P. 1 

# OAR Box 1812 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 203 ) lll-A- 1 Docket Number: 

# A-86-0 3

Printed 11/3/20087:52:05AM

Sheet 203 of 280ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO

NAGENC Y P. 2

4 0 CF RPart s 8 0 an

d 8 6 [AMS-FRL- .


### EPAASRDQCKE T Regulatio no f Fuel s an d Fue l Additives : Fue l Qualit yRegulation s fo r HighwayDiese l Fue l Sol d i n 199 3 an

d Late r Calenda r Year s

AGENCY :

ACTION : Environmenta l Protectio nAgency .

Notic e o f propose d Rulemaking .

co . i ntoday' s notic e a ne wnationa l NUMMARY : EPApropose s mtoaay sunnA * .„„ , Th e propose d nroaramo f diese l fue l qualit ycontrol . P

approximatel y0.2 5 weigh t percen t t o levei s

" , pe^ t * weigbt . Th e proposa * «ou l dais o re ^ tha t on-hig ^ aiese i *_ . aromati c !_*_. . b e hei c belo wcurren t averag e U-. U<—* * 3 , percent ^ T h e propose * -___ - fo r capping _•_-*« « woui d b eP. 3

se t a minimu

mcetan e indexspecificatio n o f 40 . Bot h requirement s woul d tak e effec t a t al l point s throughou t th e distributio n systemo n Octobe r 1 , 1993 . Thes e propose d action s woul d resul t i n substantia l reduction s i n emission s o f particulat e matte r an d sulfur dioxid e (S0 2 ) . Certificatio n diese l fue l woul d b e change d beginning wit hbot hth e 199 1 an d 199 4 mode l year s t o reflec t th e change s i n commercia l diese l fue l quality . Vehicle s sol d i n mode l year s 199 1 through199 3 woul d b e certifie d using 0.1 0 weigh t percen t sulfur fuel , reflecting th e averag e fue l sulfur leve l expecte d t o b e use d ove r thes e vehicles ' usefu l live s (a s define d i nCFRTitl e 4 0 §86.085-2) . Beginning wit hth e 199 4 mode l year , th e certificatio n fue l sulfur leve l woul d b e tha t o f commercia l diese l fue l (i.e. , no t t o excee d 0.0 5 weigh t percent) . DATES : EPAha s no t schedule d a publi c hearing o nthi s Notic e o f Propose d Rulemaking . Ahearing wil l b e hel d i f requeste d on or befor e [dat e 1 4 day s afte r Federa l Registe r publication] . Comment s o n thi s proposa l wil l b e accepte d through[dat e 3 0 day s afte r Federa l Registe r publication] . Additiona l informatio no n th e submissio no f comment s can b e foun d unde r "Publi c Participation " i nth e SupplementaryInformatio n sectio n o f today' s notice .



### -2

-P. 4

ADDRESSES : Intereste d partie s maysubmi t writte n comment s (i n duplicat e i f possible ) to :

Ai r Docke t Sectio n (A-130 ) U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Attention : Docke t No . A-86-0 3 40 1 MStreet , SW Washington , D C 2046 0 Material s relevan t t o thi s proposa l hav e bee n place d i n Docke t No . A-86-0 3 b yEPA . Th e docke t i s locate d a t th e above addres s i n RoomM-1500 , Watersid e Mal l (groun d floor) , an

d mayb e inspecte d betwee n 8 a.m . an d 3 p.m . MondaythroughFriday . Areasonabl e fe e mayb e charge d b y EPAfo r copying docke t materials . FORFURTHE RINFORMATIO NCONTACT :

Mr . Charle s Mouli s Standard s Developmen t an d Suppor t Branc h Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency 256 5 Plymout hRoad Ann Arbor , M I 4810 5 Telephone : (313 ) 668-422 9 SUPPLEMENTAR

YINFORMATION :

I . Introductio n Thi s preambl e present s th e majo r issue s raise d b y today' s propose d actio nan d discusse s EPA' s rational e fo r eac haspec t o f tha t action . Th e following section s o f th e 

### -3

-P. 5

preambl e describe : 1 ) th e backgroun d o f th e proposal , 2 ) th e contro l option s whic hwer e considere d during th e rulemaking developmen t process , 3 ) th e cos t t o th e refining industr yo f th e propose d diese l fue l requirements , 4 ) th e economi c an

d environmenta l benefit s o f th e propose d rulemaking , 5 ) th e overal l cos t effectivenes s o f th e propose d fue l regulations , 6 ) th e leadtime issue s involved , 7 ) th e enforcemen t aspect s o f th e propose d rulemaking , 8 ) the issue o f diese l engin e certification , an d 9 ) th e actua l proposa l i n detail , wit hreques t fo r comment s o nspecifi c issues .
II . Background

I n Marc ho f 1985 , EPApromulgate d particulat e emissio n standard s o f 0.2 5 gram s pe r brak e horsepower-hou r (g/BHP-hr ) for heavy-dut ytruck s (greate r than8,50 0 lbs) , an d 0.1 0 g/BHP-hr for buses , effectiv e beginning i nth e 199 1 mode l year ; an d 0.1 0 g/BHP-hr fo r heavy-dut ytruck s beginning i n th e 199 4 mode l yea r (5 0 F R10606 , Marc h15 , 1985) . During th e rulemaking process , manufacturer s expresse d concern tha t sulfur i ndiese l fue l coul d eithe r plug th e trap-ozidizer s tha t EPAprojecte d woul d b e neede d t o mee t th e propose d particulat e standard o r generat e significan t particulat e sulfat e emission s tha t woul d mak e i t difficul t t o mee t th e standards . T o addres s thi s concer n commenter s recommende d tha t EPAregulat e th e sulfur 

### -4

-P. 6

conten t o f diese l fuel . I nth e preambl e t o th e fina l rule , EPAresponde d tha t no t enoughwa s the nknow nabou t the effec t o f diese l fue l sulfur o ntrap s or particulat e emission s t o tak e regulatoryactio na t tha t time , bu t tha t i t woul d continu e t o stud yth e issu e and , i f warranted , conside r regulating diese l fue l sulfur content . I nJun e o f 1986 , EPArelease d fo r publi c commen t a stud yprepare d unde r contrac t fo r EPAb yEnerg yan d Resourc e Consultants , Inc . (ERC) , an

d Sobotka an

d Company , Inc . (SCI) , entitle d "Diese l Fue l Qualit yEffect s o n Emissions , Durability , Performance , an

d Costs " [5 1 F R23437 , Jun e 27 , 1986] . Th e draf t repor t b

yER C presente d th e importan t emission

performance

- an

d durability-relate d propertie s o f diese l fuel . Aversio n o f th e Departmen t o f Energy' s Refinery Evaluatio n Modeling System(REMS ) wa s use d bySC I t o estimat e th e cos t involve d i n making change s i n fue l composition .

A s presente d i n th e ER C report , th e mos t importan t emission-relate d propertie s o f diese l fue l ar e it s sulfur an d aromatic s content . Areductio ni nfue l sulfur woul d directl yreduc e S0 2 an d sulfat e particulat e emissions,whil e reducing fue l aromatic s woul d reduc e carbonaceou s an

d organi c particulat e emissions . Th e repor t als o conclude d tha t back-end volatilit y(e.g. , th e 90-percen t distillatio npoint ) doe s no t significantl y affec t particulat e emissions . 

### -5
-P. 7
ER C an d SC I als o conclude d that , i nadditio n t o th e emissio n benefit , a reductio no f fue l sulfur fro mestimate d presen t level s t o 0.0 5 weigh t percen t woul d reduc e corrosive engin e wea r an d exten d engin e life . A3 0 percen t extensio n i n engin e lif e wa s estimate d an d use d i nthei r cost-effectivenes s analysis . Thi s effec t i s difficul t t o quantify , however , a s dat a whic hquantif yth e effec t unde r in-us e condition s wit hmoder noil s ar e scarce . According t o th e report , a reductio n o f fue l aromatic s conten t woul d improve ignitio n quality , whic hwoul d i n tur n improve th e abilityo f engine s t o star t i n col d temperature s an d reduc e engin e noise . Th e REM S refinerymode l wa s use d t o estimat e th e cos t o f reducing fue l sulfur alon e fro mestimate d averag e level s o f 0.27 4 percen t t o 0.0 5 percent . Th e result s o f th e mode l showe d tha t b

ysegregating th e productio no f highwaydiese l fue l fro

mdistillat e burne r fuel s an d b yusing existing desulfurizatio n capacity , thi s sulfur reductio ncoul d b e accomplishe d a t a cos t o f abou t 1. 2 cent s pe r gallon . ER C claime d tha t thi s cos t woul d b e mor e thanoffse t b yth e saving s generate d b yth e increase d engin e lif e resulting fro m desulfurization .
ER C an d SC I als o conclude d (althoug hEPAdisagree d wit hthi s conclusion ) tha t the desulfurizatio nproces s woul d effec t a reductio ni naromatic s conten t t o abou t 20. 3 

### -6

-P. 8

volume percen t varying fro mrefineryt o refinery . I t wa s furthe r estimate d tha t anadditiona l reductio no f aromatic s conten t t o 1 7 percen t woul d increas e refining cos t b yan additiona l 0. 4 cen t pe r gallon . Comment s receive d fro mindustryo nth e ERC/SC I stud y indicate d tha t additiona l wor k wa s neede d i nestimating th e refinerycos t o f controlling diese l fue l qualit ya s wel l a s i n evaluating th e effec t o f fue l sulfur contro l o nengin e life . A s a result , EPAcommissione d Southwes t Researc h Institut e (SWRI ) an d Bonne r an

d Moor e Consultants , Inc . (B&M ) t o investigat e thes e area s further . Arepor t prepare d b

ySWR I entitle d "Stud yo f th e Effect s o f Reduce d Diese l Fue l Sulfur Conten t o nEngin e Wear " an d a B& Mrepor t entitle d " AStud

yo n Restrictio no f Sulfur an d Aromatic s Conten t o f HighwayDiese l Fuel " wer e th e resul t o f thi s effort . Th e repor t b

ySWR I gav e furthe r indicatio ntha t a reductio n i n fue l sulfur conten t migh t resul t i n a substantia l reductio n i n engin e wear . Dat a i n th e literatur e wer e reviewe d an d summarized , an

d ananalysi s o f use d oi l sample s take nfro mengine s operating o n highan d lowsulfur fue l wa s performed . A s documente d i n th e report , i t wa s foun d tha t i na larg e numbe r o f use d oi l sample s th e amoun t o f wea r particle s wa s significantl y lowe r i n case s wher e lowsulfur fue l had bee n used . Afte r


### -7
-P. 9

reviewing th e report , member s o f industr ycautione d tha t stil l mor e investigatio nwa s neede d befor e fir mconclusion s could , b e draw

n regarding th e effec t o f sulfur onengin e life .Th e Bonne r an d Moor e repor t examine d th e effec t o f fue l qualit yregulation s o nth e cos t o f producing diese l fuel . Th e cost s o f controlling sulfur t o 0.0 5 weigh t percent , controlling aromatic s t o 2 0 volume percent , an d controlling bot hsimultaneousl ywer e estimated . Tw o assumption s regarding th e volum e o f fue l controlle d wer e mad e i n th e study . On e assumptio n wa s tha t th e curren t degre e o f segregatio n (or lac k thereof ) o f heating oi l an d "highway " diese l fue l woul d b e maintained . Th e othe r wa s tha t al l heating oi l woul d b e produce d an d distribute d separately , an

d woul d therefor e no t nee d t o mee t "on-highway " fue l specifications . Fue l contro l cos t estimate s wer e develope d fo r eac hsegregatio nscenario .

I n additio n t o thes e contracting effort s EP Aals o engage d i n a serie s o f meeting s wit hengin e manufacturers . Th e purpos e o f thes e meeting s wa s t o monito r th e progres s being mad e towar d meeting th e 199 1 an d 199 4 heavy-dut y diese l particulat e emissio n standards . Engin e manufacturer s repeatedl yexpresse d th e nee d fo r a reductio n i n sulfur level s i n commercia l diese l fuel .



### -8

-P.1 0

Mos t recently , i n a landmark initiative , member s o f th e diese l engin e manufacturing an d petroleu

mrefining industrie s submitte d a join t proposa l for on-highwa ydiese l fue l modificatio n t o EPA . I n th e proposal , refiner s state d tha t theycoul d provid e diese l fue l containing n o mor e tha n 0.0 5 weigh t percen t sulfur an d meeting a minimu mcetan e indexspecificatio n o f 4 0 (a s a mean s o f capping aromatic s a t curren t levels ) b yOctobe r 1 , 1993 . Diese l engin e manufacturer s expresse d thei r belie f tha t thi s leve l o f fue l qualit yimprovemen t woul d b e sufficien t t o allow complianc e wit hth e 199 4 emissio n standards . T o provid e flexibilit ywithi n th e refining industry , i t wa s suggeste d tha t onl y"on-highway " diese l fue l b e require d t o mee t thes e specifications , an d tha t individua l refiner s b e allowe d t o choos e whethe r o r no t t o marke t "on-highway " diesel . Engin e manufacturer s als o state d tha t EPAshoul d allowcertificatio n using lo wsulfur fue l beginning wit h th e 199 1 mode l yea r t o reflec t upcoming change s i n commercia l fue l quality . Th e informatio n receive d fro mmember s o f industryan d governmen t contractor s wa s incorporate d int o a mor e recen t EPAstudy . Th e majo r focu s o f th e analysi s wa s t o determin e th e cost-effectivenes s o f a reductio n i n diese l fue l sulfur conten t alone , an d o f a subsequen t reductio ni n diese l fue l aromatics . Thu s assumption s wer e mad e tha t woul d resul t i n th e mos t conservativ e cost-effectivenes s estimates . -9

-P.1 1 Specifi c topic s whic hwer e evaluate d i ndetai l includ e th e refiner ycos t o f fue l control , th e effec t o f fue l regulation s on engin e manufacturers ' complianc e strategies , an d th e effec t o f fue l contro l o nengin e wear , ai r qualit y an d healt heffects . Thi s mor e recen t stud yi s publishe d todaya s th e Draf t RegulatoryImpac t Analysi s (Draf t RIA ) supporting thi s propose d rulemaking an d ha s bee nplace d i nDocke t A-86-03 , a s reference d above . Althoughth e Draf t RI Ai s no w outdate d i n some aspects , i t stil l comprise s th e technica l basi s fo r today' s proposal . Ill . Contro l Option s Th e contro l option s whic hwer e considere d i nth e rulemaking proces s includ e severa l combination s o f fue l sulfur an

d aromatic s control . Sulfur contro l option s wer e considere d dow

n t o level s a s lowa s 0.0 5 percen t b y weight . Th e primarysulfur contro l scenari o whic hwa s evaluate d quantitativel ywa s a sulfur reductio nt o 0.0 5 percen t b

yweigh t wit hn o chang e i n aromatics . Intermediat e level s o f sulfur contro l wer e evaluate d qualitativel yrelative t o th e 0.0 5 weigh t percen t level . Aromatic s contro l option s ranging fro m n o contro l t o a reductio n t o 2 0 volume percen t wer e als o considered . Sinc e -10

