tons/yr PM10

ROG emission factors not available for reduced tech nology therefore

ROG emission reductions cannot be calculated.D-20 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant for New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 0.96 tons/yr – 0.31 tons /yr = 0.65 tons/yr NOx

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.021 tons/yr – 0.006 ton s/yr = 0.015 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.65 tons/year + 20(0.015) tons/year = 0.95 weigh ted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $150,000 - $110,000 = $40,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $40,000 * 0.123 = $4,920/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surpl us Emission Reductions ($/ton) = ($4,920/yr) / (0.95 weighted tons/yr) = $5,179/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

c. Tiered Transaction Calculations

Annualized Cost of the Tiered Transaction Fleet Mod. Project Life: 5 Years (Target vocations have 5 year project life) CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225

New, Low NOx Truck Project Life: 10 Years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123

Incremental Cost of the Tiered Transaction: (Incremental cost of the Fleet Mod Project from Sec tion a) + (Incremental cost of the New, Low NOx Project from section b) $56,250 + $40,000 = $96,250

Annualized Cost of the Tiered Transaction (Annualized Cost of Fleet Mod. Project from section a) + (Annualized Cost of New, Low NOx Project from section b) $12,656 + $4,920 = $17,576D-21 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Emission Reductions Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions of the Tiered Transaction

(Weighed Emissions Reductions of the Fleet Mod Proj ect) + (Weighed Emission Reductions of the New, Low-NOx Project)

(2.45 weighted tons/yr) + (0.95 weighted tons/yr) = 3.40 weighted tons/yr

Cost-Effectiveness of the Tiered Transaction Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) = ($17,567/yr) / (3.40 weighted tons/year) = $5,167/year of weighted surplus emissions reduced

In this example, the cost-effectiveness is less tha n the threshold of $14,300 per weighted ton of pollutants reduced. Both tiered tr ansaction project applicants qualify for the maximum amount of grant funds requested. A bre akdown of the project cost follows:

• Carl Moyer Program incentives for the tiered trans action project:

Replacement truck (72 percent of $50,000 + full cost of EMU and retrofit) $ 56,250 New truck (Incremental cost) $ 40,000 Total Carl Moyer Program incentives $ 96,250

• Net cost of the tiered transaction to the fleet mo d. participant:

Cost of the replacement truck: $ 50,000 Cost of EMU and retrofit $ 20,250 Total cost of truck/EMU/retrofit $ 70,250

Carl Moyer Program Incentive -$56,250 Net cost to participant $14,000

• Net cost of the tiered transaction to the new low NOx truck purchaser:

Cost of the new, low NOx truck: $150,000 Value of the 2000 replacement truck: $ 50,000 Carl Moyer Program Incentive -$ 40,000 Payment received for replacement truck -$ 50,000 Net cost to participant for new truck $110,000D-22 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

III. Heavy-Duty Truck Idle Reduction

This section provides an example calculation for de termining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions for heavy-duty truck id ling reducing technology projects.

A. General Criteria for Heavy-Duty Truck Idling Red ucing Technologies Cost-Effectiveness Calculations

• The actual capital cost, up to $5,500, of an APU m ay be funded.

• The installation cost of an APU, including install ation of an hour meter, up to a maximum of $1,700 per diesel APU and a maximum of $ 3,400 per alternative fuel, electric motor, or fuel cell APU, may be funded.

• The cost of a PM retrofit may be funded provided t he overall project cost effectiveness is under the limit of $14,300

• For these calculations, PM10 refers to combustion PM10.

• The minimum project life is three years.

• Annual hours of equipment operation for determinin g emission reductions must be based only on readings from an installed and fully operational hour meter. A properly functioning hour meter is required to supp ort equipment activity information included in the application for Carl Moyer Program funding.

• Applicants may claim ROG emission reductions from DECS if hydrocarbon emission reductions for that technology are obtained from th e ARB’s retrofit website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm . For the Carl Moyer Program, ROG emission reductions will be credited at the 25 perc ent, 50 percent, and 85 percent reduction levels. To calculate emission reductions of ROG for the Carl Moyer Program, applicants should use the percentage reduc tion of hydrocarbons from the ARB’s retrofit website to determine the appropriate "level" of emission reductions. For example, a technology that provides a 40 percen t emission reduction of hydrocarbons would be permitted to apply a 25 perce nt reduction in ROG emissions for determining eligibility and grant amount in the Carl Moyer Program.

• Default maximum project life: Off-road new purchase 10 years Off-road repower 7 years Repower + retrofit 5 years Retrofit 5 years Project life beyond the default maximum may be subm itted with documentation for approval by ARB.D-23 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

B. Example

Example 1 (Truck Stop Electrification (TSE) Project

A HDV truck operator proposes to install a TSE syst em consisting of an electrical plug, inverter/charger and electrical HVAC on a HDV to su bstitute shore power for the truck’s auxiliary power unit (APU). The APU operates 1,800 hours/year.

Annual Baseline Idling Hours at truck stop in Calif ornia: 1,800 Idling Power Requirement: 2.7 kilowatts = 1.99 hp

Idling Substitution Rate: 100% Conversion factor: 1 ton = 907,200g Estimated cost of electrical plug, inverter/charger and electrical HVAC: $10,000 Estimated Installation Cost: $4,000 Amount Requested: $8,900

The truck idling emission rates for 2007 are: 191.5 gm/hr of NOx, 25.6 gm/hr of ROG and 1.5 gm/hr of PM ( Table B-9 ).

The APU idling emission factors for 2008 and subseq uent years are: 5.76 gm/bhp-hr for NOx, .57 gm/bhp-hr and 0.376 gm/ bhp-hr for PM ( Table B-10

).

Formula C-3 : Estimated Annual Emissions by Pollutant (tons/yr) : Truck emissions in 2007 are: NOx: (191.5 gm/hr)(1800 hrs/year)/(907,200 gm/ton) = 0.38 ton/yr ROG: (25.6 gm/hr)(1800 hrs/year)/(907,200 gm/ton) = 0.051 ton/yr PM: (1.5 gm/hr)(1800 hrs/year)/(907,200 gm/ton) = . 003 ton/yr

Formula C-10:

Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (t ons/yr) Baseline – Reduced (TSE is the reduced so emissions = 0) NOx = 0.38 ton/yr - (0.0 ton/yr) = 0.38 ton/yr ROG = 0.051 ton/yr - (0.0 ton/yr) = 0.051 PM : (0.003 ton/yr) – (0.0 ton/yr) = 0.003 ton/yr

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions: Annual Weighted Surplus Emissions Reductions in 200 7: (0.38) + (0.051) + (20)(0.003) = 0.461 ton/yr

Formula C-3 : Estimated Annual Emissions by Pollutant (tons/yr) : APU emissions in 2008 are baseline: 4.14 gm/bhp-hr of NOx, 0.41 gm/bhp-hr of ROG and 0.152 gm/bhp-hr of PM ( Table B-10 ) NOx (4.14 gm/bhp-hr)(2 hp)(1800 hrs/yr)/(907,200 gm /ton) = 0.02 ton/yr ROG (0.41 gm/bhp-hr)(2 hp)(1800 hr/yr)/(907,200 gm/ ton = 0.002 ton/yrD-24 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

PM: (0.152 gm/bhp-hr)(2 hp)(1800 hrs/yr)(907,200 gm /ton) = 0.001 ton/yr

Reduced emissions in 2008 are the APU baseline valu es due to TSE = zero emissions

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions: Annual Weighted Surplus Emissions Reductions in 200 8 are (0.02 ton/yr) + (.002 ton/yr)) + (20)(0.001 ton/yr) = 0.032 ton/yr

2009 is same as 2008

Average over three years is: ((0.461) + (0.032) + (.032))/(3) = 0.175 tons/yr

Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Calculations The annualized cost is based on the installation co st of the electrification package, the expected life of the project (3 years), and the int erest rate (3%) used to amortize the project cost over the project life. The maximum am ount that can be funded by the Carl Moyer Program fund is determined as follows: Electrification Capital Cost : $10,000 Electrification Installation Cost: $4,000 CMP Amount Requested: $8,900 Formula C-13 : Capitol Recovery Factor (CRF): [(1 + 0.04) 3 (0.04)]/[(1 + 0.04) 3 – 1]= 0.361 Formula C-12 : Annualized Cost ($): Annualized Cost (0.361)($8,900)= $3,213/yr Cost-Effectiveness (Based on weighted average emiss ions reduction) ($3,213/year)/(0.175 tons/year)= $18,360/ton

. Amount that would qualify: ($14,300)*(0.175)/(0.35) = $7,150

Project starts in 2008:

Annual Weighted Surplus Emissions Reductions in 200 8 are (0.02 ton/yr) + (.002 ton/yr)) + (20)(0.001 ton/yr) = 0.032 ton/yr And this is the same for 2009 and 2010 for a three year project life. So the cost effectiveness is:

($3,213/year)/(0.032 tons/year)= $ 100,093/ton

Amount that would qualify: ($14,300)*(0.032)/(0.361) = $1,268D-25 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

IV. Transport Refrigeration Units

This section provides two examples of calculations for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions f or TRU projects.

A. General Criteria for TRU Cost-Effectiveness Calc ulations:

• TRU emission reduction calculations will use eithe r fuel-based or hour-based formula for cost-effectiveness calculations.

• Annual hours of equipment operation for determinin g emission reductions must be based only on readings from an installed and fully operational hour meter. A properly functioning hour meter is required to supp ort equipment activity information included in the application for CMP funding.

• TRU engine emissions increase with load. Load fact ors have been determined for TRU engines and have been found to vary by engine h orsepower category. Table B-11 shows the default load factors assigned for use in the Carl Moyer Program.

• Baseline and reduced engine emission factors are l isted in Table B-12 Appendix B.

• Applicants may claim ROG emission reductions from DECS if hydrocarbon emission reductions for that technology are obtained from th e ARB’s retrofit website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm . For the Carl Moyer Program, ROG emission reductions will be credited at the 25 perc ent, 50 percent, and 85 percent reduction levels. To calculate emission reductions of ROG for the Carl Moyer Program, applicants should use the percentage reduc tion of hydrocarbons from the ARB’s retrofit website to determine the appropriate "level" of emission reductions. For example, a technology that provides a 40 percen t emission reduction of hydrocarbons would be permitted to apply a 25 perce nt reduction in ROG emissions for determining eligibility and grant amount in the Carl Moyer Program.

B. Examples

Example 1 – Repower A TRU owner proposes to purchase and install a new engine in an existing trailer TRU that uses a 1999 model year TRU Tier 1 engine rated at 37.8 hp. From records, the owner knows the existing TRU engine has operated an average of 1,300 hours per year. The owner anticipates this operating trend w ill continue for the next three years. He doesn’t know what the TRU engine load factor is for his operations. Both the old and new operations occur 100 percent in California. The replacement engine will be a 2006 model year Tier 2 engine rated at 37.8 hp. Th e cost of the new certified engine will be $4,000; the cost to replace the existing en gine with a remanufactured 1999 model year engine is $3200. Installation and engin eering costs for the repower will beD-26 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

$700 greater than replacement with a remanufactured engine due to the need to modify
motor mounts.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 1999 engine

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 5.26 g/bhp-hr NOx, 1.74 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.480 g/bhp-hr PM10 (Tier 1)

• Engine rated HP (application): 37.8 hp

• Default load factor (Table B-11): 0.53

• Annual hours of operation (application): 1,300 ho urs

Reduced Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): 2006 engine

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 4.63 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.29 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.280 g/bhp-hr PM10 (Tier 2)

• Reduced engine rated HP (application): 37.8 hp

• Default load factor (Table B-11): 0.53

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Hours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (5.26 g/bhp-hr)(37.80 hp)(0.53)(1,300 hrs/yr)(1 ton /907,200 g) = 0.15 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (4.63 g/bhp-hr)(37.80 hp)(0.53)(1,300 hrs/yr)(1 ton /907,200 g) = 0.13 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.74 g/bhp-hr)(37.80 hp)(.53)(1,300 hrs/yr)(1ton/9 07,200 g) = 0.05 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.290 g/bhp-hr)(37.80 hp)(0.53)(1,300 hrs/yr)(1 to n/907,200 g) = 0.01 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.480 g/bhp-hr)(37.8 hp)(0.530)(1,300 hrs/yr)(1 to n/907,200 g) = 0.014 tons/yr tons/yr PM10
6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.280 g/bhp-hr)(37.80 hp)(0.530)(1,300 hrs/yr)(1 t on/907,200 g) = 0.008 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 0.15 tons/yr - 0.13 tons/y r = 0.01 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.05 tons/yr - 0.01 tons/y r = 0.04 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.014 tons/yr - 0.008 ton s/yr = 0.006 tons/yr PM10D-27 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions: 0.01 + 0.04 + 20(0.006) = 0.17 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 3 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.360

Formula C -14: Incremental Cost: $4,000 + $700 - $3,200 = $1,500

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $1,500 * 0.360 = $540/yr

Cost Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton): ($540yr)/(0.17 weighted ton/yr) = $3,176/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduce d

This project would qualify for a $1,500 Carl Moyer Program grant, covering all of the capital and installation costs of the project.