-P.1 2

diese l fue l aromatic s level s hav e bee nincreasing ove r pas t year s (due t o increase d blending o f high-aromati c cracke d stock s int o diese l fuel ) an d the oi l industr

ypropose d t o eliminat e thi s slippage , th e prospec t o f merel ycapping aromatic s conten t a t curren t level s t o avoi d futur e deterioratio n wa s als o considered . Th e primaryscenari o evaluate d quantitativel ywa s a reductio ni naromatic s t o 2 0 volume percen t subsequen t t o a reductio no f fue l sulfur t o 0.0 5 percen t b

yweight . Bot hprimarycontro l scenario s ar e evaluate d i n detai l i nth e Draf t RIA . IV . Cos t o f Fue l Contro l

T o date , severa l independen t analyse s o f th e cos t an d feasibilit yo f diese l fue l qualit ycontro l hav e bee n prepared . Thes e includ e studie s performe d fo r EP Aunde r contrac t b

ySC I an

d Bonne r an

d Moor e Managemen t Consultants , Inc. , an d a surveyconducte d b yth e Nationa l Petroleu

mRefiner s Associatio n (NPRA ) o f membe r refineries . Th e result s o f thes e differen t studie s show some disagreemen t ove r th e tota l cos t o f diese l fue l modification s du e to : 1 ) uncertaintie s involve d i n th e modeling process , an d 2 ) uncertaintie s i nth e analytica l technique s an

d assumption s mad e b yth e NPR

Amember s i n thei r surveyresponses . Th e majo r area s o f modeling uncertaint yinclude : 1 ) th e amoun t o f desulfurizatio n equipmen t currentl yi nplac e i nth e refining industry , 2 )

-11

-P.1 3

th e availabilit yan d performanc e o f technolog yrequire d fo r aromatic s control , an d 3 ) th e abilit yo f th e refining industr yan d fue l distributio n systemt o segregat e "on-highway " an

d "off-highway " distillat e fuels . Th e degre e t o whic hth e cos t o f diese l fue l modificatio ni s > dependan t o n thes e area s o f uncertaintie s i s discusse d i n mor e detai l below . O f thes e uncertainties , th e segregatio nissu e i s th e mos t important . According t o the NPR Asurvey , i f curren t fue l distributio n practice s ar e maintained , abou t 2. 4 millio n barrel s pe r day(bbl/day ) o f distillat e woul d hav e t o mee t th e lowsulfur requirement . O f thes e 2. 4 millio n bbl/day , however , onl y1. 2 millio nbbl/dayar e use d o n highways . I f refiner s an d distributor s coul d completel y segregat e th e on - an d off-highwayportion s o f th e distillat e pool , th e controlle d volume (an d regulatory cost ) coul d b e cu t nearl yi nhalf . I n th e join t industry proposa l fo r on-highwaydiese l fue l specifications , i t wa s strongl yrequeste d tha t onl yon-highwayfue l b e regulate d an d tha t individua l refiner s b e allowe d t o determin e whethe r o r no t t o marke t on-highwaydiese l fuel . Th e join t industr yproposa l als o containe d provision s fo r distinguishing betwee non-highwayan d off-highwaydiese l fue l (i.e. , fue l dying) . AlthoughEPAi s unabl e t o accuratel yestimat e th e quantit yo f distillat e tha t woul d b e segregated , th e languag e o f th e join t industr yproposa l

-12

-P.1 4

indicate s tha t increase d segregatio no f distillat e fuel s i s likely . T o bracke t thi s likelihood , a rang e o f cost s wil l b e presented : on e assuming complet e segregatio no f on-highwa

yfue l an

d th e othe r assuming curren t segregatio n practices .
A . Sulfur Reductio n Diese l fue l sulfur reductio ni s accomplishe d byth e hydrodesulfurizatio n process . Hydroge ni s introduce d a t elevate d temperatur e an d pressur e i n distillat e hydrotreaters , resulting i na reductio ni nfue l sulfur content . Th e technolog yi s commerciall yprove nan d i s currentl yemploye d t o a larg e degre e b yth e refining industry . Thus , regulatio n o f fue l sulfur woul d merel y requir e th e extende d applicatio no f an existing technology . Th e nea r ter

m cos t o f mandatoryremova l o f sulfur from diese l fue l i s affecte d significantl yb ytw o factors : th e amoun t o f exces s desulfurizatio n capacit ytha t currentl y exist s i n th e refining industry , an d th e degre e t o whic h refiner s ca n segregat e th e productio n o f on-highwaydiese l fuel . Th e amoun t o f exces s desulfurizatio n capacit y availabl e wil l certainl yeffec t th e amoun t o f capita l investmen t require d fo r complianc e wit hsulfur regulations . Th e degre e t o whic hth e refining industryca n segregat e distillat e fue l type s wil l impac t bot hcapita l investmen t an

d operating cos t requirements .

-13

-P.1 5

I n 1986 , NPR

Asurveye d membe r refinerie s t o determin e th e cos t o f making change s i n fue l quality . Th e result s o f th e surveyshowe d tha t whil e 6 5 o f th e 13 9 refiner s whic h responde d had n o distillat e desulfurizatio ncapacity , a significan t amoun t o f desulfurizatio ncapacit ydi d exist . I t wa s estimate d tha t ful l practica l utilizatio no f existing facilitie s coul d resul t i n th e productio n o f 315,78 5 bbl/dayo f 0.0 5 weigh t percen t sulfur fue l i n 1991 . NPR

Aals o conclude d tha t increase d segregatio no f distillat e fuel s woul d tak e plac e i nsome refineries , bu t onl yt o a margina l degree . Th e NPR Asurveyestimate d tha t controlling diese l fue l sulfur t o 0.0 5 weigh t percen t woul d requir e capita l expenditure s o f $3. 3 billio nan d woul d cos t approximatel y3.1 1 cent s pe r gallo no f diese l fue l controlled . Thi s cos t i s highe r tha ntha t estimate d byth e EP A contracto r studies . SCI , i n an analysi s performe d subsequen t t o th e ERC/SC I report , estimate d tha t cost s fo r sulfur contro l coul d b e a s lo wa s 1.4 1 cent s pe r gallon . Thi s cos t estimat e wa s generate d assuming tha t onl y6 9 percen t o f curren t desulfurizatio n capacit yi s utilize d an d tha t "on-highway " diese l fue l coul d b e segregated . SC I estimate d a cos t o f 2.2 8 cent s pe r gallo no f controlle d fue l assuming n o exces s desulfurizatio ncapacit yexist s an d n o increase d segregatio no f distillat e product s i s feasible .

-14

-P.1 6
Bonne r an

d Moor e Consultant s Inc . recentl ycomplete d anothe r stud

yfo r EPAo nth e cos t o f modifying diese l fue l quality . Th e result s o f tha t stud yshowe d tha t diese l fue l sulfur contro l woul d cos t 2.6 9 cent s pe r gallo ncontrolle d assuming n o exces s desulfurizatio n capacit yi s availabl e an d n o increas e i n segregatio nwoul d tak e place . Th e cos t pe r gallo n o f controlle d fue l wa s estimate d t o b e abou t th e same unde r an increase d segregatio nscenari o (off-highwa y diese l qualit ywa s no t allowe d t o deteriorat e i n th e model) . Th e NPR

Asurvey' s estimat e o f curren t exces s desulfurizatio n capacit yan d Bonne r & Moore' s sulfur reductio n cos t estimate s (adjuste d fo r afte r ta xrea l rat e o f return o n investment ) wer e use d t o develo p a fina l estimat e o f sulfur contro l costs . Th e Bonne r an d Moor e cost s incorporate d an d addresse d comment s whic hwer e receive d o n th e earlie r SC I work , an d thu s wer e use d preferentiall yhere . Thes e adjuste d cost s wer e calculate d b yEPAt o b e abou t 2. 3 cent s pe r gallo no f controlle d fue l assuming n o increase d segregatio n o f distillat e product s ove r th e bas e case . Thi s figur e i s clos e t o tha t calculate d b

ySCI , a s indicate d above . Acos t o f 1. 8 cent s pe r gallo n o f controlle d fue l wa s estimate d fo r th e complet e (10 0 percent ) segregatio nscenario .

-15

-P.1 7

B . Aromatic s Contro l
Ther e ar e a numbe r o f technica l option s fo r th e remova l o f aromatic s fromdiese l fuel . Hydrocracking , a technolog

yi n widespread use , canb e use d t o mildl yreduc e aromati c level s i ndistillat e fuels . Amor e sever e process , hydrodearomatization , canals o b e used , although commercia l experienc e i s limited . Solven t extractio nca n als o b e use d fo r aromatic s remova l an d i s als o commerciall y available , bu t mayno t b e practica l i nman yrefining situations . Th e Mobi l "methanol-to-olefin-to-distillate " proces s can als o b e use d t o produc e a lowaromati c distillat e fuel . Whateve r proces s i s used , significan t capita l investmen t woul d b e required . Th e 198 6 NPR

Asurveyresult s indicate d that , no t onl y woul d aromatic s contro l b e expensive , bu t tha t 5 3 o f th e 13 9 refinerie s reporting woul d b e financiall yunabl e t o instal l th e equipmen t necessaryt o produc e lowaromatic s fuel . Th e contro l o f sulfur an d aromatic s woul d requir e capita l investmen t o f an additiona l $3.3 4 billio nbeyond tha t necessaryfo r sulfur contro l ($6.6 5 billio n total) . Thi s investmen t plu s operating expense s woul d rais e diese l fue l price s b

yan additiona l 3.2 4 cent s pe r gallo n (6.3 5 cent s pe r gallo n for bot hsulfur an d aromatic s control) .

-16

-P.1 8
I n an analysi s performe d afte r th e initia l ERC/SC I report , SC I estimate d aromati c contro l costs , assuming solven t extractio n woul d b e th e technolog yemploye d fo r aromatic s removal . Cost s fo r controlling aromatic s t o 2 0 percen t afte r controlling sulfur t o 0.0 5 weigh t percen t wer e estimate d i n it s repor t t o b e 0.4 8 cen t pe r gallo n assuming 10 0 percen t segregation . Acontro l cos t estimat e o f 1.2 6 cent s pe r gallo nwa s generate d assuming n o increas e i n fue l segregatio n (i.e. , NPR Asegregatio n assumption) . Th e recentl ycomplete d Bonne r & Moor e repor t estimate d cost s fo r controlling aromatics , wit hhydrodearomatizatio n use d a s th e principa l technolog yfo r aromatic s reduction . Incrementa l cost s fo r aromatic s contro l (the differenc e betwee n sulfur an d sulfur/aromatic s contro l costs ) wer e projecte d t o b e 2. 5 cent s pe r gallo no f controlle d fue l assuming n o increas e i n fue l segregation , an d 2. 6 cent s pe r gallo n o f controlle d fue l i n th e increase d segregatio n case . Using informatio ncontaine d i nal l thre e o f thes e studies , EPAestimate s that , wit hNPR Asegregation , aromatic s contro l woul d cos t o n additiona l 2. 1 cent s pe r gallo n o f treate d fue l wit h0.0 5 weigh t percen t sulfur contro l alread

yi n place . Wit h10 0 percen t distillat e fue l segregation , aromatic s contro l woul d cos t anadditiona l 2. 4 cent s pe r gallo n o f treate d fuel .

-17

-P.1 9

V . Benefit s o f Fue l Contro l Reduction s i n diese l fue l sulfur an d diese l fue l aromatic s woul d resul t i n a numbe r o f benefit s (bot h financia l an

d environmental ) whic hcanb e weighe d agains t the refining cos t o f modification . A s wil l b e describe d i n Sectio n A , improvement s i n fue l qualit ywoul d allowengin e manufacturer s t o compl ymor e easil ywit hfutur e heavy-dut y diese l particulat e standard s an d woul d reduc e th e cos t an d complexit yo f engin e hardwar e necessaryfo r particulat e control . I n Sectio n B , th e relationshi p betwee nfue l sulfur an

d engin e wea r wil l b e describe d an d possibl e economi c benefit s wil l b e quantified . Th e projecte d nationwid e emissio n an d ai r qualit ybenefit s wil l b e presente d i n Sectio n C . I n Section s D . an d E , th e projecte d healt heffect s an d visibilit yeffect s o f emissio n reduction s resulting fro mfue l contro l wil l b e presented .
A . Exhaus t Aftertreatmen t Technolog yBenefit s Th e 0. 1 g/BHP-hr particulat e emission s standard promulgate d fo r heavy-dut ydiese l vehicle s fo r th e 199 4 mode l yea r (5 0 F R10606 , Marc h15 , 1985 ) wil l likel y necessitat e th e us e o f som e typ e o f exhaus t aftertreatmen t device . Th e designan d th e cos t o f th e devic e wil l b e affecte d b

yth e qualit yo f th e fue l used . Th e purpos e o f
•18

-P.2 0

thi s sectio n i s t o identif yth e impac t tha t th e propose d fue l contro l wil l hav e o n exhaus t aftertreatmen t technolog y requirements . Th e benefit s o f sulfur contro l i nthi s are a ar e two-fold . Firs t o f all , fue l sulfur contribute s t o particulat e emission s directl yvi a formatio n o f sulfat e i n th e engin e exhaust . O naverage , abou t 2 percen t o f th e sulfur i n th e fue l i s emitte d a s sulfat e particulate , o r abou t 0.06-0.0 8 g/BHP-hr (including th e weigh t o f bound water) . Th e propose d fue l sulfur regulation s woul d reduc e thi s amoun t b

yroughl y8 0 percent , greatl yenhancing engin e manufacturers ' abilitie s t o compl ywit hth e particulat e standards . Secondly , th e us e o f some aftertreatmen t devices , particularl yflowthroughcatalyst s o r catalyze d trap s i s effectivel yprohibite d b yth e curren t level s o f sulfur i n fuel . Whil e a catalys t woul d significantl yreduc e organi c particulat e emissions , a highl yactive catalys t woul d als o greatl yincreas e th e amoun t o f sulfat e particulat e produce d i n th e exhaust , thu s negating th e beneficia l effect s o f th e catalyst . Whe n fue l sulfur i s reduced , however , thi s effec t become s les s pronounced , a s th e concentratio n o f sulfur specie s i n th e exhaus t i s reduce d proportionally . A les s active catalys t formulatio nmayb e abl e t o avoi d thi s problem , albei t wit ha los s o f efficienc yi n controlling organi c particulates . -19

-P.2 1
Asmalle r emission s benefi t ca nals o b e achieve d b y aromatic s control . Engin e tes t result s showtha t reduction s i n fue l aromatic s level s resul t inlowe r emission s o f carbonaceou s (RCP ) an d solubl e organi c fractio n (SOF ) particulates . Hence , a reductio ni nfue l aromatic s woul d reduc e particulat e formation , an d subsequentl yreduc e th e nee d fo r exhaus t treatmen t devices .
Aprojectio n o f exhaus t aftertreatmen t technolog y reguirement s wa s mad e fo r heavy-dut ydiese l vehicle s fo r th e 199 4 an

d late r mode l year s unde r variou s fue l contro l scenarios . Th e likel yaftertreatmen t technolog ymixe s wer e determine d b

yevaluating th e cost-effectivenes s o f eac h technolog

ytyp e wit hrespec t t o particulat e control , fo r eac hheavy-dut yvehicl e class . Th e firs t step i n thi s proces s wa s t o establis ha distributio n o f baselin e particulat e emissio nlevel s an d compositions , base d o n availabl e tes t data , fo r eac h vehicl e class . Next , variou s aftertreatmen t technologie s wer e applie d incrementall yt o engine s i neac hheavy-dut y clas s according t o th e cost-effectivenes s o f control , unti l aftertreatmen t applicatio n wa s sufficien t t o insur e complianc e wit hth e particulat e standard s (assuming averaging withi n eac hheavy-dut ysubclass) .

-20

-P.2 2

Fo r 199 4 an

d late r mode l yea r heavy-dut ydiesels , du e t o the larg e contributio n o f sulfate s t o engine-ou t particulate , complianc e wit hth e O. l g/BHP-h r particulat e standard wil l likel yrequir e fleetwid e trap-oxidize r applicatio n i f n o fue l control s ar e implemented . Th e onl y exceptio n i s th e heavy-heavy-dut yengin e class , where , wit h averaging , i t i s projecte d tha t slightl yunde r 9 0 percen t o f vehicle s wil l requir e traps . Wit hsulfur control , th e 199 4 pictur e i s projecte d t o b e somewha t different . Th e enhance d feasibilit yo f high-activit yflow-throughoxidatio n catalyst s wit hsulfur contro l woul d allowth e displacemen t o f some trap s b y oxidatio n catalysts . O naverage , i t i s projecte d tha t approximatel y3 5 percen t o f engine s woul d requir e trap s i n al l vehicl e classe s whil e an additiona l 2 9 t o 5 5 percent , depending o n engin e subclass , woul d requir e flow-through oxidatio n catalysts . Furthe r reductio n o f aromatic s t o 2 0 volum e percen t woul d displac e trap s fro m an additiona l 5 percen t o f al l engine s an

d als o decreas e oxidatio ncatalys t requirements . Th e onl yexceptio n woul d b e th e mediu mheavy-dut ydiese l engin e subclass , wher e trap displacemen t woul d b e abou t 9 percent , bu t oxidatio n catalys t usag e woul d increas e abou t 8 percent . Th e fue l economy , hardware , an d maintenanc e cost s saving s associate d wit hsulfur contro l fo r 199 4 woul d b e -21

-P.2 3

$32 4 fo r light-heav ydut ydiesel s (LHDDEs) , $65 1 fo r medium-heav

ydut ydiesel s (MHDDEs) , $75 2 fo r heavy-heav y dut ydiesel s (HHDDEs) , an d $70 0 fo r urbanbuses . Th e subsequen t reductio n i n fue l aromatic s t o 2 0 percen t woul d resul t i n furthe r saving s o f $3 1 fo r LHDDEs , $8 7 fo r MHDDEs , $7 8 for HHDDEs , an d $9 4 fo r urba n buses .
An analysi s t o determin e th e saving s i naftertreatmen t cost s fo r 1991-9 3 mode l yea r engine s wa s als o performe d an d i s describe d i n th e Draf t RIA . Thi s analysi s wa s initiate d some time ag o an

d assume d tha t trap s woul d b e use d o na substantia l numbe r o f 1991-9 3 engines . Presently , however , i t appear s tha t manufacturer s wil l no t us e trap s t o compl y wit hth e 199 1 mode l yea r truc k standard , bu t instead rel y o n engine-relate d controls . Th e adoptio no f a 0.1 0 percen t sulfur leve l for certificatio n fue l i s expecte d t o reduc e certificatio n emission s b yabou t 0.03-0.0 4 g/BHP-hr fro m wha t theywoul d hav e been , using a 0.2 5 percen t sulfur fue l an d thu s eas e th e manufacturers ' attempt s t o achieve th e 199 1 standards . Nevertheless , sinc e manufacturers ' plan s fo r 199 1 engine s ar e alread ylargel yfixed , EPAdoe s no t expec t fue l contro l t o affec t manufacturers ' plan s fo r engine-relate d control s i nthi s timeframe . Consequently , in-us e emission s woul d remai nunaffected . Some truc k manufacturer s no t abl e t o compl ywit hth e standard withou t fue l contro l migh t choos e t o paynonconformanc e penaltie s (NCPs) . However , sinc e NCP s ar e no t a ne t cos t t o society , -22

-bu t rathe r a "transfe r payment " fro mon e secto r o f societ y t o another , n o aftertreatment-relate d societa l saving s ca n b e claime d fo r fue l contro l o n thes e engines . Trap s ar e stil l expecte d t o b e th e primarytechnology use d b ybu s engin e manufacturer s t o compl ywit hth e 0.1 0 g/BHP-hr 199 1 bu s standard ; us e o f analternativ e fuel , suc ha s methanol , mayals o b e employed . Some reduce d usag e o f trap s i s likel yi f certificatio n fue l sulfur wer e reduced . However , du e t o th e fac t tha t a relativel ysmal l numbe r o f bu s engine s woul d b e certifie d ove r th e 3-year period , thi s saving s du e t o fue l contro l wa s no t quantified .
B . Wea r Benefit s

An extensiv e bod

yo f dat a exist s i nth e literatur e documenting th e relationshi p betwee n diese l fue l sulfur an d corrosiv e engin e wear . Becaus e o f thi s effect , engin e oil s typicall ycontai n alkalin e additive s whic hwor k t o neutraliz e th e acidi c sulfur specie s presen t i nth e combustio n chamber . A s wa s postulate d i n th e ERC/SC I study , curren t oi l formulation s mayno t b e sufficien t t o completel ycontro l corrosiv e wear , and , consequently , a reductio n i n fue l sulfur level s maysignificantl yreduc e engin e wea r rates . Base d o n dat a availabl e a t th e time , th e ERC/SC I repor t predicte d tha t th e reductio ni nwea r a s a resul t o f fue l sulfur control s woul d increas e engin e lif e b yapproximatel y3 0 percent . -23

-P.2 5 Afte r th e ERC/SC I repor t wa s released , Southwes t Researc hInstitut e (SwRI ) wa s commissione d b yEPAt o stud

y th e issu e further . A s state d i n it s report , SwR I foun d tha t engine s whic hha d operate d onbot hhighan d lo wsulfur fuel s i n Souther n Californi a exhibite d a reductio ni nwea r particle s foun

d i n use d oi l sample s whe noperate d o nlow sulfur fuel . Whil e th e effec t o f lowsulfur fue l differe d among engine s an

d fleets , th e vas t majorit yo f th e dat a showe d tha t a fue l sulfur reductio n from roughl y0. 3 t o 0.0 5 weigh t percen t resulte d i na 3 0 t o 4 0 percen t reductio n i n wea r particle s (i.e. , oi l iro n content) .
Base d o n thes e data , EPAcalculate s tha t a reductio n i n sulfur leve l t o 0.0 5 weigh t percen t fro mth e nationa l averag e baselin e sulfur leve l o f 0.2 5 weigh t percen t woul d resul t i n a wea r rat e reductio n o f abou t 1 8 percent . Estimating th e financia l saving s t o consumer s o f suc ha decreas e i n engin e wea r rates , however , i s a mor e difficul t task . Engine s ar e currentl yrebuil t fo r a numbe r o f reasons , including excessiv e oi l consumption , los s o f power , an

d majo r engin e failures . Whil e thos e engine s whic hfai l du e t o cylinde r wear-relate d factor s woul d realiz e a benefit , man yengine s maynot . Fo r instance , i f an engin e experience s a majo r failure , items suc ha s pisto n ring s an

d cylinde r liner s wil l normall yb e replace d during rebuild . Thi s woul d effectivel yeliminat e an ybenefi t o f reduce d corrosiv e wea r whic hwoul d hav e bee n realize d ha d anothe r engin e componen t no t failed . -24

-Further , th e relative contribution s o f corrosiv e an d abrasive wea r t o engin e lif e i s no t wel l understood . Whil e bot htype s o f wea r contribut e t o deterioratio ni n engin e performanc e an

d life , i t i s possibl e tha t abrasive wea r contribute s mor e t o los s o f oi l contro l tha n doe s corrosiv e wear . Wit hthes e factor s i nmind , an attemp t t o quantif y the economi c benefit s o f reduce d engin e wea r wa s made . Thre e differen t approache s wer e take nt o thi s problem . Th e firs t wa s base d o nth e assumptio ntha t lowe r fue l sulfur level s woul d allowengin e manufacturer s t o exten d recommende d oi l chang e intervals , wit hn o resulting chang e i n engin e life . Th e second approac hassume d tha t reduce d corrosiv e wea r woul d resul t i nanextensio ni n th e lif e o f the engine . Th e third approac hwa s t o assume tha t a reductio n i n wea r woul d exten d th e lif e o f bot hth e engin e an

d vehicl e chassis . Thes e method s provide d thre e independen t estimate s o f th e potentia l cos t savings . Using th e firs t approach , informatio no nlifetime mileage , oi l chang e interval , an d vehicl e lif e wa s use d t o estimat e th e annua l numbe r o f oi l change s fo r eac hdiese l vehicl e class . I t wa s the n assume d tha t oi l chang e interval s coul d b e extende d b y1 8 percent , resulting i noi l cos t saving s fo r owners . Th e result s o f thi s analysi s showe d presen t valu e saving s o f 1.6#/ga l fo r light-dut y

-25

-P.2 7

diese l vehicle s (LDDVs) , l.2#/ga l fo r light-dutydiese l truck s (LDDTs) , 0.80/ga l fo r LHDDEs , 1.3^/ga l fo r MHDDEs , 0.90/ga l fo r HHDDEs , an d 1.8^/ga l fo r urba nbuses . Th e benefi t wa s assume d t o apply , beginning i n 1994 , onl yt o 198 8 MYan

d late r LDDV s an

d LDDTs , an

d t o 199 1 MYan

d late r HDDVs . Vehicle s produce d i npreviou s mode l year s exhibi t muc hhighe r particulat e emissions , whic hmaycontaminat e th e oi l an

d eliminat e th e abilit yt o exten d oi l chang e intervals . Th e secon

d approac hwa s t o assume tha t ther e woul d b e n o chang e i n oi l chang e interval , bu t tha t reduce d wea r rate s woul d lead t o a longe r engin e life . Th e reductio ni n engin e wea r wa s expecte d t o resul t i nlonge r rebuil d interval s onl yi n engine s whic har e rebuil t fo r reason s relate d t o highoi l consumption . Base d o ndat a obtaine d fro man EM

Asurveyo f rebuil d practices , i t wa s estimate d tha t 4 2 percen t o f truck s woul d realiz e th e 1 8 percen t increas e i n engin e lif e a s a resul t o f sulfur control . Thi s 1 8 percen t increas e i nengin e lif e translate s int o an economi c benefi t fo r th e owne r b ydelaying rebuil d maintenanc e costs . Estimate d cos t saving s unde r thi s scenari o (average d ove r th e entir e fleet ) wer e 2.5l#/ga l o f diese l fue l consume d fo r MHDDEs , 2.52#/ga l fo r HHDDE s an d 1.98^/ga l fo r urba n buses . LDDVs , LDDT s an d LHDDE s receive d n o benefi t sinc e thes e engine s ar e no t normall y rebuil t an

d ther e wa s n o credi t take nfo r extende d vehicl e lif e unde r thi s scenario . -26

-P.2 8 Th e third approac hwa s t o estimat e th e cos t saving s assuming tha t reduce d engin e wea r woul d resul t i nbot ha n extensio n i n rebuil d interval s an d i ntota l vehicl e life . Unde r thi s approach , th e economi c benefit s includ e bot h delaying maintenanc e cost s an d delaying subsequen t vehicl e purchases . Onc e agai n using informatio n o nrebuil d practices , rebuil d costs , an d vehicl e costs , anestimat e o f th e cos t saving s o na pe r gallo n fue l consume d basi s wa s generated . Tota l cost s saving s estimate s wer e 300/ga l fo r LDDVs , 260/ga l fo r LDDTs , 23#/ga l fo r LHDDEs , 11.7^/ga l fo r MHDDEs , 8.4^/ga l for HHDDEs . an d 11.5^/ga l fo r urba n buses . Thes e estimate s represen t th e highes t cos t saving s whic hcoul d potentiall yresul t fro msulfur control .
I n summary , EPAestimate s th e potentia l fo r reduce d engin e wea r fro

mlow-sulfur fue l unde r thre e alternativ e truc k manufacturer/owne r respons e scenarios : 1 ) extende d oi l chang e interval s wit hn o increas e i nengin e life , 2 ) n o chang e i n oi l chang e interval s bu t anincreas e i n engin e life , an

d 3 ) n o chang e i n oi l chang e interval s wit h increase s i n bot hengin e an d tota l vehicl e life . EPAha s n o dat a t o determin e whic hscenari o i s mos t likel yt o occur . Th e annua l benefit s o f decrease d engin e wea r i n yea r 201 0 ar e estimate d a t betwee n$40 0 millio nan d $3. 7 billion ; fue l costs , however , ar e estimate d t o increas e betwee n $54 0 millio n an d $1. 3 billion .