Example 2 – Retrofit A TRU owner decides to retrofit a 34 hp model year 2001 TRU Tier 1 engine with a verified Level 3 active diesel particulate filter ( DPF) system that uses a fuel-borne catalyst (FBC). The capital cost for the DPF syste m with FBC dosing unit is $2,800, including installation. The owner reports operatin g the TRU 2,000 hours per year. The project would commence by January 1, 2007. The app licant is willing to commit to a three year project life.

Surplus emissions from early compliance: Model year 2001 TRU engines must comply with the TR U ATCM's LETRU In-Use Performance Standard (Level 2 – 50 percent PM reduc tion) by the end of 2008. Model year 2001 TRU engines must also comply with the TRU ATCM’s ULETRU standard (Level 3 – 85 percent PM reduction) by the end of 2 015. Therefore, all of the emission reductions in 2007 and 2008 would be surplus. And, in the third year of the project, 2009, the surplus emissions would be 35 percent (85 percent minus 50 percent) of the baseline engine emissions. The ARB test data shows ROG reductions of 55 percent from use of the DPF. For the Carl Moyer Program, t he applicant may count a 50 percent ROG reduction for the cost-effectiveness calculation.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 34 hp model ye ar 2001 TRU engine

• Baseline engine rated HP (application): 34 hp

• Default load factor (Table B-11): 0.53 (assumed t o stay constant before and after project)

• Annual hours of operation (application): 2,000 hr /yrD-28 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 1.74 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.480 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): Level 3 active diesel particulate filter (DPF) system that uses a fuel-borne catalyst (FBC).

• Retrofit verification emission level (EO): 50 perc ent ROG, 85 percent PM10

• Cost (quote provided by applicant): $2,800 for DP F system with FBC dosing including installation.

• Annual hours of operation (application): 2,000 hr

Emission Reduction Calculations Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on h ours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.74 g/bhp-hr)(0.53)(2,000 hr)(1 ton/907,200 g) = 0.07 tons/yr ROG 2. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.480 g/bhp-hr)(34.00 hp)(0.530)(2,000 hrs/yr)(1 t on/907,200 g) = 0.019 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits Estimated emission reductions are: 2007: 0.07 tons/yr * 0.50 = 0.04 tons/yr ROG 2008: 0.07 tons/yr * 0.50 = 0.04 tons/yr ROG 2009: 0.07 tons/yr * 0.50 = 0.04 tons/yr ROG

2007: 0.019 tons/yr * 0.85 = 0.016 tons/yr PM10 2008: 0.019 tons/yr * 0.85 = 0.016 tons/yr PM10 2009: 0.019 tons/yr * 0.35 = 0.007 tons/yr PM10

Average PM10 Reductions = (0.016 tons/yr PM10 + 0.0 16 tons/yr PM10 + 0.007 tons/yr PM10)/3 = 0.013 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.04 + 20(0.013) = 0.30 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 3 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.360

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $2,800 – $0 = $2,800

(Note: Annual operating costs above normal (e.g., cost of FBC) cannot be paid for with Carl Moyer Program funds, but air districts may ele ct to pay for these with matching funds.)D-29 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.360 * $2,800 = $1,008/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surpl us Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($1,008/yr)/(0.30 weighted ton/yr) =$3,360/ ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness is below the $14,300 thresho ld. This project would therefore qualify for a $2,800 Carl Moyer Program grant cover ing all of the capital costs and installation costs of the projectD-30 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

V. Off-Road Compression-Ignition Engines

This section provides four examples of calculations for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions f or off-road compression-ignition projects.

A. General Criteria for Off-Road Compression-Igniti on Engine Cost-Effectiveness Calculations

• Off-road emission reduction calculations will use either fuel-based or hour-based formula for weighted cost-effectiveness calculation s.

• Annual hours of equipment operation for determinin g emission reductions must be based only on readings from an installed and fully operational hour meter. A properly functioning hour meter is required to supp ort equipment activity information included in the application for CMP funding.

• For applications or equipment not listed in Table B-13 in Appendix B, a default load factor of 0.43 must be used.

• The replacement load factor should never exceed 10 0 percent in cases where the replacement engine is significantly smaller than th e existing engine

• Baseline and reduced engine emission factors are l isted in Table B-12 of Appendix B.

• For off-road equipment capable of operation with a new certified on-road engine instead of a new off-road engine (i.e., yard hostle rs, yard goats), emission benefits from the baseline engine will be based on an on-roa d engine. If an applicant provides sufficient documentation to show that past practices involve predominantly the use of off-road engines in yard hostlers, then an off-road engine emission factor baseline can be used.

• For new purchases of off-road equipment powered by an on-road engine, emission benefits relative to the baseline engine are calcul ated based on on-road engine emission factors. If an applicant provides ARB wit h documentation showing that in past practice, the fleet has been powered by off-ro ad engines, then the baseline emission may be calculated using the off-road engin e emission factors.

• For calculations based on fuel consumption, use th e default energy consumption factor (ECF) of 18.5 bhp-hr/gallon.

• Default project life Default Off-road new purchase 10 yearsD-31 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Off-road repower 7 years Off-road repower and retrofit 5 years Retrofit 5 years Project life beyond the default project life may be submitted with documentation for approval by ARB.

• Applicants may claim ROG emission reductions from DECS if hydrocarbon emission reductions for that technology are obtained from th e ARB’s retrofit website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm . For the Carl Moyer Program, ROG emission reductions will be credited at the 25 perc ent, 50 percent, and 85 percent reduction levels. To calculate emission reductions of ROG for the Carl Moyer Program, applicants should use the percentage reduc tion of hydrocarbons from the ARB’s retrofit website to determine the appropriate "level" of emission reductions. For example, a technology that provides a 40 percen t emission reduction of hydrocarbons would be permitted to apply a 25 perce nt reduction in ROG emissions for determining eligibility and grant amount in the Carl Moyer Program.

B. Examples

Example 1 – Repower with a Tier 2 Engine and Retrof it with a Level 3 DECS A construction company wants to repower an uncontro lled scraper with a Tier 2 engine. The baseline engine is a 300 hp 1987 Caterpillar 33 06 that operates for 1,500 hours per year and would cost $11,500 to rebuild. The applic ant is proposing to install a 300 hp 2004 Caterpillar C9 that costs $80,000. This equip ment operates 100 percent of the time in California and has a project life of 5 year s. A Level 3 diesel particulate filter has been verified for use on a 2004 Caterpillar C9 engi ne and has a cost of $15,000. Since installation of a retrofit device is required for o ff-road projects if available and feasible, the cost-effectiveness of the project including the installation of the DECS must be determined.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine: 1987 Caterpillar 3306

• HP (application): 300

• Hours of operation (application): 1,500

• Cost of rebuild (quote provided with application): $11,500

• Load factor (Table B-13): 0.72

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 10.23 g/bhp-hr NOx ; 1.01 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.382 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine: 2004 Caterpillar C9 (Executive Order U-R- 001-0247; Engine family 4CPXL08.8HSK)

• HP (application): 300

• Hours of operation (application): 1,500

• Cost of new engine (quote provided with applicatio n): $80,000D-32 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Load factor (Table B-13): 0.72

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 3.79 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.088 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Percent operating in California (application): 10 0 percent

• Retrofit: Level 3 verified reductions: 85 perce nt PM10

• Cost of retrofit (quote provided with application) : $15,000

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Hours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions 10.23 g/bhp-hr *300 hp*0.72*1500 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 3.65 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions 3.79 g/bhp-hr *300 hp*0.72*1500 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 1.35 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions 1.01 g/bhp-hr *300 hp* 0.72*1500 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 0.36 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions 0.12 g/bhp-hr *300 hp*0.72*1500 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 0.04 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions 0.382 g/bhp-hr *300 hp*0.72*1500 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 0.136 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions 0.088 g/bhp-hr *300 hp*0.72*1500 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 0.031 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx = 3.65 tons/yr - 1.35 tons/y r = 2.30 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.36 tons/yr - 0.04 tons/ yr = 0.32 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.136 tons/yr - 0.031 ton s/yr = 0.105 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Retrofits 0.031 tons/yr PM10 * 0.85 = 0.026 tons/yr PM10

Total PM10 Emission Benefits 0.105 tons/yr + 0.026 tons/yr = 0.131 tons/yr PM1 0

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 2.30 tons/yr + 0.32 tons/yr + 20(0.131 tons/yr) = 5 .24 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $95,000 - $11,500 = $83,500

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.225 * $83,500 = $18,788D-33 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($18,788/yr)/(5.24 weighted tons/yr) = $3,585/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Example 2 – New Purchase An applicant wants to purchase a new yard tractor w ith an LNG 250 hp on-road engine certified to ARB’s Heavy Duty Optional Standard (20 04 Cummins C Gas Plus 8.3 L) at a cost of $96,800. The applicant has provided docume ntation that they would normally have purchased a yard tractor with a 2004 250 hp Ti er 2 off-road diesel engine at a cost of $61,250. The annual hours of operation is 1,250 hours, the equipment operates 100 percent of the time in California, and has a pr oject life of 10 years. The default load factor is 0.43.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine: 2004 Tier 2 off-road diesel engine

• HP (application): 250

• Annual hours of operation (application): 2,000

• Default load factor: 0.43

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $61,250

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 4.15 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.088 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 2004 Cummins C Gas Plus (Ex ecutive Order A-021-0362)

• HP (application): 250

• Annual hours of operation (application): 2,000

• Default load factor: 0.43

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $96,800

• Converted emission standards (Table B-2): 1.44 g/ bhp-hr NOx; 0.030 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Percent operating in California (application): 10 0 percent

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on h ours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions 4.15 g/bhp-hr *250 hp*0.43*2,000 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 0.98 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions 1.44 g/bhp-hr *250 hp*0.43*2,000 hr*(ton/907,200 g) = 0.34 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions 0.088 g/bhp-hr *250 hp*0.43*2,000 hr*(ton/907,200 g ) = 0.021 tons/yr PM10 4. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions 0.030 g/bhp-hr *250 hp*0.43*2,000 hr*(ton/907,200 g ) = 0.007 tons/yr PM10D-34 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

ROG emission factors not available for reduced tech nology therefore ROG emission reductions cannot be calculated.