-27

-P.2 9
Base d o n thes e estimates , th e annua l ne t benefi t accruing directl yt o truc k owner s fro mreduce d engin e wea r alone.coul d b e ove r $ 2 billion . Unde r thi s scenario , truc k owner s woul d b e willing t o payove r $ 2 billio nmor e pe r yea r for low-sulfur diese l fue l than i t woul d cos t refiner s t o produc e it . T o th e exten t tha t thes e estimate s accuratel yreflec t th e effect s o f th e propose d regulation , ther e mus t b e a reaso nwh ysuc hlarg e potentia l ne t gain s hav e no t materialize d base d o n marke t force s alone . EPA seek s commen t o n thi s issue . On e possibl e explanatio ni s tha t ther e ar e significan t cost s t o truc k owner s o f determining th e actua l effect s o f reduce d sulfur fuel s o nengin e wear . Sinc e th e effect s tak e plac e insid e engine s ove r fairl ylon g period s o f time , i t mayno t b e eas yt o observe , isolate , an d measur e th e effect s o f reduce d sulfur fuels . I f thes e informatio n cost s ar e sufficientl ylarge , theycoul d outweighth e potentia l ne t benefit s o f a mov e t o low-sulfur fue l resulting fro

mmarke t force s alone . Unde r thes e circumstances , th e informatio ncost s woul d effectivel y preven t th e introductio n o f low-sulfur fuel . Whil e thes e cos t saving s estimate s indicat e tha t substantia l societa l benefit s mayresul t fro msulfur control , i t i s fai r t o includ e th e cavea t tha t th e dat a bas e behind thi s analysi s i s limited . I t ha s eve nbee n
-28

-P.3 0

argue d tha t sulfur contro l woul d hav e n o impac t o nengin e wear . However , a s wil l b e see ni n Sectio n V I o f today' s notice , fue l sulfur contro l i s desirabl e eve n withou t th e inclusion o f reduce d engin e wea r benefits . C . Emission s an

d Ai r Qualit y Th e diese l fue l qualit ychange s being considere d woul d resul t i n substantia l reduction s i nSO , emission s an d particulat e matte r formatio n beyond th e reduction s resulting fro

m th e 199 4 0. 1 g/BHP-hr particulat e standard . I n addition , emission s o f C O an d H C wil l b e indirectl y affecte d b

yfue l qualit ymodification , du e t o th e change s i n aftertreatmen t technolog ystrategie s use d b yengin e manufacturer s t o compl ywit hth e 199 4 particulat e standards . Th e projecte d nationwid e emissio n reduction s unde r th e two extreme distillat e fue l segregatio n scenario s (10 0 percen t an

d NPR Asegregation ) resulting fro mfue l sulfur an

d aromatic s contro l ar e show n i nTable s l an

d 2 . Becaus e th e effec t o f diese l fue l contro l o n vehicl e emission s change s wit hmode l year , th e overal l emission s an d ai r qualit yimpact s o f fue l contro l varie s ove r time . Becaus e o f this , bot hth e nea r an d lon g ter m effect s o f fue l contro l wer e evaluated .

A s show n i n Tabl e 1 , fue l sulfur contro l woul d resul t i n additiona l reduction s i ndirec t particulat e matte r (PM )
-29

-P.3 1

fro mbaselin e level s (i.e. , particulat e matte r emitte d fro m th e exhaust ) ove r tha t accomplishe d b yth e HD D particulat e standard s alone . Thi s i s becaus e fue l sulfur contro l wil l resul t i n particulat e reduction s fro mpre-199 1 HDD an d light-dutydiese l engines , a s wel l as , depending o nth e degre e o f segregation , off-highwaysources . I n addition , a larg e reductio n i ndiese l SO , emission s woul d result , representing an 8 0 percen t reductio nfrombaselin e level s for thos e emissio n source s wher e diese l fue l i s controlled . Thi s woul d represen t a reductio n o f 1.0-2. 5 percen t i n tota l nationa l SO , emissions . Beyond that , a s describe d i n mor e detai l i nth e Draf t RIA , i t wa s estimate d tha t approximatel y1 2 percen t o f urba nSO , emission s ar e converte d t o sulfat e particulate s i n th e urba n atmosphere . Thes e atmospherically-forme d particulat e ar e referre d t o a s indirec t PM . Thus , th e reductio ni n SO , emission s woul d resul t i n substantia l indirec t P Mreduction s i n bot hth e shor t an

d lon g ter ma s well .

-30

-P.3 2 Tabl e l

Projecte d Nationwid e Emissio n Reduction s du e t o Diese l Fue l Sulfur Contro l (100 0 tons/yr )

Pollutan t Tota l Particulat e Directl yEmitte d Indirec t SO 2 H C C O 199 5 99-196 * 10-2 9 89-16 7 310-58 0 1 4 14 1 201 5

159-32 1 3-3 5 156-28 6 542-99 3 8 8 91 6

Lowe r en

d o f rang e resul t o f 100 % distillat e segregation , uppe r en d resul t o f curren t segregatio n practices . Th e emissio n impact s o f controlling fue l aromatic s t o 2 0 volume percen t wer e als o evaluate d an d ar e show

ni n Tabl e 2 . Tota l particulat e emissio n reduction s rang e from 10,00 0 ton s pe r yea r i n199 5 t o 60 0 ton s pe r yea r i n2015 . Smal l H C an

d C O emissio nreduction s woul d als o resul t from aromatic s control . Thes e particulat e reduction s ar e a facto r o f 1 0 t o 2 0 smalle r i n th e shor t ter m tha nthos e resulting fro

m sulfur control . Du e primaril yt o th e stead y stat e natur e o f off-highwaydiese l operation , emission s fro moff-highwaysource s shoul d no t b e strongl yaffecte d b y

-31

-P.3 3

fue l aromatic s levels . Thus , estimate d emissio nreduction s ar e constan t ove r th e rang e o f distillat e segregatio n scenarios . Tabl e 2 Projecte d Nationwid e Emissio nReduction s du e t o Subsequen t Diese l Fue l Aromatic s Contro l (100 0 tons/yr )
Pollutan t 199 5 201 5 1 0 0 3 8 6 9 0 . 6

0 1 5 9 8 Direc t P M S0 2 H C C O Shoul d th e degre e o f segregatio n o f distillat e fuel s increas e significantly , i t i s possibl e tha t refiner s ma y chang e blending practic e t o direc t lowsulfur an d aromati c blend stock s t o th e on-highwaypool . Directionally , thi s practic e woul d hav e th e undesirabl e sid e effec t o f increasing th e sulfur an d aromati c conten t o f non-highway distillat e fuels , thu s decreasing environmenta l benefits . Althoughthi s practic e migh t tak e plac e t o some extent , EPA expect s th e primaryapproac ht o meeting thi s standard woul d b e t o desulfuriz e on-highwaydiese l fue l blend stocks . Roughl y7 0 percen t o f home heating oi l i s markete d i n northeaster n states , wher e limit s o n th e sulfur conten t o f home heating oil s woul d effectivel yprohibi t th e shifting t o highsulfur blendstock s t o th e off-highwaypool . Thus , mos t o f th e home heating oi l marke t i s no t eve n potentiall y
-32

-P.3 4

availabl e fo r sucha change . Th e cost s fo r fue l contro l presente d i n thi s preambl e wer e generate d unde r th e assumptio n tha t th e sulfur an d aromatic s conten t o f th e off-highwaypoo l woul d no t increase . T o th e exten t th e sulfur conten t o f off-highwaydistillat e doe s increas e i n reality , actua l refining cost s an d emissio nreduction s wil l b e commensuratel ylower . Th e ai r qualit yimpact s o f today' s propose d rulemaking wer e als o evaluate d using a lead-surrogat e mode l develope d fo r previou s analyse s supporting diese l particulat e emissio n standard s (explaine d i n th e Draf t RIA) . Concentration s o f variou s pollutant s i nurba narea s o f variou s size s wer e projected . Mode l result s indicat e tha t b yth e yea r 2015 , i n larg e metropolitan area s (greate r tha n 1,000,00 0 residents) , annua l arithmeti c mea n particulat e concentration s woul d decreas e b yan additiona l 2.3-6. 3 3 Ug/ ma s a resul t o f sulfur control . Reduction s i n annua l arithmeti c mea nconcentration s o f SO , ranging from

3 7.0-16. 7 Ug/ mar e als o projected . (Thes e compar e t o curren t PM I Q an<

*** S0 2 concentration s i nurba narea s

3 3 ranging fro

m18-9 0 Ug/ man d 3-6 7 Ug/ m, respectively. ) Result s o f simila r modeling fo r subsequen t diese l fue l aromatic s contro l indicat e tha t fo r larg e metropolita n area s (greate r than 1,000,00 0 residents ) i n th e yea r 2015 , -33

-P.3 5

aromatic s contro l woul d resul t i n particulat e reduction s o f

3 onl y0.0 1 Ug/ m

. Amor e detaile d analysi s o f th e ai r qualit yimpact s o f today' s proposa l i s presente d i n th e Draf t RIA .
D . Healt hEffect s

A s presente d above , th e fue l control s propose d today wil l resul t i n reduction s i n emission s o f diese l particulate , SO , an d HC , an

d a t th e same time decreas e th e level s o f ambien t particle s tha t ar e atmospheri c product s o f SO , emissions . Becaus e o f th e advers e healt h effect s o f PM , an d S0 2 , EPAha s develope d Nationa l Ambien t Ai r Qualit yStandard s (NAAQS) . Insofa r a s anare a i s ou t o f complianc e wit hthes e standards , a reductio no f thes e regulate d pollutant s woul d reduc e healt hrisk . Th e quantitativ e degre e o f benefi t canno t b e calculate d precisel ysinc e i t depend s o n curren t level s i na localit y an d th e precis e decreas e i nlevels . Nevertheless , th e healt heffect s tha t ca n b e cause d b ythes e compound s i s verybriefl ydiscusse d belo wt o illustrat e th e utilit yo f reducing an

yexisting unacceptabl e risk . Short

- an

d long-ter

mexposur e t o SO , i n associatio n wit hparticle s cause s exces s mortalit yan d morbidity . Peopl e wit hcardiorespiratorydisease s ar e a t highe r ris k fo r mortalit yfollowing long-ter mexposure . Th e increas e i n morbidit yfro

mlong-ter

mexposur e i s reflecte d a s an -34

-P.3 6

increas e i n th e prevalenc e o f respiratorysymptom s i n childre n an

d adult s an

d th e frequencyo f respiratory illnes s i n children . Acut e exposur e t o lo wlevel s o f S0 2 alon e cause s pulmonaryfunctio n change s i n asthmatics . Upo n atmospheri c transformation , SO , can for ma clas s o f particle s calle d acidi c sulfates , whic hinclud e ammoniu m sulfat e (the leas t acidic) , ammoniu mbisulfate , an d sulfuri c aci d (the mos t acidic) . Acut e exposur e o f asthmatic s t o sulfuri c aci d can caus e pulmonaryfunctio n changes , an

d i t appear s tha t adolescen t asthmatic s mayb e mor e responsive . Acut e exposur e o f animal s an d human s change s th e abilit yo f th e lun g t o clea r particles . Animal s expose d fo r long term s t o sulfuri c aci d exhibi t alteration s i n lun g function , structure , an d clearance ; a fewo f thes e change s mayb e permanent . Give nth e natur e o f thes e changes , some scientist s hav e hypothesize d (bu t no t proved ) tha t chroni c sulfuri c aci d exposur e maylead t o chroni c bronchitis . Preliminaryestimate s froman epidemiologica l stud yals o rais e concernabou t possibl e chroni c effects . Anothe r significan t issu e relate s t o th e effect s o f exposur e t o sulfuri c aci d plu s othe r chemicals . A5-year exposur e o f animal s t o a combinatio no f S0 2 plu s sulfuri c aci d cause d pulmonaryfunctio ndecrement s an d structura l damag e t o th e lungs . I n some anima l studies , acut e exposur e t o sulfuri c aci d mixe d wit hparticle s ha s bee n foun

d t o b e synergisti c fo r some type s o f pulmonary effects . -35

-P.3 7 Th e non-cance r effect s o f exposur e t o lowlevel s o f diese l particle s sucha s migh t occur i n the ambien t ai r ar e no t wel l understood . Highlevel s hav e bee nobserve d t o caus e effect s i n occupationa l situation s an d i nanima l studies , bu t for non-cance r effects , i t i s no t currentl y possibl e t o quantitativel yextrapolat e t o lowe r levels . Th e non-cance r healt heffect s o f exposur e t o ligh t aromati c an

d short-chai naliphati c hydrocarbon s ar e no t wel l understood . Person s chronicall yexpose d t o some hydrocarbo n mixture s hav e complaine d o f dizziness , drowsiness , headaches , confusion , an d genera l lethargi c feeling . Anima l studie s o f some hydrocarbon s sho w neurotoxi c an

d othe r effects . Whe nsuc heffect s ar e observed , scientist s ofte nbecome concerne d abou t whethe r children' s developing nervou s system s mayb e effected . Althoughthi s discussio nfocuse s o n a fewchemical s presen t i n emission s tha t als o serve a s precursor s t o othe r potentiall ytoxi c atmospheri c chemicals , ther e ar e likel y t o b e mor e comple xalteration s tha t wil l hav e a n unknown impac t o n healt hrisk . Fo r example , change s i nth e chemistryo f a diese l particl e ha s th e potentia l t o alte r it s healt hrisk , i.e. , potenc yo f a particle , whic hneed s t o b e evaluate d separatel yfro ma simpl e reductio ni n th e mas s o f particle s emitted . Whil e i t i s clea r tha t th e emission s o f some toxi c chemical s wil l b e decreased , th e
-36

-ne t healt himpac t o f al l th e change s involve d canonl yb e

assesse d wit han appropriat e researc hprogram . Anothe r are a o f concernrelate d t o diese l particulat e contro l i s tha t o f cance r impacts . I t migh t b e argue d that , sinc e today' s proposa l wil l reduc e sulfat e emissions , ther e woul d b e a corresponding increas e i n organi c particulat e emission s a s manufacturer s adjuste d thei r contro l strategie s t o keep th e same tota l emissio n rate . I n fact , thi s assumptio n i s th e basi s o f th e analysi s o f th e cance r impact s containe d i n th e draf t RIA . However , base d upo n a mor e curren t assessmen t o f expecte d manufacture r contro l strategies , th e Agenc yn o longe r expect s thi s t o b e th e case . Th e positio no f engin e manufacturer s i s tha t th e 199 4 standard i s no t feasibl e withou t sulfur control , i npar t becaus e th e sulfur itsel f contribute s t o th e particulat e leve l requiring control . Th e Agency , therefore , expect s tha t th e emissio nreduction s associate d wit hlowe r sulfur fuel s wil l b e use d by manufacturer s no t t o increas e non-sulfat e emissions , bu t t o permi t certificatio n o f thei r engine s a t level s sufficientl ybelo wth e standard t o ensur e in-us e compliance . Ther e i s a secon

d impac t o f lowe r sulfur fuel s a s i t relate s t o availabl e technolog yfo r controlling engine-ou t emissions . Th e switc ht o lowsulfur fue l wil l allowth e us e o f catalyze d devices , bot hcatalyze d trap s an d flow -37