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx =0.98 tons/yr - 0.34 tons/yr = 0.64 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits PM10= 0.021 tons/yr - 0.007 tons /yr = 0.014 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.64 tons/yr + 20(0.014 tons/yr) = 0.92 weighted to ns/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $96,800 - $61,250 = $35,550

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.123 * 35,550 = $4,373/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($4,373/yr)/ (0.92 weighted tons/yr) = $4,753/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Example 3 – Auxiliary Engine Repower An applicant wants to repower the auxiliary engine of a street sweeper with a Tier 2 engine. The baseline engine is a Tier 1 200 hp eng ine that consumes an estimated 4,500 gallons fuel per year and would cost $7,000 t o rebuild. The applicant is proposing to install a 200 hp Tier 2 engine that costs $35,00 0. This equipment operates 100 percent of the time in California and has a pro ject life of 7 years. No retrofit device has been verified for this engine or equipment.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine (application): Tier 1 off-road diesel engi ne

• HP (application): 200 (not used for calculation, but used to determine appropriate emission factors)

• Annual fuel consumption (application): 4,500

• Cost of rebuild (quote provided with application): $7,000

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 5.93 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.38 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.120 g/bhp-hr PM10D-35 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine (application): Tier 2 off-road diesel engi ne

• HP (application): 200 (not used for calculation, but used to determine appropriate emission factors)

• Annual fuel consumption (application): 4,500 gall ons

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $35,000

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 4.15 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.088 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Percent operating in California (application): 10 0 percent

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions 5.93 g/bhp-hr *18.5 bhp-hr/gal *4,500 gal*(ton/907, 200 g) = 0.54 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions 4.15 g/bhp-hr *18.5 bhp-hr/gal *4,500 gal*(ton/907, 200 g) = 0.38 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions 0.38 g/bhp-hr *18.5 bhp-hr/gal *4,500 gal*(ton/907, 200 g) = 0.03 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions 0.12 g/bhp-hr *18.5 bhp-hr/gal *4,500 gal*(ton/907, 200 g) = 0.01 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions 0.120 g/bhp-hr *18.5 bhp-hr/gal *4,500 gal*(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.011 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions 0.088 g/bhp-hr *18.5 bhp-hr/gal *4,500 gal*(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.008 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx = 0.54 tons/yr - 0.38 tons/y r = 0.16 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.03 tons/yr - 0.01tons/y r = 0.02 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.011 tons/yr -0.008 tons /yr = 0.003 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.16 tons/yr + 0.02 tons/yr + 20(0.003 tons/yr) = 0.24 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 7 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.167

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $35,000 - $7,000 = $28,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.167 * $28,000 = $4,676D-36 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($4,676/yr/ (0.24 weighted tons/yr) = $19,483/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduce d

The cost-effectiveness for this example is greater than the $14,300 per weighted ton cost-effectiveness requirement. In order to meet t he $14,300 per weighted ton cost-effectiveness requirement, this project would only qualify for a fraction of the incremental cost $20,551. This amount is determine d by multiplying the maximum allowed cost --effectiveness by the estimated annua l emission reductions and divided by the capital recovery factor: ($14,300 * 0.24)/0.167 = $20,551

Example 4 – Retrofit of a Tier 1 Engine with a Leve l 2 DECS A Level 2 diesel oxidation catalyst with emulsified fuel has been verified for use on a yard tractor with a Tier 1 110 hp 2002 Case 4TA-390 engine. The cost of installing the retrofit is $2,000 and is verified for 50 percent r eductions of PM10 and 15 percent reductions of NOx. The yard tractor consumes 5,000 gallons of fuel per year. There is an incremental cost for the fuel of $0.20/ gallon t hat is eligible for funding with match funds by the district. The incremental cost was ca lculated with information provided from the applicant (i.e. quote from distributor). Retrofit projects have a maximum project life of 5 years.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine: 2002 Case 4TA-390

• Gallons consumed (application): 5,000 gal/yr

• Cost: $0

• Energy consumption factor: 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 6.54 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.304 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Level 2 verified reductions: 15 percent NOx; 50 p ercent PM10

• Cost of retrofit (quote provided with application) : $2,000

• Percent operating in California (application): 10 0 percent

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumption using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions 6.54 g/bhp-hr * 5,000 gal* 18.5 bhp-hr/gal *(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.67 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions 0.304 g/bhp-hr * 5,000 gal * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal *(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.031 tons/yr PM10D-37 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-11: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for retrofits

• 0.67 tons/yr * 0.15 = 0.10 tons/yr NOx

• 0.031 tons/yr * 0.50 = 0.016 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 0.10 tons/yr + 0 tons/yr + 20(0.016 tons/yr) = 0.42 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $2,000 - $0 = $2,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.225 * $2,000 = $450

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($450/yr)/(0.42 weighted tons/yr) = $1,071/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Calculations with incremental cost of fuel paid for with district funds (if district chooses to provide funding for increased fuel cost)

5,000 gal/ yr * 5 years project life * $0.20/gal = $5,000

District may pay up to $5,000 for incremental cost of fuel.

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost ($2,000 + $5,000) - $0 = $7,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.225 * $7,000 = $1,575

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($1,575/yr)/(0.34 weighted tons/yr) = $4,632/tons of weighted surplus emissions reducedD-38 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

VI. Large Spark-Ignition Off-Road Equipment

Example calculations will be included once project criteria are developed.D-39 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

VII. Ground Support Equipment

Sample calculations will be added once project crit eria are developed.D-40 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

VIII. Locomotives

This section provides four examples of calculations for determining cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions for locomotive projects

.

A. General Criteria for Locomotive Cost-Effectivene ss Calculations

• Baseline emissions for a locomotive engine repower are based upon federal emission requirements for engine remanufacture (see Chapter VIII, Section III) and the corresponding emission rates in Table B-16. Ba seline costs for a locomotive engine repower equal the actual remanufacture cost or $50,000, whichever is greater.

• For the purposes of the Carl Moyer Program, an alt ernative technology switcher is defined as a hybrid (e.g., Green Goat) or multiple engine switcher in which an existing locomotive chassis is significantly refurb ished with a new engine, batteries, electronic controls, and/or other equipment. An al ternative technology switcher must meet Tier 2 locomotive emission standards for PM an d hydrocarbons and be 30 percent cleaner than Tier 2 locomotive emission standards for NOx. An alternative technology switcher project is consider ed a new locomotive purchase.

• Baseline emissions for an alternative technology s witcher project reflect Tier 0 emission rates for Class I locomotives and uncontro lled emission rates for Class III locomotives. The cost of an alternative technology switcher eligible for Carl Moyer Program funding shall not exceed 60 percent of the total cost of the new switcher for Class I locomotives, and 80 percent of the total co st of the new switcher for Class III locomotives.

• Baseline emissions and costs for a new locomotive purchase project which is not an alternative technology switcher reflect Tier 2 emis sion rates and the cost of a new Tier 2 locomotive, respectively.

• Locomotive repower projects must achieve a 15 perc ent NOx reduction beyond existing emission levels.

• All locomotive purchase and repower projects (exce pt alternative technology switchers) must include purchase and installation o f an automatic engine start-stop (AESS) ILD to reduce unnecessary engine idling if t he locomotive is not already equipped with such a device and AESS installation i s technically feasible.

• If not already required by a rule, regulation, MOU , or other legal mandate, the purchase and installation cost of an AESS is eligib le for Carl Moyer Program funding, subject to the following limitations:

− The Carl Moyer Program may provide actual equipmen t costs up to a maximum of $8,000 for a locomotive-specific AESS.D-41 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

− The Carl Moyer Program may provide the lower amoun t of actual installation costs of the AESS, up to a maximum of $3,400.

− AESS emission reductions are calculated by applyin g the ILD factors in Table B-17 to the reduced engine emissions.

• Because of uncertainty in locomotive load factors, locomotive project activity must be based upon annual fuel consumption.

• The energy consumption rate for a locomotive engin e is 20.8 bhp-hr per gallon. The energy consumption rate for an on- or off-road engi ne used in a locomotive application is 18.5 bhp-hr per gallon.

• Class I freight locomotive projects in all air dis tricts other than the South Coast must have a minimum project life of ten years. All othe r locomotive projects have a minimum project life of three years.

• The maximum project life for a locomotive project is 20 years.

• The baseline emission rates used to determine emis sion reductions and cost-effectiveness for locomotives subject to the S outh Coast MOU reflect the Tier 2 locomotive emission factors for line-haul and switc h locomotives identified in Table B-16.

• Benefits of an AESS are reflected by applying the ILD factor to the newer locomotive engine only if: 1) the project locomotive is operat ed by a Class 3 railroad or Amtrak; 2) the baseline engine does not have a functioning AESS; and 3) a functioning AESS is to be installed on the project locomotive. The ILD factor is never used to calculate the cost-effectiveness of new locomotive purchase projects or for Class 1 locomotive projects (since Class 1 locomotives are required to install an AESS as part of the Statewide Locomotive MOU). The ILD emi ssion reduction factor is found in Table B-17. Example 1 utilizes the ILD fac tor to calculate the costeffectiveness of a Class 3 locomotive repower.

• For alternative technology switcher projects, fuel consumption for the new locomotive may differ from baseline fuel consumptio n if the new locomotive fuel use is sufficiently documented to ARB and air district staff.

B. Examples

Example 1 – Switch Locomotive Engine Repower (Class III Railroad) A Class III railroad operator opts to replace an ex isting 1971 model year switch locomotive engine with a new 2006 model year Tier 2 locomotive engine. The existing locomotive consumes 40,000 gallons of fuel per year . The cost to rebuild the existing engine is $48,000, while the cost to purchase and i nstall the new engine is $350,000. The cost to purchase an automatic engine start-stop ILD is $8,000, while installation ofD-42 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

the device costs $3,000. The railroad company will commit to a 10 year project life. Emission reductions are calculated as follows:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Locomotive model year (application): 1971

• Locomotive emission rate (Table B-16): 15.66 g/bh p-hr NOx, 0.99 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 40,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 20.8 bhp-hr/gal

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine model year (application): 2006

• Emission rate (Table B-16): 6.57 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0. 51 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.189 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 40,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 20.8 bhp-hr/gal

• ILD emission reduction factor (Table B-17): 0.90

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on Fu el Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr): 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (15.66 g/bhp-hr*40,000 gal/yr*20.8 bhp-hr/gal)*(ton /907,200g) = 14.36 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (6.57 g/bhp-hr*40,000 gal/yr*20.8 bhp-hr/gal*0.90)* (ton/907,200g) = 5.42 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.99 g/bhp-hr *40,000 gal/yr*20.8 bhp-hr/gal)*(ton /907,200g) = 0.91 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.51 g/bhp-hr*40,000 gal/yr*20.8 bhp-hr/gal *0.90) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.42 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual combustion PM10 baseline technology (0.396 g/bhp-hr*40,000 gal/yr*20.8 bhp-hr/gal)*(ton /907,200g) = 0.363 ton/yr PM10 6. Annual combustion PM10 reduced technology emissi ons (0.189 g/bhp-hr*40,000 gal/yr*20.8 bhp-hr/gal *0.90 )*(ton/907,200g) = 0.156 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 14.36 tons/yr – 5.42 tons /yr = 8.94 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.91 tons/yr - 0.42 tons/ yr = 0.49 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission benefits= 0.363 tons/yr - 0.156 tons /yr = 0.207 tons/yr PM10D-43 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions 8.94 tons/yr + 0.49 tons/yr + 20(0.207 tons/yr) = 1 3.57 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost ($350,000 + $11,000) - $50,000 = $311,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.123 * $311,000 = $38,253/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($38,253/yr)/(13.57 weighted tons/yr) = $2,819/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Example 2 – Line-Haul Locomotive Engine Repower (Cl ass I Railroad) A Class I railroad operator opts to replace his exi sting 1976 line-haul locomotive engine with a new 2006 model year Tier 2 locomotive engine . Based on the fuel receipts, it is determined that the existing and new locomotive eng ines will consume 75,000 gallons of fuel per year. The cost to rebuild the existing engine is $65,000, while the cost of the new engine plus installation is $390,000. The rail road will commit to a 20 year project life. Emission reductions are calculated as follow s:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Locomotive model year (application): 1976