-P.3 9

throughreductio n catalysts , whic hcoul d no t b e use d withou t sulfur control . Thi s chang e wil l ten d t o reduc e th e organi c fractio no f particulat e emissions , becaus e catalyze d device s operat e preferentiall yo nth e organics . Thus , rathe r tha n increasing cance r incidences , sulfur contro l mayactuall yreduc e thema smal l amount . However , a t thi s time ther e i s inadequat e informatio nt o mak e a quantitativ e estimat e o f th e impac t an d updat e th e analysi s i n th e draf t RIA . Th e Agenc ydesire s t o mak e i t clea r tha t EPAn o longe r believe s tha t th e cance r impact s o f sulfur contro l develope d i n th e draf t RI Aar e correc t an d specificall yrequest s commen t o n thi s matte r an d ho wth e questio n o f cance r impact s shoul d b e analyzed . I n addition , comment s ar e requeste d regarding whethe r regulatorymeasure s shoul d b e take nt o encourag e catalyze d device s for maximu

mcontro l o f th e organi c emissions . Th e propose d cap o n th e aromatic s level s o f diese l fue l i s no t expecte d t o hav e a significan t impac t o n cance r incidenc e sinc e i t serve s onl yt o preven t th e level s from increasing i n th e future . However , t o th e exten t tha t averag e aromatic s level s dro p a s th e resul t o f thi s cap , ther e coul d b e a verysmal l reductio ni ncance r du e t o bot h a decreas e i n tota l particulat e emissions , an d a decreas e i n th e averag e carcinogeni c potenc yo f th e particulates . Mor e stringen t contro l o f aromatic s woul d resul t i n a somewha t large r reductio n i n cance r incidence . Th e
-38

-P.4 0

cancer-relate d benefi t o f suc hstringen t aromatic s contro l i s discusse d furthe r i n Chapte r 6 o f th e RegulatoryImpac t Analysis , an

d intereste d reader s ar e referre d t o tha t chapte r for mor e information . Unlik e th e analysi s o f th e cance r impact s o f sulfur , EPAbelieve s th e analysi s fo r aromatic s contro l i s stil l fundamentall ysound .
E . Visibilit y

Becaus e particulat e matte r bot hscatter s an d absorb s light , a chang e i n urba n visibilit yi s als o projecte d t o resul t fro

mth e diese l fue l modification s propose d i n today' s notice . Th e projecte d change s i nurba nambien t particulat e concentration s describe d above wer e use d i n conjunctio n wit ha visibilit ymode l develope d t o suppor t previou s rulemaking s implementing diese l particulat e emissio n standard s t o projec t visibilit yimpacts . Baselin e visibilitie s wer e determine d fo r th e yea r 199 0 fo r four range s o f cit ysiz e a s wel l a s fo r rura l areas . Th e percen t chang e i n averag e visibilit yb yth e yea r 201 5 for eac hpopulatio n categorywa s the n determine d assuming n o chang e i nnon-distillat e relate d particulate . I t i s projecte d that , wit hsulfur control , visibilit yi n th e yea r 201 5 wil l improve b yamount s ranging fro m0. 6 t o 4. 3 percen t i n urba nareas , an d wil l improve b

y1. 0 percen t i n rura l areas , relative t o baselin e 201 5 levels . An
-39

-P.4 1

additiona l reductio n o f fue l aromatic s t o 2 0 volume percen t woul d hav e littl e visibilit yimpact . VI . Cost-Effectivenes s Th e cos t effectivenes s o f pollutio ncontro l i s define d a s th e ne t societa l cos t pe r to n o f pollutan t remove d an d i s use d t o ran k pollutio n contro l programs . Th e projection s o f pollutan t reduction s an d th e cos t an

d credi t element s describe d above wer e use d i n estimating th e cost-effectivenes s o f diese l fue l contro l according t o a calenda r yea r approac hdiscounte d ove r a 33-yea r period . Th e propose d reductio no f diese l fue l sulfur woul d hav e impact s o n th e emission s o f a numbe r o f differen t pollutants , including particulate s (PM) , HC , CO , an d S0 2 < However , sinc e P Mcontro l i s th e majo r focu s o f thi s proposal , i n th e cost-effectivenes s analysi s th e ne t cos t pe r to n o f PMcontrolle d wa s determine d an d use d i n evaluating th e variou s fue l contro l options . Th e ne t societa l cos t consist s o f th e refinerycos t o f th e fue l contro l an

d an yfue l composition-relate d fue l econom y penalty , les s an

ysocieta l cos t saving s "credits " resulting fro mfue l control . Thes e societa l cos t saving s includ e utilizatio n o f les s expensiv e ne wengin e technology , decrease d fue l consumptio na s a resul t o f reduce d trap usage , an

d saving s associate d wit hreduce d engin e wear .

-40

-P.4 2 Sinc e th e fue l control s propose d i ntoday' s notic e woul d affec t differen t mode l years ' vehicle s a t th e same time , . an

d t o varying degrees , a calenda r yea r approac ht o cost-effectivenes s wa s use d (i.e. , ne t cost s an d emissio n reduction s wer e estimate d fo r eac hcalenda r year) . Sinc e th e effectivenes s o f th e contro l change s dramaticall yove r time (due t o flee t an d technolog

yturnover ) th e cost-effectivenes s wa s estimate d ove r a 33-yea r perio d using a discoun t rat e o f 1 0 percent . Th e cost-effectiveness , including an d excluding variou s wea r credit s an

d gaseou s pollutan t credits , i s show ni n Tabl e 3 . Tabl e 3 33-Yea r Urba n Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s

Sulfur Contro l

Maximu m wea r credi t include d Minimu mwea r credi t include d N o wea r credi t include d Cost-Effectivenes s ($/ton ) -68,14 8 t o -19,25 3 -3,90 6 t o 4,30 4 2,82 6 t o 6,77 3 Aromatic s Contro l

PrimaryAnalysi s HighEmissio n Reductio n Sensitivit yAnalysi s Cost-Effectivenes s ($/ton ) 310,75 1 t o 560,37 8 135,78 9 t o 244,86 8

-41

-A s can b e see n i nTabl e 3 , eve n i f saving s from

reduce d wea r ar e no t counted , th e cost-effectiveness , o f fue l sulfur contro l i s a t mos t $6,77 3 pe r ton , an d i s significantl yles s whe n engin e wea r credit s ar e included . Tabl e 3 show s tha t aromatic s contro l i s muc hles s cost-effective than sulfur contro l (or th e particulat e standard s themselves) . Th e 33-yea r cost-effectivenes s fo r aromatic s contro l t o 2 0 percen t wa s calculate d t o b e $310,000-560,00 0 pe r ton . Intermediat e sulfur contro l level s woul d b e les s costl yt o refiners . Asmal l amoun t o f sulfur remova l ca n b e obtaine d veryinexpensively , sinc e th e necessary equipmen t alread

yexist s an

d nee d onl yb e operated . However , an

ysubstantia l degre e o f sulfur contro l wil l entai l th e building o f ne wdesulfurizatio ncapacit ywit h roughl ya constan t cos t pe r to no f sulfur removal . Sinc e th e resulting diese l emissio nreduction s ar e proportiona l t o th e fue l sulfur level , th e cos t pe r to no f sulfurou s emissio n controlle d i s relativel yconstan t downt o 0.0 5 weigh t percent . Th e us e o f catalyti c exhaus t treatmen t device s require s fuel s wit hverylowsulfur levels , certainl ybelo w 0.1 0 weigh t percen t an d probabl yquit e nea r th e 0.0 5 weigh t percen t level . Thus , fo r an ysulfur leve l above 0.0 5 weigh t percent , muc ho f th e technolog ycredi t i s los t an d

-42

-P.4 4

th e cost-effectivenes s woul d b e wors e than tha t fo r 0.0 5 weigh t percent . This , couple d wit hth e oi l an d engin e industries ' ow

n proposa l o f th e 0.0 5 weigh t percen t level , indicate s tha t n o lesse r amoun t o f contro l appear s appropriate . Likewise , a sulfur standard belo w0.0 5 weigh t percen t woul d no t appea r appropriat e a t thi s time . Whil e suc h contro l i s likel yfeasibl e fo r some combination s o f refineries , crud e oi l slates , an d produc t slates , EPAlack s evidenc e tha t suc ha standard woul d b e feasibl e fo r al l o r eve n mos t refineries . Also , 0.0 5 weigh t percen t appear s t o b e sufficien t t o permi t complianc e wit hth e 199 4 diese l particulat e standard . Wit hrespec t t o aromatic s control , EP Awoul d expec t some improvemen t i n th e cost-effectivenes s o f aromatic s contro l a s th e standard wer e increase d fro m2 0 volum e percent . However , lik e sulfur control , fo r an ysubstantiv e degre e o f control , w e expec t suc himprovemen t t o b e muc h les s than a facto r o f two , leaving th e 33-yea r cost-effectivenes s wel l above $150,00 0 pe r urba nto n o f P M control . Further , EPA' s assessmen t i s tha t fue l aromatic s contro l i s no t necessaryfo r complianc e wit hemissio n standards , and , i nfact , tha t an yemission s effect , o r overal l environmen t benefit , woul d b e smal l or negligible .

-43

-P.4 5

Therefore , EPAbelieve s i t woul d b e inappropriat e t o propos e mor e stringen t control s a t thi s time .
A t th e same time , capping aromatic s a t curren t level s woul d likel yentai l onl yoperationa l adjustment s withi nth e refiner yan d n o nee d fo r ne wequipment . Couple d wit h contro l o f onl yon-highwa ydiese l fuel , w e expec t suc ha cap t o entai l littl e cost . EPAbelieve s i t i s appropriat e t o propos e suc ha cap todayan d ha s chose n a minimu mcetan e specificatio n (recommende d i nth e join t industr yproposal ) a s a mean s o f s o doing . However , i t i s uncertai n whethe r setting a cetan e indexspecificatio n i s th e mos t effectiv e metho d o f capping aromatics . A s describe d mor e thoroughl y i n Sectio n Xo f thi s preamble , EP Ai s requesting comment s o n th e adequacyo f thi s propose d specificatio n a s a mean s o f capping aromatics .
VII . Leadtime Th e effectiv e dat e o f th e diese l fue l regulation s propose d i n today' s rulemaking i s base d o ntwo factors . One , refiner s nee d time t o design , purchase , an d instal l th e require d processing equipment . Two , th e benefit s o f sulfur contro l i n expanding th e technologica l option s fo r complianc e wit hth e 199 4 heavy-dut ydiese l particulat e regulation s mak e i t highl ydesirabl e tha t today' s propose d regulation s tak e effec t prio r t o th e introductio n o f th e
-44

-P.4 6

199 4 mode l year . EPAcontracte d wit hSC I t o stud yth e leadtim e necessaryfo r complying wit hth e propose d regulations , taking int o accoun t th e potentia l burde nt o th e refining industr yo f th e RVP regulation s propose d i n 198 7 (5 2 F R31274) . Considering th e amoun t o f capita l equipmen t necessary , SC I conclude d that , i f on-highwayan d off-highwaydiese l fue l coul d b e segregated , complianc e coul d b e achievabl e b ylat e 1993 , give npromulgatio no f a fina l rul e b

ymid-1990 . I f segregatio no f diese l fuel s prove d infeasible , SC I conclude d tha t complianc e migh t requir e a longe r leadtime .
I n th e join t industryproposa l submitte d t o EPA , th e oi l refiner s propose d tha t diese l fue l containing n o greate r tha n 0.0 5 percen t sulfur b yweigh t coul d b e supplie d b

yOctobe r l , 1993 . Th e proposa l indicate d tha t segregatio n o f on-highwayan d off-highwaydiese l woul d likel yoccur t o some extent . Thus , bot hthos e organization s responsibl e fo r th e join t industryproposa l an d SC I agre e tha t complianc e coul d tak e plac e b ylat e 1993 . Therefore , an effectiv e dat e fo r today' s propose d regulation s o f Octobe r 1 , 199 3 appear s appropriate .

-45

-VIII . Enforcemen t Option s an d Selectio n

A . Introductio n Th e environmenta l goa l o f moto r fue l regulatio n i s t o improve o r protec t ai r qualit yb ycontrolling th e typ e o f fue l use d i n moto r vehicle s o r moto r vehicl e engines . Environmenta l benefit s canb e los t throughmisfueling , whe n a noncomplying or inappropriat e fue l i s use d i n a moto r vehicle . Regulation s coul d forbi d misfueling itsel f o r see k t o preven t misfueling b ycontrolling fue l distribution . T o reac hth e environmenta l goa l wit hth e mos t efficien t us e o f enforcemen t resources , moto r fue l regulation s ar e bes t targete d a t th e fue l distributio n network .

A s i n al l regulation s controlling th e marketing o f moto r fuels , th e fac t tha t moto r fue l passe s throughth e contro l o f man

yparties , fromrefine r t o retailer , befor e reaching th e consumer , raise s question s o f responsibilit y an d contro l whe n violation s ar e identified . Thi s aspec t o f th e distributio n systemraise s two principa l issue s pertaining t o enforcement : l ) a t wha t poin t i nth e distributio n networ k shoul d diese l fue l b e require d t o mee t standards , an

d 2 ) whic hpartie s shoul d b e hel d legall y responsibl e fo r violation s o f thes e standard s a t th e variou s point s i n th e distributio nnetwork . Eac ho f thes e issue s wil l b e discusse d i n turn . -46

-P.4 8

B . Poin t o f Applicatio n

An importan t consideratio naffecting enforcemen t i s th e issu e o f wher e i nth e distributio nnetwor k standard s wil l b e applied . Th e option s considere d b yth e Agenc yi n deciding wher e th e diese l fue l standard s shoul d appl y include :
1 . A t al l site s i n th e distributio n network ;
2 . Onl ysite s unde r th e contro l o f "downstream " parties , including retai l outlet s an d wholesal e purchaser-consumers ; 3 . Onl ysite s unde r th e contro l o f "upstream " parties , including refiner s an d importers ;
4 . Site s controlle d b ybot h"downstream " an d "midstream " parties , including retai l outlets , wholesal e purchaser-consumers , blending facilities , bul k terminals , an d bul k plants ; an

d

5 . Site s controlle d b ybot h"upstream " an d "midstream " parties , including refineries , impor t an d blending facilities , bul k terminals , an d bul k plants .

-47

-I n choosing among thes e options , some o f th e factor s

whic hwer e considere d b yth e Agenc ywere : 1 ) whic hpla n offer s th e bes t chanc e o f preventing a noncomplying fue l fromreaching consumers , 2 ) th e amoun t o f resource s neede d fo r successfu l enforcemen t o f th e regulations , taking int o consideratio n th e numbe r o f facilitie s tha t wil l hav e t o b e monitore d an

d th e difficult yo f identifying th e part ywh o initiall yintroduce d th e noncomplying fue l int o th e distributio n network , an d 3 ) whic hpla nwoul d mos t effectivel yencourag e qualit ycontro l measure s an d discourag e fue l switching (the us e o f les s expensiv e noncomplying diese l fuel) . Highwaydiese l engine s canoperat e equall ywel l o n eithe r off-highwayo r on-highwa ydiese l fuel . Onl y on-highwaydiese l fuel , however , wil l bea r th e cos t o f additiona l processing require d fo r complianc e wit htoday' s propose d standards . Thus , i t i s likel ytha t ther e wil l b e a possibilit yof , an d an economi c incentive for , fue l switching a t eac hpoin t i n th e distributio nnetwork . Therefore , i n orde r t o ensur e tha t unregulate d diese l fue l i s no t use d i n highwayvehicles , th e Agenc ytodaypropose s a diese l fue l standard tha t i s applicabl e throughou t th e entir e distributio n network . Thi s approac hi s consiste d wit htha t use d i nth e lea d i n gasolin e an d recentl y promulgate d volatilit yregulations .