• Emission rate (Table B-16): 7.74 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0. 47 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.288 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 75,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 20.8 bhp-hr/gal

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine model year (application): 2006

• Emission rate (Table B-16): 4.50 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0. 26 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.153 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 75,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 20.8 bhp-hr/galD-44 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr): 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (7.74 g/bhp-hr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal * 75,000 gal/yr) * (ton/907,200g) = 13.31 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (4.50 g/bhp-hr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal * 75,000 gal/yr) * (ton/907,200g) = 7.74 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.47 g/bhp-hr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal * 75,000 gal/yr) * (ton/907,200g) = 0.81 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.26 g/bhp-hr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal * 75,000 gal/yr) * (ton/907,200g) = 0.45 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual combustion PM10 baseline technology (0.288 g/bhp-hr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal * 75,000 gal/yr) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.495 ton/yr PM10 6. Annual combustion PM10 reduced technology emissi ons (0.153 g/bhp-hr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal * 75,000 gal/yr) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.263 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx = 13.31 tons/yr - 7.74 tons/ yr = 5.57 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.81 tons/yr - 0.45 tons/y r = 0.36 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.495 tons/yr - 0.263 ton s/yr = 0.232 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 5.57 tons/yr + 0.36 tons/yr + 20(0.232 tons/yr) = 1 0.57 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 20 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.074

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $390,000 - $65,000 = $325,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.074 * $325,000 = $24,050/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($24,050/yr)/(10.57 weighted tons/yr) = $2,275/tons of weighted surplus emissions reducedD-45 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Example 3 – Hybrid Switch Locomotive Purchase (Clas s I Railroad) A Class I railroad has the opportunity to purchase a locomotive frame refurbished with an 800 horsepower Tier 2 certified off-road engine. Because the project is a hybrid locomotive project, and involves significantly refu rbishing the existing locomotive frame with a new battery and other equipment, the project is considered a new locomotive purchase. A typical switcher with activity similar to that of the new locomotive consumes 45,000 gallons fuel per year. The applica nt provides documentation to demonstrate the new advanced technology switcher wi ll reduce fuel consumption by 33 percent. The cost of the locomotive project is $1.1 million. The project life is 10 years. Emission reductions are calculated as fo llows:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline locomotive model year: none

• Baseline emission rates (reflect locomotive Tier 0 emission factors, Table B-16): 11.34 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.99 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.396 g/bhp- hr PM

• Activity (application): 45,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 20.8 bhp-hr/gal

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine model year: 2006

• Reduced emission rates (reflect off-road Tier 2 em ission factors, Table B-12): 3.87 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.088 g/bhp-h r PM10

• Activity (application): 30,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr): 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.34 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal) *(ton/907,200g) = 11.70 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (3.87 g/bhp-hr * 30,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal) * (ton/907,200g) = 2.37 ton/yr NOx

3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.99 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal) * (ton/907,200g) = 1.02 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.12 g/bhp-hr * 30,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal) * (ton/907,200g) = 0.07 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual combustion PM10 baseline technology (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.409 ton/yr PM10D-46 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

6. Annual combustion PM10 reduced technology emissi ons (0.088 g/bhp-hr * 30,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.054 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx = 11.70 tons/yr – 2.37 tons/ yr = 9.33 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 1.02 tons/yr - 0.07 tons/y r = 0.95 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.409 tons/yr - 0.054 ton s/yr = 0.335 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions 9.33 tons/yr + 0.95 tons/yr + 20(0.335 tons/yr) = 1 6.98 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $1,100,000 * 0.60 = $660,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.123 * $660,000 = $81,180/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($81,180/yr)/(16.98 weighted tons/yr) = $4,781/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Example 4 – Multiple Engine Switcher Purchase (Clas s III Railroad) A Class III railroad operator has the opportunity t o purchase a switch locomotive with three Tier 3 certified 700 horsepower off-road engi nes. Because this is a multiple engine switcher with new electronics, a new battery , and other components, the project is evaluated as a new locomotive purchase. Fuel re ceipts indicate other switch locomotives with the same activity in the rail yard consume 45,000 gallons of fuel per year. The cost of the new multiple engine switcher is $975,000. The project life is 5 years. Emission reductions are calculated as fol lows:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Locomotive model year: none

• Locomotive emission rate (uncontrolled, Table B-16 ): 15.66 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.99 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 45,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 20.8 bhp-hr/galD-47 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine model year: 2006

• Emission rates (reflect off-road Tier 3 emission f actors, Table B-12): 2.32 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.088 g/bhp-h r PM10

• Activity (application): 45,000 gal/year

• Energy consumption factor = 18.5 bhp-hr/gal

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr): 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (15.66 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal) *(ton/907,200g) = 16.16 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (2.32 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal) * (ton/907,200g) = 2.13 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.99 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal) * (ton/907,200g) = 1.02 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.12 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal) * (ton/907,200g) = 0.11 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual combustion PM10 baseline technology (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.409 ton/yr PM10 6. Annual combustion PM10 reduced technology emissi ons (0.088 g/bhp-hr * 45,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal) *(ton/907,200g) = 0.081 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions by Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx = 16.16 tons/yr – 2.13 to ns/yr = 14.03 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 1.02 tons/yr – 0.11 tons/ yr = 0.91 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.409 tons/yr – 0.081 ton s/yr = 0.328 tons/yr PM10 Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions 14.03 tons/yr + 0.91 tons/yr + 20(0.328 tons/yr) = 21.50 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1): = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $975,000 * 0.80 = $780,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.225 * $780,000 = $175,500/yrD-48 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($175,500/yr)/(21.50 weighted tons/yr) = $8,163/tons of weighted surplus emissions reducedD-49 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

IX. Marine Vessels

This section provides three examples of calculation s for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions f or marine vessel projects.

A. General Criteria for Marine Vessel Cost-Effectiv eness Calculations

• Engines on marine vessels with wet exhaust systems are eligible for Carl Moyer Program funding if the project vessel meets all oth er applicable program requirements. The wet exhaust systems themselves a re not eligible for Carl Moyer Program funding. A wet exhaust factor of 0.80 must be applied to the baseline and reduced emission propulsion and auxiliary engine em ission calculations for all projects on vessels with wet exhaust systems.

• Projects must have a minimum project life of three years.

• The maximum project life for marine vessel project s (equivalent to the average engine life reported by U.S. EPA) is as follows: Engine displacement < 5.0 liter/cyl. 16 years Engine displacement >5.0 liter/cyl. 23 years Auxiliary engines 17 years

B. Examples

Example 1 – Tugboat Propulsion Engine Repower A tugboat operator wishes to replace a 1975 model y ear 1,200 horsepower tugboat propulsion engine during the normal overhaul period with a 2006 model year 1,200 horsepower engine. Both engines have a displ acement of 7.0 liters per cylinder. The operator documents that the vessel consumes 95, 000 gallons of fuel annually within California Coastal Waters. The cost to rebu ild the old engine is $100,000. The cost to purchase and install the new engine and new GPS unit on the vessel are $250,000 and $2,500, respectively. The operator co mmits to a 5 year project life. Emission reductions are calculated as follows:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 1975

• Engine horsepower (application): 1,200 hp

• Engine emission rate (Table B-18): 11.16 g/bhp-hr NOx, 1.14 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.382 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 95,000 gal/yr

• Engine displacement (application): 7.0 liters/cyl inder

• Fuel consumption rate (Table B-20): 20.8 bhp-hr/g al

Reduced Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): 2005

• Engine horsepower (application) = 1,200 hpD-50 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Engine emission rate (Table B-18): 7.60 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0.82 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.274 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 95,000 gal/yr

• Fuel consumption rate (Table B-20): 20.8 bhp-hr/g al

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standards (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.16 g/bhp-hr)(95,000 gal/yr)(20.8 bhp-hr/gal)(to n/907,200 g) = 24.31 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (7.60 g/bhp-hr * 95,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal)(t on/907,200 g) = 16.55 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.14 g/bhp-hr * 95,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal)(t on/907,200 g) = 2.48 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.82 g/bhp-hr * 95,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal)(t on/907,200 g) = 1.79 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.382 g/bhp-hr * 95,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal)( ton/907,200 g) = 0.832 ton/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.274 g/bhp-hr * 95,000 gal/yr * 20.8 bhp-hr/gal)( ton/907,200 g) = 0.597 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission reductions = 24.31 tons/yr – 16.55 to ns/yr = 7.76 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission reductions = 2.48 tons/yr – 1.79 tons /yr = 0.69 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission reductions = 0.832 tons/yr – 0.597 t ons/yr= 0.235 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 7.76 + 0.69 +20(0.235) = 13.15 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project life = 5 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost ($250,000 + $2,500) - $100,000 = $152,500

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost ($152,500 * 0.225) = $34,312/yrD-51 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Surplus Emissio n Reductions ($34,312/year)/(13.15 weighted tons/yr) = $2,609/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Example 2 – Fishing Vessel Auxiliary Engine Repower A charter fishing vessel owner wishes to repower a 125 horsepower 1985 auxiliary engine with a new 2005 model year 200 horsepower en gine. The new engine has a displacement 1.3 liters per cylinder. The vessel o wner has documented that the vessel auxiliary engine operates for 900 hours annually in California waters. The cost to rebuild the existing engine is $2,600. The cost to purchase and install a new engine and GPS unit is $52,500. The applicant will commit to a 10 year project life. Emission reductions are calculated as follows:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 1985

• Engine horsepower (application): 125 hp

• Engine emission rate (Table B-18): 10.23 g/bhp-hr NOx, 1.06 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 900 hr/yr

• Engine load factor (Table B-19): 0.43

Reduced Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): 2005

• Engine horsepower (application) = 200 hp

• Emission rate (Table B-18): 4.17 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0. 39 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.160 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 900 hr/yr

• Engine displacement (application) = 1.3 liters per cylinder

• Load adjustment ( Formula C-5: Replacement Load Factor ): = 0.43*(125 hp/200 hp) = 0.27

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on H ours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (10.23 g/bhp-hr * 900 hr/yr * 125 hp * 0.43)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.55 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (4.17 g/bhp-hr * 900 hr/yr * 200 hp * 0.27)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.22 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.06 g/bhp-hr * 900 hr/yr * 125 hp * 0.43)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.06 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.39 g/bhp-hr * 900 hr/yr * 200 hp * 0.27)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.02 ton/yr ROGD-52 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 900 hr/yr * 125 hp * 0.43)(ton/90 7,200 g = 0.021 ton/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.14 g/bhp-hr * 900 hrs/year * 200 hp * 0.27)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.008 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission reductions = 0.55 tons/yr – 0.22 tons /yr = 0.33 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission reductions = 0.06 tons/yr – 0.02 tons /yr = 0.04 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission reductions = 0.021 tons/yr – 0.008 t ons/yr= 0.013 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.33 tons/yr + 0.04 tons/yr + 20(0.013 tons/yr) = 0 .63 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project life = 10 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $52,500 - $2,600 = $49,900

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost ($49,900 * 0.123) = $6,137/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($6,137/year)/ (0.63 weighted tons/yr) = $9,741/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

Example 3 – Fishing Vessel Propulsion Engine Repowe r (Wet Exhaust System) A commercial fishing vessel owner wishes to repower a 1973 250 horsepower propulsion engine with a new 2006 model year 250 ho rsepower engine. The existing and replacement engines both have a displacement of 1.4 liters per cylinder. The vessel has a wet exhaust system. The vessel owner has documented that the vessel propulsion engine consumes 24,000 gallons of fuel a nnually in California waters. The cost to rebuild the existing engine is $3,250. The cost to purchase and install a new engine is $51,300. The vessel will be outfitted wi th a new GPS unit for $2,300. The applicant will commit to a 5 year project life. Em ission reductions are calculated as follows:

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 1973

• Engine horsepower (application): 250 hpD-53 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Engine emission rate (Table B-18): 11.16 g/bhp-hr NOx, 1.14 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 24,000 gal/yr

• Engine displacement (application): 1.4 liters/cyl inder

• Fuel consumption rate (Table B-20): 18.5 bhp-hr/g al

• Wet exhaust emission factor (default): 0.80

Reduced-Emission Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): 2006

• Engine horsepower (application): 250 hp

• Emission rate (Table B-18): 4.17 g/bhp-hr NOx, 0. 39 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.160 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Activity (application): 24,000 gal/yr

• Engine displacement (application): 1.4 liters per cylinder

• Fuel consumption rate (Table B-20): 18.5 bhp-hr/g al

• Wet exhaust emission factor (default) = 0.80

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.16 g/bhp-hr * 24,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal * 0.80)(ton/907,200 g) = 4.30 ton/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (4.17 g/bhp-hr * 24,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal * 0.80)(ton/907,200 g) = 1.63 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.14 g/bhp-hr * 24,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal * 0.80)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.45 ton/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.39 g.bhp-hr * 24,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal * 0.80)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.15 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 24,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal * 0.80)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.155 ton/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.160 g/bhp-hr * 24,000 gal/yr * 18.5 bhp-hr/gal * 0.80)(ton/907,200 g) = 0.063 ton/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx Emission Reductions = 4.30 tons/yr – 1.63 tons /yr = 2.67 tons/yr NOx

• ROG Emission Reductions = 0.45 tons/yr – 0.15 tons /yr = 0.30 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 Emission Reductions = 0.155 tons/yr – 0.063 t ons/yr = 0.092 tons/yr PM10D-54 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 2.67 + 0.30 +20(0.092) = 4.81 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project life = 5 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost ($51,300 + 2,300) - $3,250 = $50,350

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $50,350 * 0.225 = $11,328/yr

Cost Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Surplus Emissio n Reductions ($11,328/year)/(4.81 weighted tons/yr) = $2,355/ ton of weighted surplus emissions reducedD-55 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

X. Agricultural Sources

This section provides three examples of calculation s for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions f or agricultural source projects.

A. General Criteria for Agricultural Source Cost-Ef fectiveness Calculations

• Projects must have a minimum project life of three years. ARB may approve a shorter project life on a case-by-case basis. Proj ects with shorter lives may be subject to additional funding restrictions, such as a lower cost-effectiveness limit or a project cost cap.

• The default project life when determining project benefits for new purchases to repowers shall be ten years for electric motors and for engines with documentation. The default project life for engines without docume ntation shall be seven years. A longer project life may be used with approval by ARB staff, however, sufficient documentation must be provided to ARB that supports the selected project life based on actual remaining useful life.

• In these calculations PM10 refers to combustion pa rticulate matter.

• Emission reduction calculations may be based on ho urs of operation or on fuel
usage.

• Baseline and reduced technology emission factors a re listed in Tables B-12 and B-14a of Appendix B.

• Load factors for selected equipment categories are in Tables B-13 and B-14b of Appendix B.

• For emission reduction calculations based on fuel usage, an energy consumption factor must be used. The default energy consumptio n factor for stationary agricultural irrigation pump engines greater than 5 0 hp is 17.56 bhp-hr/gal.

B. Examples

Example 1 - Repower (diesel to diesel) Based on Hou rs

Baseline Technology Information:

• Baseline technology (application): 1977 John Dee re JD6466A

• Engine horsepower (application): 182 hp

• Activity (application): 3,000 hours per year

• Load factor (Table B-13): 0.65

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 11.16 g/bhp-hr NOx ; 1.14 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM10D-56 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• Baseline rebuild cost (quote provided with applica tion): $3,500

Reduced Technology Information:

• Reduced technology (application): 2005 John Deere 6068HF275-225

• Engine horsepower (application): 184 hp

• Activity (application): 3,000 hr/yr

• Load factor (Table B-13): 0.65

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 4.15 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.088 g/bhp-hr PM10

• New engine cost (quote provided with application): $20,320 (includes hour meter)

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on H ours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.16 g/bhp-hr * 182 hp * 0.65 * 3,000 hrs)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 4.37 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (4.15 g/bhp-hr * 184 hp * 0.65 * 3,000 hrs)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 1.64 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.14 g/bhp-hr * 182 hp * 0.65 * 3,000 hrs)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.45 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.12 g/bhp-hr * 184 hp * 0.65 * 3,000 hrs)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.05 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 182 hp * 0.65 * 3,000 hrs)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.155 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.088 g/bhp-hr * 184 hp * 0.65 * 3,000 hrs)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.035 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 4.37 tons/yr – 1.64 ton s/yr = 2.73 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.45 tons/yr – 0.05 tons /yr = 0.40 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.155 tons/yr – 0.035 ton s/yr = 0.120 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 2.73 tons/yr + 0.40 tons/yr + 20(0.120 tons/yr) = 5.53 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project life: 7 years CRF (Table B-1): 0.167

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $20,320 - $3,500 = $16,820

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.167 * $16,820 = $2,809/yrD-57 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($2,809/yr)/(5.53 weighted tons/yr) = $508/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for this project is less tha n $14,300 per weighted ton of emissions reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 2 - Repower (diesel to diesel) Based on Fue l Use

Baseline Technology information:

• Baseline Technology (application): 1979 Cummins N TC 220

• Engine horsepower (application): 220 hp

• Annual fuel consumption (application): 8,000 gal/ yr

• Energy consumption factor (default): 17.56 bhp-hr /gal

• Emission Factors (Table B-12): 11.16 g/bhp-hr NOx ; 1.20 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM1010

• Rebuild cost (quote provided with application): $ 2,500

Reduced Technology information:

• Reduced Technology (application): 2005 Case I-H P X190

• Engine horsepower (application): 190 hp

• Energy consumption factor (default): 17.56 bhp-hr /gal

• Annual fuel consumption (application): 8,000 gal/ yr

• Emission Factors (Table B-12): 4.15 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.088 g/bhp-hr PM1010

• New engine cost (quote provided with application): $16,500 (includes hour meter)

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-6: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on F uel Consumed using Emission Factors or Converted Emission Standard (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (11.16 g/bhp-hr * 17.56 bhp-hr/gal * 8,000 gal)(ton /907,200 g) = 1.73 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (4.15 g/bhp-hr * 17.56 bhp-hr/gal * 8,000 gal)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.64 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.20 g/bhp-hr * 17.56 bhp-hr/gal * 8,000 gal)(ton/ 907,200 g) = 0.19 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.12 g/bhp-hr * 17.56 bhp-hr/gal * 8,000 gal/yr)(t on/907,200 g) = 0.02 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 17.56 bhp-hr/gal * 8,000 gal)(ton /907,200 g) = 0.061 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.088 g/bhp-hr * 17.56 bhp-hr/gal * 8,000 gal/yr)( ton/907,200 g) = 0.014 tons/yr PM10D-58 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 1.73 tons/yr – 0.64 tons/y r = 1.09 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.19 tons/yr – 0.02 tons/y r = 0.17 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.061 tons/yr – 0.014 ton s/yr = 0.047 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Red uctions 1.09 tons/yr + 0.17 tons/yr + 20(0.047 tons/yr) = 2.20 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project life: 7 years CRF (Table B-1): 0.167

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $16,500 - $2,500 = $14,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.167 * $14,000 = $2,338/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($2,338/yr)/(2.20 weighted tons/yr) = $1,063/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for this project is less tha n $14,300 per weighted ton of emissions reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 3 – Natural Gas Repower Based on Hours

Baseline Technology information:

• Baseline Technology (application): 1980 Detroit D iesel 8V71

• Engine horsepower (application): 220 hp

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Load factor (Table B-13): 0.65

• Emission Factors (Table B-12): 10.23 g/bhp-hr NOx ; 1.08 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.396 g/bhp-hr PM10

• Rebuild cost (quote provided with application): $ 6,000

Reduced Technology information:

• Reduced Technology (application): 2005 Cummins GT A 8.3

• Engine horsepower (application): 200 hp

• Activity (application): 2,000 hr/yr

• Load factor (calculated using Formula C-5): 0.65 * (220 hp/200 hp) = 0.72

• Emission Factors (Table B-14a): 1.58 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.13 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.060 g/bhp-hr PM10D-59 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• New engine cost (quote provided with application): $29,000 (includes hour meter)

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on H ours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (10.23 g/bhp-hr * 220 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 3.23 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (1.58 g/bhp-hr * 200 hp * 0.72 * 2,000 hrs)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.50 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (1.08 g/bhp-hr * 220 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.34 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0.13 g/bhp-hr * 200 hp * 0.72 * 2,000 hrs)(ton/907 ,200 g) = 0.04 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.396 g/bhp-hr * 220 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.125 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0.060 g/bhp-hr * 200 hp * 0.72 * 2,000 hrs)(ton/90 7,200 g) = 0.019 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 3.23 tons/yr – 0.50 tons/y r = 2.73 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.34 tons/yr – 0.04 tons/y r = 0.30 tons/yr ROG

• PM10 emission benefits = 0.125 tons/yr – 0.019 ton s/yr = 0.106 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 2.73 tons/yr + 0.30 tons/yr + 20(0.106 tons/yr) = 5.15 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project life: 7 years CRF (Table B-1): 0.167

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $29,000 - $6,000 = $23,000

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost 0.167 * $23,000 = $3,841/yr

Cost-Effectiveness: Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($3,841/yr)/(5.15 weighted tons/yr) = $746/tons of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for this project is less tha n $14,300 per weighted ton of emissions reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.D-60 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

XI. Light-Duty Vehicles

This section provides an example calculation for de termining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions for light-duty vehicle projects.

A. General Criteria for Light-Duty Vehicle Cost-Eff ectiveness Calculations

• Emission reductions from VAVR programs shall be ca lculated in accordance with the methodology specified in the ARB’s VAVR regulations . Emission reductions, by model year of vehicle retired, are shown in Table 1 1-2. (The table is also included in Appendix B, Tables for Emission-Reduction and Cost- Effectiveness Calculations, at Table B-21.)

• The project life for a vehicle retirement project is three years as specified in the ARB’s VAVR regulation.

• In calculating cost-effectiveness, the total cost is the full cost paid by the district using State funds (i.e, the total paid to the enter prise operator to retire a vehicle, not just the amount paid to the vehicle owner).

• Cost-effectiveness is calculated without interim r ounding to the annualized cost or the annual weighted surplus emission reduction.

• For these calculations, PM10 refers to combustion PM10.

B. Examples

Example 1 - Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retiremen t Project A district pays $750 to retire a 1980 model year li ght-duty vehicle during calendar year 2006. Please note that the cost of $750 is the tot al cost paid by the district with Carl Moyer Program or AB 923 funds to the enterpris e operator to retire the vehicle, not just the amount paid to the vehicle owner.

Emissions Reduction Calculations:

Table B-21 lists the emission reductions over the 3 year project life in pounds.

• NOx emission benefit = 85 pounds over 3 years (from Table B-21) = (85 lb)/[(3 yrs)*(2000 lb/ton)] = 0.0142 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefit = 129 pounds over 3 years (from Table B-21) = (129 lb)/[(3 yrs)*(2000 lb/ton)] = 0.0215 tons/yr ROGD-61 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

• PM10 emission benefit = 1.13 pounds over 3 years (from Table B-21) = (1.13 lb)/[(3 yrs)*(2000 lb/ton)] = 0.000188 tons /yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.0142 + 0.0215 + 20*(0.000188) = 0.0394 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost:

Project life: 3 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.360

Total cost: $750

Formula C-12: Annualized cost 0.360 * $750 = $270/yr

Cost-Effectiveness:

Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/ton) ($270/yr)/(0.0394 weighted tons/yr) = $6,850/weighted ton of surplus emissions reducedD-62 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

XII. Zero-Emission Technologies

This section provides several examples of calculati ons for determining the cost-effectiveness of surplus emission reductions f or zero-emission projects.