-48

-P.5 0 C . Lega l Responsibilit yfo r Violation s

I n general , ther e ar e thre e option s fo r th e assignmen t o f lega l responsibilit yfo r diese l fue l standard s violations . Th e firs t optio ni s t o plac e lega l responsibilit yonl yo nth e part ywh o originall yintroduce d th e noncomplying diese l fue l int o commerce . Thi s woul d b e th e part ywh o manufactured , blended , o r initiall y mislabele d th e noncomplying diese l fuel . Unde r thi s option , whe n a violatio n i s found , th e responsibl e part y mus t b e identifie d b ytracing th e noncomplying diese l fue l bac k throughth e distributio nchai n t o it s source .
Asecon d optio n i s t o hol d liabl e th e regulate d part y offering fo r sale , supplying o r transporting a noncomplying diese l fuel . Unde r thi s enforcemen t approach , th e sourc e o f th e noncomplying diese l fue l nee d no t b e identified . Everyregulate d part yselling , supplying o r transporting diese l fue l o r offering t o sel l o r supply , woul d effectivel yb e responsibl e fo r monitoring th e diese l fue l t o verif ytha t th e fue l complie s wit hstandards .

-49

-P.5 1 Th e third optio n include s bot htype s o f liabilit y describe d above bu t goe s on e step furthe r t o includ e a vicariou s liabilit yprovision . Vicariou s liability , fo r purpose s o f diese l fue l regulation , mean s tha t partie s upstrea mi n th e distributio nchai ncanb e hel d responsibl e fo r violation s whic har e foun d a t downstrea

mfacilitie s ove r whic htheycoul d exercis e some control . Vicariou s liabilityraise s a presumptio no f liability , tha t can b e rebutte d b

yth e regulate d party , a s specifie d i nth e defense s include d i n th e propose d regulations . Th e Agenc ypropose s tha t th e third option , wit hth e vicariou s liabilit yprovisions , b e implemented . Thi s approac hha s bee n use d b yth e Agenc yi n it s fue l contaminatio n liabilit yregulation s (4 0 CF R80.23) . I t ha s als o bee n adopte d i nth e recentl ypromulgate d volatilit y contro l regulation s (4 0 CF R80.27) . Whil e thes e two set s o f regulation s cove r gasolin e and ' includ e specification s differen t fro

mthos e propose d i n thi s regulation , essentiall yth e same partie s ar e covere d b yal l thre e set s o f regulations . Therefore , i t i s appropriat e tha t thes e propose d regulation s covering diese l fue l contai n th e same liabilit yscheme whic hha s previousl ybee n applie d t o th e regulate d parties . Th e commonalit yo f thes e enforcemen t scheme s simplifie s th e industry' s abilit yt o compl yan d enhance s th e Agency' s enforcemen t o f th e regulations .

-50

-P.5 2

D . Complianc e Monitoring

I n th e cas e o f th e lea d i ngasolin e contro l regulations , industr ycomplianc e wit hth e regulation s i s monitore d througha combinatio no f auditing an d spo t sampling i n th e field . Th e gasolin e volatilit yregulation s wil l b e enforce d primaril ythroughspo t sampling a t al l point s i n th e distributio n chain . Monitoring complianc e wit hth e diese l fue l standards , however , present s some enforcemen t problem s whic hdiffe r fro mthos e o f gasoline . A s th e diese l fue l industr ynote s i nth e proposa l i t an d othe r relate d industrie s an d association s submitte d t o th e Agency , th e diese l fue l industry' s pas t experienc e wit hth e collectio n o f fue l excis e taxe s ha s show ntha t th e greate r th e numbe r o f supplier s an d resellers , th e mor e difficult , costl yan

d ineffective auditing can be . Anothe r o f th e difficultie s i n verifying complianc e wit hdiese l fue l standard s i s distinguishing betwee ndiese l moto r fue l whic hi s intende d fo r on-highwa yus e an

d meet s standard s fo r on-highwaydiese l fuel , an d diese l fue l whic h i s intende d fo r off-highwayus e an d i s no t i ncomplianc e wit hon-highwaydiese l fue l standards . Th e sulfur conten t an d cetan e indexo f diese l fue l can onl yb e determine d throughsophisticate d laboratorytest s whic hwil l mak e fiel d complianc e testing impossible .

-51

-T o addres s thi s problem , th e diese l fue l industry

suggest s tha t off-highwaydiese l fue l b e dye d a s a wayo f marking o r labeling the off-highwaydiese l fuel . Th e Agencyfind s th e industry' s suggestio nt o b e a practica l one . Therefore , the Agencypropose s t o establis hth e presumptio n tha t an ydiese l fue l i n th e contro l o f a regulate d part yi s on-highwa ydiese l fue l an

d subjec t t o th e standard s o f thi s propose d regulation , unles s i t i s visibl ydyed . Mor e specifically , EPApropose s tha t an y diese l fue l whic hdoe s no t showvisibl e evidenc e o f being dye d wit h1 , 4 dialkylamin o - anthraquinon e (whichha s a characteristi c blu e colo r an d i s currentl yuse d i n some grade s o f aviatio n gasoline) , wil l b e considere d t o b e subjec t t o th e propose d standards . Comment s ar e requeste d o n thi s approach , including th e Agency' s choic e o f dy e an d whethe r a concentratio no f dye shoul d b e specifie d along wit hth e visibl e colo r requirement . Thi s scheme o f dyeing wil l plac e th e impetu s o nth e industr yt o ad

d th e dye a t th e earlies t possibl e poin t onc e th e decisio n i s mad e tha t th e diese l fue l wil l b e use d fo r othe r than moto r vehicl e purposes . Onc e dy e i s adde d t o th e non-highwaydiese l fuel , i t canno t b e remove d late r i n th e distributio n chai ni f th e fue l i s subsequentl yuse d fo r moto r vehicles . An ymixing o f complying an d noncomplying blend s wil l als o b e apparent . Requiring tha t on-highway diese l fue l b e dyed , o nth e othe r hand , woul d permi t distributor s t o wai t t o th e las t poin t i n th e distributio n chai n t o dy e th e fuel , preventing EPAfromenforcing th e sulfur conten t an d aromatic s standard s earlie r i nth e

-52

-P.5 4

distributio n chain . However , wit hth e off-highwayfue l dyed , th e decisio n t o produc e o r impor t complying fue l wil l probabl yb e mad e a t th e refineryo r impor t facilit yan d n o dye woul d b e added .
I n additio n t o th e usua l contro l afforde d b yth e us e o f dyes , th e Agenc ywil l als o collec t diese l fue l sample s a t an ypoin t i n th e distributio nchain . Thes e sample s wil l b e collecte d according t o th e procedure s outline d i n Appendi xGo f thes e propose d regulations . Thes e sample s wil l the n b e teste d according t o th e ASTMstandard tes t method s fo r sulfur percentag e (ASTM-2622-82 ) an d cetan e index(ASTM-976) . Th e ASTMmethod s fo r determining cetan e indexan

d sulfur percentag e wil l b e incorporate d by referenc e i n th e fina l rule .
IX . Diese l Engin e Certificatio n Fue l

EPAha s consistentl yrequire d tha t diese l fue l fo r certificatio n (an d subsequen t complianc e testing ) b e representative o f commerciall yavailabl e diese l fuel . A s such , i t i s appropriat e t o propos e tha t th e sulfur leve l o f fue l use d t o certif y199 4 an d late r engine s b e n o mor e tha n 0.0 5 weigh t percent . (The curren t specificatio n fo r aromatic s an

d cetan e appear s adequate , s o n o chang e her e appear s necessary. ) However , 1991-9 3 engine s woul d operat e o n bot hcurren t fue l (roughl y0.2 5 weigh t percen t sulfur ) an d controlle d fuel , s o th e questio n arise s a s t o whic h fuel , o r a combinatio n thereof , shoul d b e use d i n certification . -53

-Th e join t industr yproposa l requeste d tha t 1991-9 3 certificatio n fue l contai n n o mor e than0.0 5 weigh t percen t sulfur . EPAbelieve s thi s woul d b e inappropriat e sinc e thes e engine s woul d b e operate d on highsulfur fue l fo r muc ho f thei r usefu l live s an d thei r emission s coul d excee d th e PMstandard s during thi s time , whil e jus t meeting th e standard s o n low-sulfur fuel . However , i t als o appear s inappropriat e t o ignor e th e fac t tha t thes e engine s woul d b e operate d o n low-sulfur fue l fo r a portio no f thei r usefu l lives . Thus , EPAbelieve s i t i s appropriat e t o requir e thes e engine s t o certif yo n a fue l wit ha sulfur leve l representing a n averag e o f wha t wil l b e use d ove r th e engines ' usefu l life . W e considere d doing thi s fo r eac h mode l yea r individually , bu t thi s woul d b e costl yan d very comple xlogistically , a s eac hlaboratorywoul d hav e t o maintai n stock s o f five diese l fuel s fo r man yyear s t o come . Thus , w e propos e tha t a singl e averag e sulfur leve l fue l b e use d fo r 1991-9 3 certification . Base d o nmileag e accumulatio n dat a take n fromheavy-duty , diese l vehicles , thi s averag e sulfur leve l i s 0.1 0 weigh t percent . Thu s th e certificatio n level s o f 1991-199 3 mode l yea r engine s woul d represen t th e averag e in-us e emission s ove r th e ful l usefu l lif e o f thes e engines . I t i s importan t t o note ,

"Calculatio n o f Averag e Fue l Sulfur Leve l o f 1991-9 3 Mode l Yea r Heavy-Dut yDiesels, " Timoth ySprik , EPA , December , 1988 .

-54

-P.56 _

however , tha t EPAbelieve s that , fo r th e reason s discusse d previously , actua l in-us e emission s o f thes e vehicle s wil l no t b e affecte d b

ythi s chang e t o th e certificatio n fuel .
X . Descriptio n o f th e Proposa l Thi s sectio n summarize s i n detai l th e propose d contro l measure s containe d i ntoday' s notice . Th e detaile d requirement s mayb e foun d i n thei r entiret yi n th e propose d regulation s publishe d wit htoday' s notice .
A . Commercia l Fue l Requirement s 1 . Standard s Afte r Septembe r 30 , 1993 , al l diese l fue l sold , supplied , offere d fo r sal e or supply , dispensed , o r transporte d i n an ystat e fo r us e i n on-highwaydiese l vehicle s shal l contai nn o mor e tha n0.0 5 percen t sulfur b y weight , an

d shal l hav e a minimu mcetan e indexo f 40 . EPA i s awar e tha t th e effectiv e dat e o f complianc e fo r refiner s wil l b e prio r t o Septembe r 30 , 1993 , becaus e th e on-highway diese l fue l mus t b e full yavailabl e throughou t th e distributio n systemb ytha t date .

-55
-2 . Enforcemen t Provision s

a* Overal l Enforcemen t Scheme . Th e propose d enforcemen t provision s i n thi s notic e ar e base d o n th e requiremen t tha t on-highwa ydiese l fue l hav e a cetan e index numbe r o f a t leas t 4 0 an d tha t th e percentag e o f sulfur by weigh t b e n o greate r than0.0 5 percen t a t al l point s i nth e distributio n network . Al l partie s i n th e distributio n networ k ar e covere d b ythes e regulations , including refiners , importers , distributors , carriers , resellers , retai l an

d wholesal e purchaser-consumers . An ydiese l fue l fo r us e i n moto r vehicle s mus t compl ywit hthes e standard s whe n introduce d int o commerce , sold , offere d fo r sale , supplied , offere d fo r supply , dispensed , o r transported . Basically , onc e diese l fue l ha s bee nintroduce d int o th e distributio n network , th e fue l mus t compl ywit hthes e standard s a t al l point s up t o an d including th e time i t leave s th e pump . Th e propose d regulation s defin e cetane , cetan e index , diese l fuel , sulfur percentage , refinery , retai l outlet , distribution , reselling , wholesal e purchaser-consume r an d carrier . Method s o f determining cetan e indexan d sulfur percentag e wil l b e incorporate d b yreferenc e t o 4 0 CF RPar t 8 0 an d ar e ASTMstandard tes t metho d an d 7622-82 , respectively .

-56

-P.5 8 Thi s notic e als o set s fort hpropose d regulation s establishing presumption s o f liabilityfo r partie s foun d wit hnoncomplying fuel . Ther e i s als o a vicariou s liabilityprovisio n whic hhold s certai n upstrea mpartie s i n th e distributio n network responsibl e for violation s a t downstrea

mfacilitie s ove r whic htheycoul d hav e exercise d some control . Defense s t o vicariou s liabilityar e include d i n th e propose d regulations . b . Sampling Methodology . Th e propose d sampling methodolog

yi s se t fort hi nAppendi xG . Th e sampling procedure s include nozzl e sampling , bottl e sampling , tap sampling , an

d manua l line sampling . Th e purpos e o f th e sampling methodolog yi s t o assur e tha t th e sampl e take ni s tru e an d unaltere d an

d i s representativ e o f th e diese l fue l being tested .

c . Testing Methodologies . Tw o testing methodologie s hav e bee nproposed . Th e firs t one , ASTM standard tes t metho d 2622-82 , determine s th e percentag e o f sulfur i n th e diese l fue l b ymean s o f X-ra

yspectrometry . Th e secon

d test , ASTMstandard tes t method , i s a metho d fo r estimating th e ASTMcetan e indexo f th e diese l fue l fro m th e AP I gravit yan

d mid-boiling point . Th e issu e o f wha t enforcemen t toleranc e shoul d b e allowe d whe n using thes e tes t method s wil l b e addresse d i n
-57
-P.5 9

a manne r consisten t wit hothe r mobil e sourc e relate d standards . Th e diese l fue l refiner s an d othe r regulate d partie s wil l b e expecte d t o mee t th e applicabl e sulfur an d cetan e limit s a s establishe d b yth e regulation s whe n finalized . Theymus t tak e tes t variabilit yint o accoun t i n producing an

d marketing diese l fue l an d canno t rel yo nth e Agencyt o automaticall yprovid e a nenforcemen t toleranc e i n additio n t o th e absolut e standard s establishe d fo r sulfur or cetan e limits . I f the sulfur conten t o f moto r vehicl e diese l fue l wer e foun d t o contai n0.0 6 weigh t percen t sulfur an

d th e applicabl e standard wer e 0.0 5 weigh t percen t sulfur , thi s woul d b e considere d a violatio n o f th e regulatorystandard tha t coul d subjec t liabl e partie s t o enforcemen t action . d . Liabilit yProvisions . Th e propose d liabilit y provision s (4 0 CFR80.2 9 through80.31 ) ar e patterne d afte r th e liabilityscheme use d i nth e Agency' s lea d contaminatio n regulations , a t 4 0 CFR80.2 3 an d ar e almos t identica l t o th e volatilit yregulations , a t 4 0 CFR80.27 . On e o f th e mai n feature s o f thes e provision s i s th e presumptio n o f liabilit ywher e regulate d partie s ar e foun d offering fo r sale , supplying , or transporting diese l fue l whic hfail s t o mee t th e requirement s fo r sulfur percentag e o r cetan e index . I t i s th e responsibilit yo f th e regulate d part yt o monito r th e diese l fue l whic hi s being offere d fo r sale , supplie d o r transporte d contro l t o verif ytha t th e fue l complie s wit hstandards . -58