A. General Criteria for Zero-Emission Technology Co st-Effectiveness Calculations

Electrically Driven Agricultural Pumps

• Agricultural pumps that use an electric motor may use a 10 year project life for calculating cost effectiveness.

• All electric-driven agricultural pumps must have a functioning kilowatt-hour meter, or other method approved by the local air district, to monitor usage.

• Participants in the PG&E/SCE rate incentive progra ms must use Tier 3 engine emission factors for calculating reduced technology emissions.

• Participants in the PG&E/SCE rate incentive progra ms may use one-half the rebuild cost for calculating incremental cost.

• Participants in the PG&E/SCE rate incentive progra ms who are replacing a baseline Tier 2 engine still under contract with the Carl Mo yer Program may use zero rebuild cost in calculating incremental cost.

• For these calculations, PM10 refers to combustion PM10.

• The minimum project life is three years.

Electric Idle Reduction

• The actual capital cost, up to $5,500, of an APU m ay be funded.

• The installation cost of an APU, including install ation of an hour meter, up to a maximum of $3,400 per electric motor or fuel cell A PU may be funded.

B. Examples

Example 1 – Replacing a Diesel Pump Engine with a E lectric Pump Motor: Not

Participating in PG&E/SCE Incentive Program An applicant wants to purchase a 2005 GE 5K445FT328 , 100 hp (75 kW) electric pump motor to replace a 1991 Caterpillar 3116, 155 hp di esel pump engine with uncontrolled emissions. The motor costs $26,700; otherwise the applicant would have to rebuild the diesel engine at a cost of $7,000. On average, the applicant currently operates theD-63 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

diesel pump engine at 65 percent of the maximum loa d rating for 2,000 hours each year. The pump operates 100 percent of the time in California.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 1991 Caterpillar 3116, dies el off-road engine (uncontrolled)

• Engine HP (application): 155 hp

• Load factor (default for agricultural pumps): 0.6 5

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Cost rebuild (quote provided with application): $ 7,000

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 7.60 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.82 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.274 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 2005 GE 5K445FT328, electri c motor

• Engine HP (application): 100 hp (75 kW)

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Percent operate in California (application): 100 percent

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $26,700

• Emissions: 0 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0 g/bh p-hr PM10

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on H ours of Operation 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (7.60 g/hp-hr *155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 1.69 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions = 0 ton s/yr 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.82 g/hp-hr *155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.18 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions = 0 ton s/yr 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.274 g/hp-hr *155 hp *0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.061 tons/yr PM 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions = 0 t ons/yr

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOx = 1.69 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 1.69 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.18 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.18 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.061 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.013 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 1.69 + 0.18 + 20(0.061) = 3.09 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123D-64 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $26,700 – $7,000 = $19,700

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $19,700 * 0.123 = $2,423/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/weighted ton) ($2,423/yr)/(3.09 weighted ton/yr)

= $784/weighted ton of surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per weighted ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 2 – Replacing a Diesel Pump Engine with a E lectric Pump Motor:

Applicant Is Participating in PG&E/SCE Incentive Pr ogram An applicant wants to purchase a 2005 GE 5K445FT328 , 100 hp (75 kW) electric pump motor to replace a 1991 Caterpillar 3116, 155 hp di esel pump engine with uncontrolled emissions. The motor costs $26,700; otherwise the applicant would have to rebuild the diesel engine at a cost of $7,000. On average, the applicant currently operates the diesel pump engine at 65 percent of the maximum loa d rating for 2,000 hours each year. The pump operates 100 percent of the time in California. The applicant is eligible and has been accepted in the PG&E/SCE rate incentiv e program.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 1991 Caterpillar 3116, dies el off-road (uncontrolled)

• Engine HP (Application): 155 hp

• Load factor (default for agricultural pumps): 0.6 5

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Cost to rebuild (quote provided with application): $7,000

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 7.60 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.82 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.274 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 2005 GE 5K445FT328, electri c

• Engine HP (application): 100 hp (75 kW)

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Percent operate in California (application): 100 percent

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $26,700

• Emissions: Applicant can only claim emission benef its from baseline to a comparable Tier 3 engine

.D-65 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Electric motor: 0 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0 g/bhp-hr PM Tier 3 155 hp diesel engine (Table B-12): 2.32 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr RO G; 0.112g/bhp-hr PM10

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions Based on H ours of Operation 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (7.60 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 1.69 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx Tier 3 technology emissions (2.32 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.52 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.82 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.18 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG Tier 3 technology emissions (0.12 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.03 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.274 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,20 0 g/ton) = 0.061 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 Tier 3 technology emissions (0.112 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,20 0 g/ton) = 0.025 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOX = 1.69 tons/yr- 0.52 tons/yr = 1.17 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.18 tons/yr - 0.03 tons/ yr = 0.15 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.061 tons/yr - 0.025 ton s/yr = 0.036 tons/yr PM10

Formula C.2 – Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 1.17 + 0.15 + 20(0.036) = 2.04 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $26,700 – ($7,000/2) = $23,200 *Applicant may use o ne-half rebuild cost for baseline, as per criteria

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $23,200 * 0.123 = $2,854/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/weighted ton) ($2,854/yr)/(2.04 weighted ton/yr) = $1,399/weighted ton of surplus emissions reducedD-66 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per weighted ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 3 – Replacing a Diesel Pump Engine with a E lectric Pump Motor:

Applicant Is Participating in PG&E/SCE Incentive Pr ogram and Replaced Engine Is a CMP-Funded Tier 2 Engine

An applicant wants to purchase a 2005 GE 5K445FT328 , 100 hp (75 kW) electric pump motor to replace a Tier 2 155 hp diesel pump engine . The motor costs $26,700. On average, the applicant currently operates the diese l pump engine at 65 percent of the maximum load rating for 2,000 hours each year. The pump operates 100 percent of the time in California. The Tier 2 engine was purchase d with Carl Moyer Program funds three years ago, and is still under contract. The engine has not reached its rebuild interval. The applicant is eligible and has been a ccepted in the PG&E/SCE rate incentive program.

Baseline Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 2004 Tier 2 diesel off-road

• Engine HP (application): 155 hp

• Load factor(default for agricultural pumps): 0.65

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Cost rebuild (quote provided with application): $ 0

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 4.17 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.19 g/bhp-hr ROG; 0.128 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• Engine (application): 2005 GE 5K445FT328, electri c

• Engine HP (application): 100 hp (75 kW)

• Activity (application): 2,000 hours per year

• Percent operate in California (application): 100 percent

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $26,700

• Emissions: Applicant can only claim emission benef its from baseline to a comparable Tier 3 engine. Tier 3 155 hp diesel engine (Table B-12): 2.32 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0.12 g/bhp-hr RO G; 0.112g/bhp-hr PM10

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-4 - Estimated Annual Emissions based on H ours of Operation 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (4.17 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.93 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx Tier 3 technology emissions (2.32 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.52 tons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissionsD-67 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

(0.19 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.04 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG Tier 3 technology emissions (0.12 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.03 tons/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.128 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,20 0 g/ton)= 0.028 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 Tier 3 technology emissions (0.112 g/hp-hr * 155 hp * 0.65 * 2,000 hrs)/(907,20 0 g/ton)= 0.025 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOX = 0.93 tons/yr- 0.52 tons/yr = 0.41 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.04 tons/yr - 0.03 tons/y r = 0.01 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10= 0.028 tons/yr - 0.025 tons /yr = 0.003 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.41 tons/yr + 0.01 tons/yr + 20(0.003 tons/yr) = 0.480 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 10 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.123

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost $26,700 – $0* = $26,700 *Applicant may use a rebuil d cost of $0 since the project is still under Moyer contract and has not reached a re build interval.

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $26,700 * 0.123 = $3,284/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/weighted ton) ($3,284/yr)/(0.480 weighted ton/yr) = $6,842/weighted ton of surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per weighted ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 4 – Electric Idle Reduction Package Replace s Main Diesel Engine Idling An applicant wants to purchase an electric package that includes an electric HVAC, a large alternator, and inverter/charger and a lead a cid battery pack. These units will replace all idling that uses the truck’s main propu lsion engine. The package costs $10,000 and another $2,000 for installation. The ap plicant currently idles his 1999 MY truck engine an average of 1,250 hours each year.D-68 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Baseline Technology Information:

• Main engine model year (application): 1999

• Annual hours of idling (application): 1,250

• Main Engine idling emission rate (Table B-9): 171 .00 g/hr NOx, 34.28 g/hr ROG, g/hr 2.28 PM10

Reduced Technology Information:

• 110 VAC, 60 Hz HVAC (8300 BTU) ; 270 A alternator; lead acid battery pack; inverter/charger (applicati on)

• Annual hours of idling (application): 1,250

• Percent operate in California (application): 100 percent

• Cost of new equipment (quote provided with applica tion): $10,000

• Cost of installation (quote provided with applicat ion): $2,000

• Electric emission rates: 0 g/bhp-hr NOx; 0 g/bhp -hr ROG; 0 g/bhp-hr PM10

Emission Reduction Calculations : Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on H ours of Operation 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (171.00 g/hr * 1,250 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.24 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions = 0 t ons/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (34.28 g/hr * 1,250 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.05 tons/yr ROG 4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions = 0 to ns/yr ROG 5. Annual combustion PM10 baseline technology emiss ions (2.28 g/hr * 1,250 hrs)/(907,200 g/ton) = 0.003 tons/yr PM10 6. Annual combustion PM10 reduced technology emissi ons = 0 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y Pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• Emission benefits NOX = 0.24 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.24 tons/yr NOx

• Emission benefits ROG = 0.05 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.05 tons/yr ROG

• Emission benefits PM10 = 0.003 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.003 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2: Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Redu ctions 0.24 tons/yr + 0.05 tons/yr + 20(0.003 tons/yr) = 0.350 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 5 years CRF (Table B-1) = 0.225

Formula C-14: Incremental Cost Capital cost: $10,000 CMP will pay up to $5 ,500, as per guideline criteria Installation cost: $2,000 $5,500 + $2,000= $7,500D-69 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Formula C-12: Annualized Cost $7,500 * 0.225 = $1,688/yr

Cost-Effectiveness : Formula C-1: Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplu s Emission Reductions ($/weighted ton) ($1,688/yr)/( 0.350 weighted ton/yr)

= $4,823/weighted ton of surplus emissions reduced

The cost-effectiveness for the example is less than $14,300 per weighted ton of pollutants reduced. This project qualifies for the maximum amount of grant funds requested.

Example 5 – Purchase of TRU with Electric Standby O ption The TRU owner proposes to purchase a TRU that is eq uipped with electric standby in lieu of one without this option. This would virtua lly eliminate TRU engine operation while the TRU is at the facility. The TRU owner ha s submitted records that show his fleet of facility-controlled TRUs has operated an a verage of three hours per day of TRU engine run time while at the facility. The increme ntal cost of the E/S option is $2,000. Facility infrastructure would cost $5,000. TRUs op erate at the facility 360 days per year. The new TRU would be equipped with a 2006 eng ine rated at 36.2 hp to maintain cooling when the truck is not at the facility.

Baseline Technology

• Engine rating = 36.2 hp

• Model year = 2006

• Default load factor = 0.53

• Emission factors (Table B-12): 4.63 g/bhp-hr NOx , 0.29 g/bhp-hr ROG, 0.280 g/bhp-hr PM10

Reduced Technology

• Electric standby = zero emissions

• Annual TRU engine activity replaced with electric standby = (3 hrs/day)(360 days/yr) = 1,080hr/yr

Emission Reduction Calculations: Formula C-4: Estimated Annual Emissions based on hours of Operation (tons/yr) 1. Annual NOx baseline technology emissions (4.63 g/bhp-hp)(36.2 hp)(0.53)(1,080 hrs/yr)(1 ton/ 907,200g) = 0.10 tons/yr NOx 2. Annual NOx reduced technology emissions (0 g/bhp-hr)(36.2hp)(0.53)(1,080hrs)(1 ton/907,200g ) = 0 ton/yr NOx 3. Annual ROG baseline technology emissions (0.29 g/bhp-hr)(36.20hp)(.53)(1,080 hrs/yr)(1ton/90 7,200g) = 0.007 tons/yr ROGD-70 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS

4. Annual ROG reduced technology emissions (0 g/bhp-hr)(36.2hp)(0.53)(1,080hrs)(1 ton/907,200g ) = 0 ton/yr ROG 5. Annual PM10 baseline technology emissions (0.280 g/bhp-hp)(36.2 hp)(0.530)(1,080 hrs/yr)(1 to n/907,200g) = 0.006 tons/yr tons/yr PM10 6. Annual PM10 reduced technology emissions (0 g/bhp-hp)(36.2 hp)(0.530)(1,080 hrs/yr)(1 ton/90 7,200g) = 0 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-10: Annual Surplus Emission Reductions b y pollutant (tons/yr) for Repowers and New Purchases

• NOx emission benefits = 0.10 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.10 tons/yr NOx

• ROG emission benefits = 0.007 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.007 tons/yr ROG

• PM10emission benefits = 0.006 tons/yr - 0 tons/yr = 0.006 tons/yr PM10

Formula C-2, Annual Weighted Surplus Emission Reduc tions:

0.10 tons/yr + 0.007 tons/yr + 20(0.006 tons/yr) = 0.227 weighted tons/yr

Annualized Cost: Project Life: 3 years CRF (Table B-1): =0.360

Incremental Cost: =$2,000

Formula C- 12-Annualized Cost 0.360 * $2,000 = $720/yr

Cost Effectiveness: Formula C-1 Cost-Effectiveness of Weighted Surplus Emission Reductions ($/ton):

($720/yr)/(0.227 weighted tons/yr) = $3,172/ton of weighted surplus emissions reduced

The $5,000 cost for electric power plugs cannot be funded by the Carl Moyer Program because it is considered infrastructure. The air d istrict may pay for this with district match funds.

This project qualifies for the $2,000 cost of the E /S option.

## APPENDIX E

DESCRIPTION OF CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION

EXECUTIVE ORDERSE-1 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION APPENDIX E

DESCRIPTION OF CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION

I. New Engine Certification

The Air Resources Board (ARB) certifies engines des tined for sale in California and provides the engine manufacturers with an Executive Order (EO) for each certified engine family. An example of an EO is shown in Fig ure E-1. The EO includes general information about the certified engine such as engi ne family, displacement, horsepower rating(s), intended service class, and emission con trol systems. It also shows the applicable certification emission standards as well as the average emission levels measured during the actual certification test proce dure. For the purpose of the Carl Moyer Program, the certification emission standards are used to calculate emission reductions. The certification emission standards a re shown in the row titled “(DIRECT) STD” under the respective “FTP” column headings fo r each pollutant. For instance, the Cummins 8.3 liter natural gas engine illustrated in Figure E-1 was certified to a combined oxides of nitrogen plus non-methane hydroc arbon (NOx+NMHC) emission standard of 1.8 g/bhp-hr, a carbon monoxide (CO) em ission standard of 15.5 g/bhp-hr, and a particulate matter (PM) emission standard of 0.03 g/bhp-hr.

In the case where an EO shows emission values in th e rows labeled “AVERAGE STD” and/or “FEL”, the engine is certified for participa tion in an averaging, banking, and trading (AB&T) program. AB&T engines (i.e., all FE L-certified engines) are not eligible to participate in the CMP for new vehicle purchase projects since emission benefits from an engine certified to an FEL level are not surplus emissions.E-2 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION Figure E-1 Sample Executive Order

ARB Executive Order for Heavy-Duty On-Road EnginesE-3 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION

II. Retrofit System Verification

The ARB’s verification procedures provide a way to thoroughly evaluate the emission reduction capabilities and durability of a variety of emission control strategies as part of a retrofit in-use program. It ensures that emissio n reductions achieved by a control strategy are both real and durable and that product ion units in the field are achieving emission reductions which are consistent with their verification.

The ARB has a verification procedure for in-use str ategies to control emissions from diesel engines (diesel emission control systems or DECS). The verification procedure requires a minimum PM reduction of at least 25 perc ent. If a diesel emission control strategy also reduces NOx emissions by at least 15 percent, that reduction can also be verified. Emission control strategies for diesel e ngines are verified based on a tiered verification classification shown in Table E-1 belo w. It is the responsibility of the diesel emission control strategies manufacturer to provide data to verify emission reduction claims. The ARB issues Executive Orders for verifi ed emission control strategies destined for sale in California. An example of an EO for a retrofit emission control system for diesel engines is shown in Figure E-2.

Applicants may claim ROG emission reductions from D ECS if hydrocarbon emission reductions for that technology are obtained from th e ARB’s retrofit website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm . For the Carl Moyer Program, ROG emission reductions will be credited at the 25 perc ent, 50 percent, and 85 percent reduction levels. To calculate emission reductions of ROG for the Carl Moyer Program, applicants should use the percentage reduction of h ydrocarbons from the ARB’s retrofit website to determine the appropriate "level" of emi ssion reductions. For example, a technology that provides a 40 percent emission redu ction of hydrocarbons would be permitted to apply a 25 percent reduction in ROG em issions for determining eligibility and grant amount in the Carl Moyer Program.

Table E-1 Verification Levels for Diesel Emission Control Str ategies

Pollutant Emission Reduction Classification
< 25% Not Verified

> 25% Level 1

> 50% Level 2 PM

> 85%, or

< 0.01 g/bhp-hr Level 3

< 15% Not Verified NOx
> 15% Verified in 5% IncrementsE-4 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION

ARB staff has also developed an interim retrofit ve rification procedure for large spark-ignition engines (LSI). This interim procedu re can be used to verify retrofit systems to reduce NOx and HC emissions from spark-i gnition engines until the interim procedure is formally adopted by the ARB. Emission control strategies for LSI engines are verified based on a tiered verification classif ication shown in Table E-2 below.

Table E-2. LSI Emission Control System Verificatio n Levels



### Classification Percentage Reduction (HC+NOx) Absolute Emissions (HC+NOx)

LSI Level 1 (1) > 25% (2) Not Applicable
LSI Level 2 (1) > 75% (3) 3.0 g/bhp-hr (3)

LSI Level 3a (1) > 85% (4) 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 g/bhp-hr
LSI Level 3b (5) Not Applicable 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 g/bhp-hr
Notes: (1) Applicable to uncontrolled engines only (2) The allowed verified emissions reduction is capped at 25% regardless of actual emission test values (3) The allowed verified reduction for LSI Level 2 is c apped at 75% or 3.0 g/bhp-hr regardless of actual emission test val ues (4) Verified in 5% increments, applicable to LSI Level 3a classifications only (5) Applicable to emission-controlled engines onlyE-5 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION Figure E-2 Example of an EO for a Retrofit Emission Control Sy stemE-6 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATIONE-7 CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION

## APPENDIX F

RETROFIT EMISSION CONTROL STRATEGIESG-1 RETROFITS APPENDIX F

RETROFIT EMISSION CONTROL STRATEGIES

All retrofit systems must be verified by ARB in ord er to qualify for Carl Moyer Program funding. Potential compression-ignited (diesel) en gine retrofits include diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, flow though filters and fuel additives. Potential spark-ignited engines include closed-loop fuel cont rol, three-way catalyst, fuel injection, or any combination thereof.

I. Compression-Ignited (Diesel) Engines

A. Diesel Oxidation Catalysts

A diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) reduces carbon mo noxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), and the soluble organic fraction (SOF) of diesel PM through catalytic oxidation. Negligible reductions of the solid particle portion of PM also occur. Exhaust gases are not filtered, as with a diesel particulate filter ( DPF) so the solid particles escape. A DOC reduces total PM emissions up to 30 percent. PM em ission reductions at this higher end are typically associated with engines that emit "wet" PM (i.e., particles that have a higher percentage of SOF, unburned or partially bur ned fuel, adsorbed onto the particle surface). Older engines or engines that have less efficient fuel combustion typically produce PM with higher SOF. Engines that more effi ciently combust the fuel would have less SOF adsorbed on the soot particle, so the PM emission reductions would be less on a percentage basis.

B. Passive Diesel Particulate Filters

A DPF uses a porous substrate to filter out PM part icles from the exhaust. DPFs must "regenerate" or be cleaned periodically to remove t he collected particulate matter. A passive DPF has a catalyst coating on the filter su rfaces that lowers the PM ignition temperature, allowing the collected PM to burn off. Emissions of HC and CO are also reduced by catalytic oxidation. This approach is c alled "passive" regeneration because no outside source of energy or intervention is requ ired for regeneration, making it very attractive due to its simplicity.

C. Active Diesel Particulate Filters

Active DPFs use an external source of energy or ext ernal intervention to increase the exhaust temperature to the point where PM oxidation can occur, achieving a regeneration. Additional heat may be added to the exhaust using electrical power, microwaves, or injecting fuel. Another approach us es periodic, short-duration use of an intake throttle to reduce the amount of excess air, so the exhaust temperature rises as a result of not having to heat the excess air. The t emperature of the filter and collected PM increases until the PM burns off, at which point the throttle re-opens. Active DPFsG-2 RETROFITS

systems can initiate regeneration when the backpres sure on the filter reaches a specified level or the operator can initiate a rege neration when a warning light indicates backpressure has exceeded a set point. For applica tions where the engine-out PM is relatively high, or the exhaust temperature is rela tively cool, active regeneration systems may be more effective than a passive DPF. Emission reductions of HC and CO can also occur in active DPFs, and to a greater extent if the DPF system uses lightly catalyzed surfaces or fuel-borne catalysts to assis t in achieving regenerations.

D. Flow-Through Filters

Unlike the DPF, in which only the exhaust gases can pass through the substrate, the flow-though filter (FTF) does not physically "trap" and accumulate PM. Instead, exhaust flows through a medium (such as a wire mesh or meta l foils) that has a high density of tortuous flow channels, thus giving rise to turbule nt flow conditions that favor PM oxidation. The medium is typically treated with an oxidizing catalyst that is able to reduce emissions of PM, HC, and CO, or the FTF is u sed in conjunction with a fuel borne catalyst (FBC). The filtration efficiency of the FTF is typically lower than that of a DPF because unburned PM is not "trapped", but the F TF is less likely to plug under unfavorable conditions, such as high PM emissions o r low exhaust temperature.

E. Fuel Additives

A fuel additive is designed to be added to fuel or fuel systems so that it is present in-cylinder during combustion. Fuel additives can reduce the total mass of PM emissions, with variable effects on CO, NOx and gas eous HC production. A fuel-borne catalyst (FBC) is an additive that is used with die sel fuel to aid in soot removal by decreasing the ignition temperature of the carbonac eous exhaust. FBCs can be used with passive and active filter systems to improve f uel economy, aid system performance, and decrease mass PM emissions. FBC/D PF systems have been verified for on-road use in California in medium duty and he avy-duty engines. In addition, FBC/DPF systems are in wide spread use in Europe in both on-road and off-road, mobile and stationary applications. Use of FBCs wi th DOCs or FTFs may not be verified for use in California since catalytic part icle emissions occur and the consequences of such emissions are unknown.

II. Spark-Ignition Engines

Retrofit refers to modifications or additions made to an engine and/or fuel system such that the specifications of the retrofitted engine a re not the same as the original engine. Retrofits for LSI equipment will likely incorporate advanced automotive-inspired emission control technologies that dramatically red uce emissions while still meeting operational requirements. These have already been in use on a variety of LSI equipment for about 10 years. To qualify for Carl Moyer Program funding, the retrofit technology must be verified for sale in California and must comply with established durability and warranty requirements.G-3 RETROFITS

A. Three-Way Catalyst

Three-way catalytic converters have helped manufact urers to meet progressively lower-emissions standards. Manufacturers have inst alled three-way catalysts on automobiles for more than 25 years. Advanced three -way catalysts will likely be components in new LSI retrofit kit, and have been s hown to be robust in research demonstrations for the 2001 LSI regulation.