-Anothe r importan t featur e o f the diese l fue l

enforcemen t provision s i s th e inclusiono f vicariou s liabilityprovisions , muc hlik e thos e use d successfull yi n th e lea d contaminatio n regulation s an d recentl ypromulgate d i n the volatilit yregulations . Vicariou s liabilit ymean s tha t partie s upstrea mfro m th e sit e o f the violatio n ca n b e hel d responsibl e fo r violation s foun d a t downstrea

m facilitie s ove r whic htheyca nexercis e some control . Th e propose d regulation s wil l als o exten d vicariou s liabilit y fo r violation s a t non-brande d retai l outle t an d wholesal e purchaser-consumer s t o refiner s an d importers . Thi s chang e fro mpreviou s scheme s place s al l partie s o n th e same leve l i n term s o f oversigh t fo r assuring produc t quality . Year s o f enforcemen t experienc e wit hth e gasolin e regulation s hav e show

n tha t a far large r percentag e o f violation s occur a t non-brande d facilities . Defense s t o vicariou s liabilit yar e se t fort hi nth e propose d regulations . Basically , a nupstrea

mpart yca n avoi d vicariou s liabilit yi f tha t part yca nshowtha t th e violatio n wa s cause d b yaction s o f someon e othe r tha ntha t party' s employee s o r agents . Fo r th e purpos e o f thes e propose d regulations , carrie s wil l b e presume d t o b e th e agent s o f distributor s an d ar e als o presumptivel yliable . Th e specifi c evidenc e require d t o suppor t thi s defens e varie s depending on whic hpart yi s raising th e defense , bu t i n genera l a part ymus t showproo f o f some kind o f
-59

-P.6 1

oversigh t program , suc ha s record s o f testing o nth e diese l fue l or a contractua l obligatio n betwee nth e upstrea m an d th e downstrea

m partie s involved .
B . Fue l Specification s for Vehicl e Certificatio n an d Othe r Complianc e Testing Certificatio n fue l use d fo r 1991-199 3 mode l yea r engine s woul d contai n0.1 0 sulfur percentag e b yweigh t (±0.0 2 weigh t percent) . Beginning wit hth e 199 4 mode l year , certificatio n fue l woul d hav e a sulfur conten t ranging fro

m0.0 3 t o 0.0 5 sulfur percentag e b yweight . Al l othe r complianc e testing (e.g. , recall , selectiv e enforcemen t audits ) woul d b e conducte d using tes t fuel s containing th e same amoun t o f sulfur a s th e tes t fue l use d i n certifitying th e particula r mode l yea r vehicl e being tested . Tha t is , 1991-199 3 mode l yea r engine s woul d b e teste d wit hfue l containing 0.1 0 sulfur percentag e b y weigh t ( + 0.0 2 weigh t percent ) an d 199 4 an

d late r mode l yea r engine s woul d b e teste d wit hfue l having a sulfur conten t ranging fro m 0.0 3 t o 0.05 ' sulfur percentag e b y weight . C . Request s fo r Commen t o n Specifi c Issue s

W e reques t an

d encourag e genera l an d specifi c comment s wit hsupporting dat a an d analysi s onth e following issues .

-60

-l . I n th e Draf t RIA , th e cos t an d feasibilit yo f fue l sulfur an

d aromatic s contro l wa s evaluate d ove r th e entir e rang e o f on-highwa yan d off-highwa

ydistillat e segregatio n scenarios . EPArequest s comment s o n al l element s o f th e refining cos t analysi s a s presente d i n th e Draf t RIA . EPAspecificall yrequest s comment s o n th e feasibilityo f an

d exten t t o whic hsuchsegregatio nwoul d likel ytak e place , a s wel l a s th e likel ycos t o f s o modifying th e fue l distributio nsystem . Comment s o nth e amoun t o f exces s desulfurizatio ncapacit yavailabl e an d th e time perio d ove r whic hi t wil l b e availabl e ar e als o requested . T o th e exten t tha t increase d capacit yi s required , comment s ar e als o requeste d o nth e potentia l fo r increase d VO C o r othe r emission s fro mrefineries .

. 2 . EPAha s assesse d th e impac t o f a sulfur reductio n o n engin e manufacture r abilit yt o compl ywit hth e 199 4 particulat e standard . Thi s assessmen t wa s base d o n projection s o f likel yengine-ou t emission s an d thei r compositio n an

d estimate s o f specifi c aftertreatmen t devic e costs , feasibilitie s an d efficiencies . Pleas e provid e specifi c comment s o n eac ho f th e element s o f thi s analysis . 3 . Pleas e commen t o nth e effec t o f fue l sulfur reduction s o n diese l emissions .

•61

-P.6 3 4 . W e reques t comment s o nth e effec t o f aromatic s contro l o n particulate , HC , CO , an d NO xemissions , particularl yth e relative effec t o f differen t aromati c specie s (e.g. , mono- , di- , tri-cyclic ) o nemissions , an d ho wthi s effec t varie s betwee n older , high-emitting engine s an d future , low-emitting engines . W e als o reques t commen t o n whethe r cetan e indexo r aromatic s conten t i s th e caus e o f th e occasiona l NO xemissio n effec t an d whethe r thi s effec t woul d occur in-us e wit haromatic s control . 5 . W e reques t specifi c comment s o n th e assumption s an d methodologyuse d i n th e analysi s o f th e effect s o f a fue l sulfur reductio n o n engin e an d vehicl e life . 6 . W e reques t specifi c comment s o n EPA' s analysi s o f th e amoun t o f urbansulfat e particulat e produce d from S0 2 emissions . 7 . W e reques t comment s on th e credit s use d t o valu e th e contro l o f emission s o f gaseou s pollutant s i nth e cos t effectivenes s analysi s presente d i n th e Draf t RIA .

-62

-P.6 4 8 . An analysi s o f th e potentia l economi c benefit s o f trading an

d banking o f sulfur credit s i nth e contex t o f thi s propose d regulatio nwa s performe d fo r EPAb ySCI . Th e SC I analysi s wa s base d o n creating credit s byproviding fue l wit hlowe r sulfur level s than curren t averag e fue l sulfur conten t level s fo r eac ho f th e five PADDs . Result s o f th e stud

y(availabl e i nPubli c Docke t A-86-03 ) showe d tha t a significan t saving s t o th e refining industrywoul d resul t i f credit s coul d b e create d an d banke d prio r t o th e impositio n o f control s i nOctobe r 1993 . However , refining industr ymembers , i nth e join t industr yproposa l t o EPA , specificall ystate d tha t banking an d trading woul d no t b e desirable . EPA' s previou s experienc e wit hlead trading an d banking unde r th e lead phasedow n regulation s ha s show ntha t enforcemen t o f a bank an d trading scheme applicabl e t o sulfur conten t woul d b e extremel ydifficul t t o enforce .

EPArequest s comment s o nth e merit s an d demerit s o f phase d an

d "non-phased " (a s define d b yth e SC I analysis ) sulfur regulations , i n whic hrefiner s coul d ear ncredit s fo r achieving lowe r than certai nspecifie d level s o f sulfur i n diese l fue l prio r t o Octobe r 1 , 1993 , i n exchang e fo r permissio n t o sel l highe r tha n 0.0 5 percen t on-highway diese l fue l fo r a perio d thereafter . I t shoul d b e recognize d tha t i f th e engin e exhaus t characteristic s o f th e pre - an

d post-199 4 diese l flee t ar e likel yt o differ , ful l credi t mayno t b e granted , (i.e. , th e credit s coul d b e
-63

-require d t o b e exchange d a t othe r than1: 1 afte r 1994) .

EPAi s intereste d i n comment s a s t o whethe r reduction s i n diese l sulfur prio r t o Octobe r 1 , 1993 , ar e sufficientl y valuabl e t o meri t th e implementatio n o f a credi t banking an d trading system . Doe s th e 0.1 0 sulfur percentag e certificatio n fue l specificatio n fo r 1991-9 3 engine s affec t th e desirabilit yo f credi t trades ? Wha t reporting requirement s woul d b e necessaryt o enforc e a banking an d trading program ?
9 . A s par t o f th e enforcemen t scheme outline d i n thi s preamble , EPAha s propose d tha t diese l fuel s intende d exclusivel yfo r off-highwayus e coul d b e distinguishe d b y th e additio n o f 1 , 4 - dialkylamin o - anthraquinon e dye . Th e Agencyi s intereste d i n comment s fro mth e industrya s t o th e practicalit yo f thi s approach . Specifi c issue s upo n whic hcomment s ar e sough t includ e wha t specifi c dye s shoul d b e use d an

d whethe r thes e dye s presen t an yhealth-base d ris k eithe r i n th e fue l or whe n combusted ? I s an ytes t beyond the propose d visibilit ystandard require d t o identif ydye d fuel ? Wil l th e inclusio no f suc ha dy e presen t an

yproblem s t o th e user s o f off-highwaydiese l fuel ? Wher e i n the distributio n systemcanthi s approac h b e implemented . I s th e dyeing rul e feasibl e t o appl yt o imported distillates ? I f so , ho wwoul d i t b e implemente d operationally ? D o an ycountrie s currentl yus e a dyeing progra mfo r diese l fue l contro l purpose ? I f so , wha t experienc e hav e th e refiner s had wit hth e succes s o f thes e programs ? Cost ?

-64

-P.6 6 10 . EPAha s propose d setting a minimu mcetan e inde x specificatio n o f 4 0 a s a mean s o f capping fue l aromatic s a t curren t levels . However , fue l surveydat a show s tha t diese l fue l aromatic s correlate s rathe r poorl ywit hcetan e index , an

d mayno t b e a sufficien t safeguard agains t futur e aromatic s increases . EPArequest s specifi c comment s o nth e effectivenes s wit hwhic hth e propose d cetan e index specificatio n woul d contro l fue l aromatic s an d als o o n th e merit s an

d demerit s o f othe r possibl e mean s o f capping fue l aromatics , including direc t measuremen t o f diese l aromatic s b yFluorescen t Indicato r Adsorptio n(FIA) . EPArequest s comment s o n whethe r th e leve l o f suc ha cap shoul d b e se t a t curren t averag e aromati c level s (requiring th e contro l o f fuel s whic har e currentl yhighe r tha naverage) , o r a t les s stringen t level s (e.g. , 75t hpercentile , 90t h percentile , etc.) .
XI . Publi c Participatio n
Comment s an

d th e Publi c Docket . A s i n pas t rulemaking actions , EPAdesire s ful l publi c participatio ni narriving a t our fina l decisions . I nadditio nt o thos e area s wher e specifi c commen t ha s bee n requeste d earlie r i nthi s preamble , EPAsolicit s comment s o n al l aspect s o f today' s proposa l fro

mal l intereste d parties . Whereve r applicable , ful l supporting dat a an d detaile d analyse s shoul d als o b e submitte d t o allowEPAt o mak e maximu m us e o f th e
-65

-comments . Commenter s ar e especiall yencourage d t o provid e

specifi c suggestion s fo r change s t o an yaspect s o f th e proposa l tha t theybeliev e nee d t o b e modifie d o r improved . Al l comment s shoul d b e directe d t o th e EPAAi r Docke t Section , Docke t No . A-86-0 3 [se e "Addresses"] . Th e Agencywil l bas e it s decisio n o n th e discloseabl e publi c record . However , th e Agencyrealize s tha t some manufacturer s maywan t EPAt o conside r pertinen t informatio n tha t mayb e proprietary . Commenter s desiring t o submi t proprietaryinformatio nfo r consideratio n shoul d clearl ydistinguis hsuc hinformatio n from othe r comment s t o th e greates t possibl e extent , an d clearl ylabe l i t "Confidentia l Busines s Information. " Submission s containing suchproprietaryinformatio nshoul d b e sen t directl yt o th e contac t perso n liste d above , an d no t t o th e publi c docket , t o ensur e tha t proprietaryinformatio n i s no t inadvertentl yplace d i n th e docket . I f a commente r want s EPAt o bas e th e fina l rul e i npar t o na submissio n labele d a s confidentia l busines s information , the n a nonconfidentia l versio no f th e documen t whic hsummarize s th e keydat a o r informatio n shoul d b e sen t t o th e docket . Informatio n covere d b ya clai mo f confidentialit ywil l b e disclose d b

yEPAonl yt o th e exten t allowe d an d b yth e procedure s se t fort hi n4 0 CF RPar t 2 . I f n o clai mo f confidentialit yaccompanie s th e submissio n whe ni t i s -66

-P.6 8

receive d b

yEPA , i t mayb e mad e availabl e t o th e publi c withou t furthe r notic e t o th e commenter .

XII . StatutoryAuthorit y Authorit yfor th e action s propose d i nthi s notic e i s grante d t o EPAb

ysection s 114 , 202 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 211 , an d 30 1 o f th e CleanAi r Ac t [4 2 U.S.C . 7414 , 7521 , 7525 , 7541 , 7542 , 7545 , an d 7601] .
XIII . Lis t o f Subject s 4 0 CF RPar t 8 0

Fue l additives , Diese l fuel , Moto r vehicl e pollution , Penalties , Reporting an d recordkeeping requirements . 4 0 CFRPar t 8 6 Administrativ e practic e an d procedures . Ai r pollutio n control , Diese l fuel , Moto r vehicles , Labeling , Moto r vehicl e pollution , Reporting an d recordkeeping requirements .