LSI catalyst volumes are much lower than light duty vehicles - between 40 to 60 percent of engine displacement. Precious metal loading of the catalytic converter in a current LSI application is typically half of that in automotive applications. LSI catalysts in retrofits will likely use multi-layered wash coa ts that increase precious metals performance to achieve lower emissions. Due to con fined space on forklifts, the three-way catalysts are made such that they can be a direct fit replacement of the original vehicle silencer. Other LSI equipment wil l most likely be adaptable to catalyst additions.

B. Closed-Loop Fuel Control System

Central to automotive emission control systems is t he closed-loop fuel control system. Since 1980, automotive emission control systems hav e used a closed-loop fuel control system to help reduce emissions. This technology h as increasingly been applied to LSI retrofit technology in the last 10 years. A closed -loop fuel control system uses sensors to monitor exhaust gas concentrations, and feed thi s information back to an electronic control module, which in turn keeps the air to fuel mixture at an optimum level. The sensors (usually oxygen sensors) deteriorate over t ime, causing the system to lose emissions reduction ability, but equipment with sen sors have indicator lights that can alert the operator of an sensor failure so that the y can replace the oxygen sensors as needed.

C. Fuel-Injection System

To help ensure more precise metering of fuel and op timum combustion, carburetors will likely be replaced by sequential fuel injection or a more sophisticated regulator/mixer. Today's advanced systems must maintain an extremely tight stoichometric air to fuel balance during nearly all engine operations because wide fluctuations from the stoichiometric position will result in less ability to reduce NOx and hydrocarbons.

## APPENDIX G

DESCRIPTION OF FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCY OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER REPOWERS AND REBUILT ENGINES FOR USE IN REPOWERSG-1 NON-OEM REPOWER AND REBUILD Appendix G

Description of Functional Equivalency of Non-Origin al Equipment Manufacturer

Repowers and Rebuilt Engines for use in Repowers

A repower or an engine rebuild may be performed by the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or a non-OEM. An original equip ment manufacturer, for the purposes of the Carl Moyer Program, means any perso n engaged in the manufacturing or assembling of new vehicles or equipment for resa le under its own brand name. These manufactures provide the original product des ign and materials for the equipment assembly and manufacture and are directly responsible for manufacturing and modifying the products, making them commerciall y available, and providing the warranty.

I. Non-Original Equipment Manufacturer Repowers

The Carl Moyer Program provides funding opportuniti es for equipment repowers with a lower emission engine; like-to-like repowers are no t eligible for funding. In accordance with the Carl Moyer Program guidelines, a non-OEM r epower must be “ functionally equivalent” to an OEM repower with regard to emissions, durabil ity, and safety. A non-OEM repower consists of removing an existing en gine and replacing it with a lower emission certified engine, however the installer do es not use the procedures and/or parts specified by the OEM in their repower documen tation. The non-OEM repower must also maintain the emission performance of the replacement engine in operation.

A. Requirements to Establish Functional Equivalenc y

The following actions are necessary and sufficient for Carl Moyer Program applicants to follow when demonstrating functional equivalency.

The Carl Moyer Program applicant must:

• Submit to the Air Pollution Control Officer/Execut ive Officer of the governing air district a list of OEM and non-OEM parts to be used in the repower and the corresponding components that they replace (if repl acing parts).

• Submit a letter of qualification from the installe r who will perform the work.

• Submit a detailed description of the work to be pe rformed on the equipment including necessary engine mapping and drawings and engineering analyses to demonstrate safety and durability.G-2 NON-OEM REPOWER AND REBUILD

The following further explain these requirements:

1. List of Functionally Equivalent Parts

Carl Moyer Program applicants proposing to perform non-OEM repowers must submit to the Air Pollution Control Officer/Executive Offi cer of the governing air district the following information for each repower:

• The serial number, make, model year and configurat ion of both the original engine and the replacement engine.

• The component parts list (CPL) or arrangement numb ers for both the original engine and the replacement engine, including the exhaust a nd cooling systems if modified during the repower.

• The original equipment (OE) number and description of parts replaced.

• The replacement part identification number.

• A statement that all non-OEM replacement parts are functionally equivalent to the corresponding OE parts.

The applicant or the non-OEM installer must also co mply with any request from the ARB or Air Pollution Control Officer/Executive Officer of the governing air district for any additional information, including sample parts for inspection and records required by section 2221 (b) of title 13 of the California Code of Regulations.

2. Letter of Qualification

Any Carl Moyer Program applicant proposing to perfo rm a non-OEM repower must submit a letter of qualification from the installer addressed to the Air Pollution Control Officer/Executive Officer of the governing air dist rict. The letter should describe the installer’s operations and experience. It must inc lude the following:

• The name and address(es) of the installer.

• The length of time the installer has been operatin g.

• The number of employees and how many are actually involved in installing engines.

• The type of heavy-duty equipment it repowers.

• The number of items it normally repowers annually.

• Background and experience of the owners including education, training and certifications; previous heavy-duty engine repowers experience; and any experience with an OEM or its franchised dealers.

• Whether the business specializes in any particular type or make of heavy-duty equipment.

• Whether it has performed work under the Carl Moyer Program; any other state or local program; or for any Federal, state or local a gency.

• Whether it has ever been investigated for malpract ice or tampering with heavy-duty engines and if so, the results of the investigation

.G-3 NON-OEM REPOWER AND REBUILD

The letter must be signed by the owner of the busin ess and must include the following
statement:

“ I affirm that the repower described in the Carl Moy er Program application will use only OE parts or non-OE parts from the parts list submit ted to the air district. The replacement engine will be functionally equivalent from a durability standpoint to one offered by the OEM in the same power category and w ill maintain the emissions performance of the replacement engine in operation. Furthermore, the repowered equipment will maintain all safety specifications o f the original equipment.”

After review of the letter, the air district or ARB may request additional information.

3. Description of Work to be Performed

The Carl Moyer Program applicant must submit an add itional letter describing the proposed work or work already performed on the equi pment. The letter must confirm that the parts used are equivalent to the CPL parts or corresponding arrangement number parts. In addition, the letter must include details on required equipment modifications with pictures of the equipment and en gineering drawings as necessary.

The letter must also state that the repowered equip ment is functionally equivalent from a durability standpoint to one offered by the OEM i n the same power category and that the emission performance of the engine is maintaine d in operation. Any test data that substantiate these emission claims shall be attache d or included in the letter.

B. Other Restrictions and Considerations

The ARB or the district may require emission testin g on any piece of equipment, whether repowered by an OEM or non-OEM. Emissions testing may be specified prior to approval of a project as a condition of the gran t, but normally will not be specified unless ARB has reason to believe that a proposed re power will not be functionally equivalent from an emissions and durability standpo int to an OEM repower. Emissions testing may also be required after the project has been completed, in cases where there is evidence of malpractice or tampering. Engines t hat do not achieve the stated emission levels may be denied all or part of the re quested funding. In cases where the money has already been disbursed, the applicant wil l be responsible for providing an acceptable engine or for reimbursing the state for Carl Moyer Program funds expended. In addition, other penalties may apply.

II. Non-Original Equipment Manufacturer Rebuilt En gines for Use in Repowers

The Carl Moyer Program provides funding opportuniti es for equipment repowers using rebuilt engines. In accordance with the Carl Moyer Program guidelines, a non-OEM rebuilt engine must be “ functionally equivalent” to an OEM rebuilt engine with regard to emissions and durability.G-4 NON-OEM REPOWER AND REBUILD

A. Requirements to Establish Functional Equivalenc y

The following actions are necessary and sufficient for Carl Moyer Program applicants to follow when demonstrating functional equivalency.

The Carl Moyer Program applicant must:

• Submit to the Air Pollution Control Officer/Execut ive Officer of the governing air district a list of non-original equipment parts or to be used in the rebuilt engine and the corresponding components that they replace.

• Submit a letter of qualification from the rebuilde r who will perform the work.

• Submit a detailed description of the work to be pe rformed on the engine.

The following further explain these requirements:

1. List of Functionally Equivalent Parts

Carl Moyer Program applicants proposing to use non- OEM rebuilt engines must submit to the Air Pollution Control Officer/Executive Offi cer of the governing air district the following information for each rebuilt engine:

• The serial number, make, model year and configurat ion of the original engine.

• The component parts list (CPL) or arrangement numb ers for the original engine.

• The original equipment (OE) number and description of parts replaced.

• The replacement part identification number.

• A statement that all non-OEM replacement parts are functionally equivalent, as defined in the equivalency provision by section 242 1 (a)(13) of title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, to the correspondin g OE parts.

The applicant or the non-OEM replacement part manuf acturer must also comply with any request from the ARB or Air Pollution Control O fficer/Executive Officer of the governing air district for any additional informati on, including sample parts for inspection and records required by section 2221 (b) of title 1 3 of the California Code of Regulations.

2. Letter of Qualification

Any Carl Moyer Program applicant proposing to use a non-OEM rebuilt engine must submit a letter of qualification from the rebuilder addressed to the Air Pollution Control Officer/Executive Officer of the governing air dist rict. The letter should describe the rebuilder’s operations and experience. It must inc lude the following:

• The name and address(es) of the rebuilder.

• The length of time the rebuilder has been operatin g.

• The number of employees and how many are actually involved in rebuilding engines.G-5 NON-OEM REPOWER AND REBUILD

• The type of heavy-duty parts it rebuilds (full eng ines, fuel systems, blocks, etc.).

• The number of items it normally rebuilds annually.

• Background and experience of the owners including education, training and certifications; previous heavy-duty engine rebuild experience; and any experience with an OEM or its franchised dealers.

• Whether the business specializes in any particular type or make of heavy-duty engine or parts.

• Whether it has performed work under the Carl Moyer Program; any other state or local program; or for any Federal, state or local a gency.

• Whether it has ever been investigated for malpract ice or tampering with heavy-duty engines and if so, the results of the investigation

.
The letter must be signed by the owner of the busin ess and must include the following
statement:

“ I affirm that the rebuilt engine described in the C arl Moyer Program application will use only OE parts or non-OE parts from the parts list s ubmitted to the air district. Furthermore, the rebuilt engine will be functionall y equivalent from an emissions and durability standpoint to the OEM engine it is repla cing.”

After review of the letter the air district or ARB may request additional information.

3. Description of Work to be Performed

The Carl Moyer Program applicant must submit an add itional letter describing the proposed work or work already performed on the rebu ilt engine. The letter must confirm that the parts used are equivalent to the CPL parts or corresponding arrangement number parts and that the rebuilt engine has the sa me configuration as the original engine. In addition, any re-calibrations or adjustm ents performed on the engine or engine components must be set forth in detail, as w ell as any work performed on parts that were taken out of the engine and re-inserted.

The letter must also state that the rebuilt engine is functionally equivalent to an OEM rebuilt engine with regard to emissions and durabil ity. Any test data that substantiate these emission claims shall be attached or included in the letter.

B. Other Restrictions and Considerations

The ARB may require emission testing on any engine, whether rebuilt by an OEM or non-OEM rebuilder. Engine testing may be specified prior to approval of a project as a condition of the grant for all rebuilders rebuildin g under the grant, but normally will not be specified unless ARB has reason to believe that a proposed rebuilt engine will not be functionally equivalent from an emissions and durab ility standpoint to the OEM engine it is replacing. Engine testing may also be required after the project has been completed, in cases where there is evidence of malpractice or tampering. Engines that do not achieve the stated emission levels may be denied al l or part of the requested funding.G-6 NON-OEM REPOWER AND REBUILD

In cases where the money has already been disbursed , the applicant will be responsible for providing an acceptable engine or for reimbursi ng the state for Carl Moyer Program funds expended. In addition, other penalties may a pply.