-67

-P.6 9

XIV . RequlatoryFlexibilit yAnalysi s Sectio n 60 5 o f th e RegulatoryFlexibilit yAc t require s EPAt o performan analysi s o f th e impac t o f propose d regulation s o n smal l entitie s whe n a significan t impac t o n a substantia l numbe r o f suc hentitie s woul d occur . An analysi s o f thi s issu e wa s performe d fo r EPAb ySCI . According t o th e SC I report , 7 4 refineries , representing 8. 4 percen t o f th e tota l U.S . crud e distillatio ncapacity , wer e classifie d a s smal l refiner s a t th e beginning o f 1986 . SC I use d aggregat e refinerymodeling t o estimat e th e cos t o f modifying fue l qualit ya t thes e facilities . Th e modeling result s showe d that , fo r thos e refinerie s whic h coul d financ e th e necessaryequipment , sulfur contro l cost s wer e nearl yth e same fo r smal l refiner s a s fo r th e res t o f th e U.S . refining industry . Contro l cost s t o reduc e bot h sulfur an

d aromatic s wer e fro m2 6 t o 5 1 percen t highe r fo r smal l refiners .
SC I di d stat e tha t th e investment s require d fo r fue l contro l migh t b e difficul t fo r some smal l refiner s t o finance , an

d migh t caus e some smal l refiner s t o discontinu e th e productio n o f highwaydiese l fuel . Thi s shoul d no t b e an insurmountabl e problem , however , sinc e thes e refiner s shoul d b e abl e t o shif t thei r produc t slate s t o mee t "off-highway " distillat e need s i nthei r geographi c area , whil e othe r refiner s wit hhydrodesulfurizatio ncapacit y(or
-68

-P.7 0

the financia l abilit yt o buil d it ) woul d increas e "on-highway " diese l production . Th e reques t fo r produc t slate , flexibilit yi nth e join t industr yproposa l suggest s tha t thi s approac hwoul d b e take n b ysom e refiners . Thus , thi s propose d regulatio nshoul d no t hav e a significan t impac t o n a substantia l numbe r o f smal l entities , i f segregatio n i n th e distributio nsystemtake s place .
XV . Administrativ e Designatio n an d RegulatoryAnalysi s Th e Administrato r ha s determine d tha t thi s propose d actio n woul d constitut e a majo r regulation , an d accordingl y a Draf t RegulatoryImpac t Analysi s ha s bee nprepare d a s require d unde r Executiv e Orde r 12291 . Thi s analysi s include s detaile d assessment s o f th e estimate d economi c an d environmenta l impact s o f th e regulation s propose d here , a s wel l a s thoroughanalyse s o f th e technologica l feasibilit y o f th e propose d emissio nstandard s an d othe r regulatory provision s an

d th e alternative s tha t wer e considere d i n th e developmen t o f thi s proposal . Th e Draf t RegulatoryImpac t Analysi s ha s bee nplace d i n th e publi c docke t reference d a t th e beginning o f today' s notice . I n addition , intereste d partie s mayobtai n singl e copie s througha writte n reques t t o th e publi c contac t listed previously .

-69

--E7ZJ L Thi s propose d regulatio n wa s submitte d t o th e Offic e o f Managemen t an

d Budge t (OMB ) fo r reviewa s require d b y Executiv e Orde r 12291 . An ywritte n comment s fro m OM B an

d an yEPArespons e t o thos e comment s ar e i nth e publi c docke t for thi s rulemaking .
XVI . Reporting an

d Recordkeeping Requirement s Thi s propose d rulemaking doe s no t impos e an yreporting o r record-keeping requirements , an d thu s i s no t subjec t t o th e Paperwor k Reductio n Act , 4 4 U.S.C . 350 1 e t seq .

DAT E ADMINISTRATOR

-70

-Fo r th e reason s se t ou t i nth e preamble , Part s 8 0 an d 8 6 o f Titl e 4 0 o f the Cod e o f Federa l Regulation s ar e propose d t o b e amende d a s follows :

PART 80--REGULATIO

NO F FUEL S AN

D FUE L ADDITIVE S
1 . Th e "Authority " citatio nfo r Par t 8 0 continue s t o read a s follows : Authority : Section s 114 , 21 1 an d 301(a ) o f th e Clea n Ai r Ac t a s amended , 4 2 U.S.C . 7414 , 754 5 an d 7601(a) . 2 . Sectio n 80. 2 i s propose d t o b e amende d b yadding ne wparagraph s (w) , (x) , (y) , (z) , (aa) , (bb) , (cc) , (dd ) an d (ee ) t o read a s follows :
§ 80. 2 Definition s

(w ) "Cetan e index " o r "Calculate d cetan e index " i s a mean s fo r directl yestimating th e ASTMcetan e numbe r ( a numbe r representing th e ignitio n propertie s o f diese l engin e fue l oils ) o f distillat e fuel s fro mAP I gravit yah

d mid-boiling point .(x ) "Diese l fuel " mean s an yfue l sol d i nan yStat e an d suitabl e for us e i ndiese l moto r vehicle s an d diese l moto r vehicl e engines , an d whic hi s commonl yo r commerciall yknow

n o r sol d a s diese l fuel . (y ) "Sulfur percentage " i s th e percentag e o f sulfur b yweigh t i n diese l fue l a s determine d b yASTMstandard tes t metho d D-2622-82 .

(z ) "Refinery " mean s a plan t a t whic hdiese l fue l i s produced . (aa ) "Retai l outlet " mean s an yestablishmen t a t whic h diese l fue l i s sol d o r offere d fo r sal e fo r us e i n moto r vehicles . (bb ) "Distributor " mean s an yperso nwh o transport s or store s o r cause s th e transportatio n or storag e o f diese l fue l a t an

ypoin t betwee nan ydiese l fue l refineryan d an y retai l outle t o r wholesal e purchaser-consumer' s facilities . (cc ) "Reseller " mean s an yperso n wh o purchase s diese l fue l identifie d byth e corporate , trade , o r brand name o f a refine r fro

msuchrefine r o r a distributo r an d resell s o r transfer s i t t o retailer s o r wholesal e purchaser-consumer s displaying th e refiner' s brand , an d whos e asset s o r facilitie s ar e no t substantiall yowned , leased , o r controlle d b

ysuc hrefiner . 

### -2

-P.7 4 (dd ) "Wholesal e purchaser-consumer " mean s an y organizatio n tha t i s anultimat e consume r o f diese l fue l an d whic hpurchase s o r obtain s diese l fue l fro ma supplie r for us e i n moto r vehicle s an d receive s deliveryo f tha t produc t int o a storag e tan k o f a t leas t 550-gallo n capacit y substantiall yunde r th e contro l o f tha t organization . (ee ) "Carrier " mean s an ydistributo r wh o transport s o r store s o r cause s th e transportatio n o r storag e o f diese l fue l withou t taking titl e t o o r otherwis e altering eithe r th e qualit yo r quanit yo f th e diese l fuel .

3 . Ne wsectio n 80.2 9 i s propose d t o b e added , t o read a s follows : § 80.2 9 Control s an d prohibition s o ndiese l fue l quality . (a ) Prohibite d activities . Beginning Octobe r 1 , 1993 , n o refiner , importer , distributor , reseller , carrier , retaile r o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r shal l manufacture , introduc e int o commerce , sell , offe r fo r sale , supply , dispense , offe r fo r supply , o r transpor t an ydiese l fue l fo r us e i n moto r vehicle s unles s th e diese l fue l i s fre e o f visibl e evidenc e o f th e dy e 1 , 4 - dialkylamin o - anthraquinon e an

d ha s a cetan e indexo f a t leas t 4 0 an d a sulfur percentag e n o greate r than 0.0 5 percent . 

### -3

-P.7 5 (b ) Determinatio n o f compliance . An ydiese l fue l whic hdoe s no t showvisibl e evidenc e o f being dye d wit h1 , 4 - dialkylamin o - anthraquinon e (whichha s a characteristi c blu e color ) shal l b e considere d t o b e availabl e fo r us e i ndiese l moto r vehicle s an d moto r vehicl e engines , an d shal l b e subjec t t o the prohibition s o f paragraph(a) . Complianc e wit hth e standard s liste d i n paragraph(a ) shal l b e determine d b yth e us e o f on e o f th e sampling methodologie s specifie d i nAppendi xGt o thi s part . [The testing methodologie s specifie d fo r sulfur percentage , ASTMD-2622-82 , an d cetan e index , ASTMD-976 , wil l b e incorporate d b yreferenc e i nth e fina l regulation. ] (c ) Liability . Liabilit yfo r violation s o f paragraph(a ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e determine d according t o th e provision s o f § 80.30 . (d ) Penalties . Penaltie s fo r violation s o f paragraph(a ) o f thi s sectio nshal l b e determine d according t o th e provision s o f § 80.5 . 4 . Ne wSectio n 80.3 0 i s propose d t o b e added , t o read a s follows :
§ 80.3 0 Liabilit yfo r violation s o f diese l fue l contro l an d prohibitions .



### -4

-P.7 6 (a ) Violation s a t refiner s or importer s facilities . Wher e a violatio n o f a diese l fue l standard se t fort hi n § 80.2 9 i s detecte d a t a refineryor importer' s facility , th e refine r o r importe r shal l b e deeme d i n violation . (b ) Violation s a t carrie r facilities . Wher e a violatio n o f a diese l fue l standard se t fort hi n§ 80.2 9 i s detecte d a t a carrier' s facility , whethe r i na transpor t vehicle , i n a storag e facility , o r elsewher e a t th e facility , th e following partie s shal l b e deeme d i n violation : (1 ) Th e carrier , excep t a s provide d i nparagraph (g)(1 ) o f thi s section ; an d (2 ) Th e refine r or importe r a t whos e refineryor impor t facilit ythe diese l fue l wa s produce d o r imported , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(2 ) o f thi s section . (c ) Violation s a t brande d distributo r o r reselle r facilities . Wher e a violatio n o f a diese l fue l standard se t fort hi n § 80.2 9 i s detecte d a t a distributo r o r reseller' s facilit ywhic hi s operating unde r th e corporate , trad e o r brand name o f a refine r o r an yo f it s marketing subsidiaries , th e following partie s shal l b e deeme d i n violation :



### -5
-P.7 7 (1 ) Th e distributo r o r reseller , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(3 ) o f thi s section ; (2 ) Th e carrie r (i f any) , i f the carrie r cause d th e diese l fue l t o violat e th e standard b yfue l switching , blending , mislabeling , or an yothe r means ; an

d (3 ) Th e refine r unde r whos e corporate , trade , o r bran d name (o

r tha t o f an

yo f it s marketing subsidiaries ) th e distributo r or reselle r i s operating , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(4 ) o f thi s section . (d ) Violation s a t unbrande d distributo r facilities . Wher e a violatio n o f a diese l fue l standard se t fort hi n§ 80.2 9 i s detecte d a t th e facilit yo f a distributo r no t operating unde r a refiner' s corporate , trade , o r bran d name , o r tha t o f an yo f it s marketing subsidiaries , th e following shal l b e deeme d i n violation : (1 ) Th e distributor , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph (g)(3 ) o f thi s section ; (2 ) Th e carrie r (i f any) , i f th e carrie r cause d th e diese l fue l t o violat e th e standard b yfue l switching , blending , mislabeling , or an yothe r means ; an

d



### -6

-P.7 8 (3 ) Th e refine r or importe r a t whos e refineryo r impor t facilitythe diese l fue l wa s produce d o r imported , excep t a s provide d i nparagraph(g)(2 ) o f thi s section . (e ) Violation s a t brande d retai l outlet s o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r facilities . Wher e a violatio n o f a diese l fue l standard se t fort hi n § 80.2 9 i s detecte d a t a retai l outle t o r a t a wholesal e purchaser-consume r facilit ydisplaying th e corporate , trade , o r brand name o f a refine r o r an yo f it s marketing subsidiaries , th e following partie s shal l b e deeme d i nviolation : (1 ) Th e retaile r or wholesal e purchaser-consumer , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(5 ) o f thi s section ; (2 ) Th e distributo r and/o r reselle r (i f any) , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(3 ) o f thi s section ; (3 ) Th e carrie r (i f any) , i f th e carrie r cause d th e diese l fue l t o violat e th e standard b yfue l switching , blending , mislabeling , o r an yothe r means ; an

d (4 ) Th e refine r whos e corporate , trade , o r brand name , o r tha t o f an yo f it s marketing subsidiaries , i s displaye d a t th e retai l outle t o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r facility , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(4 ) o f thi s section . 

### -7
-P.7 9

(f ) Violation s a t unbrande d retai l outlet s o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r facilities . Wher e a violatio n o f a diese l fue l standard se t fort hi n§ 80.2 9 i s detecte d a t a retai l outle t or a t a wholesal e purchaser-consume r facilit yno t displaying th e corporate , trade , o r brand name o f a refine r o r an yo f it s marketing subsidiaries , th e following partie s shal l b e deeme d i n violation : (1 ) Th e retaile r or wholesal e purchaser-consumer , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(5 ) o f thi s section ; (2 ) Th e distributo r (i f any) , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(3 ) o f thi s section ;

(3 ) Th e carrie r (i f any) , i f th e carrie r cause d th e diese l fue l t o violat e the standard b yfue l switching , blending , mislabeling , o r an yothe r mean ; an

d (4 ) Th e refine r o r importe r a t whos e refineryo r impor t facilit yth e diese l fue l wa s produce d or imported , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(2 ) o f thi s section .



### -8

-(g ) Defenses . (l ) I nan ycas e i nwhic ha carrie r woul d b e i n violatio nunde r paragraph(b)(1 ) o f thi s section , th e carrie r shal l no t b e deeme d i nviolatio n i f h e can demonstrate : (i ) Bill s o f lading , invoices , deliverytickets , loadin g ticket s o r othe r document s fro mth e refine r or importe r a t whos e refiner yo r impor t facilit yth e diese l fue l wa s produce d or imported , or th e carrier , reseller , o r distributo r fro

mwhomthe diese l fue l wa s received , whic h represente d t o th e carrie r tha t th e diese l fue l wa s i n complianc e wit hth e diese l fue l standards ; an d (ii ) Evidenc e o f a n oversigh t progra mconducte d b

y th e carrier , fo r monitoring th e diese l fue l store d o r transporte d b

ytha t carrier , sucha s periodi c sampling an d testing o f th e cetan e indexan d sulfur percentag e o f incomin g diese l fuel , or an yothe r evidenc e tha t show s tha t car e wa s take n t o avoi d blending th e diese l fue l wit h anything whic hwoul d chang e it s cetan e indexo r sulfur percentage ; an

d (iii ) Tha t th e violatio nwa s no t cause d b yth e carrie r o r hi s employe e o r agent .



### -9

-P.8 1 (2 ) I n an

ycas e i nwhic ha refine r o r importe r woul d b e i n violatio n unde r paragraph s (b)(2) , (d)(3) , o r (f)(4 ) o f thi s section , th e refine r or importe r shal l no t b e deeme d i n violatio n i f h e ca ndemonstrate : (i ) Tha t th e violatio n wa s no t cause d b yhi mo r hi s employe e or agent ; an d (ii ) Tes t results , performe d i naccordanc e wit hth e sampling an

d testing methodologie s se t fort hi n Appendi xG t o thi s part , ASTMtes t metho d D-2622-8 2 for sulfur percentage , o r ASTMtes t metho d D-97 6 fo r cetan e index , whic hevidenc e tha t th e diese l fue l determine d t o b e i n violatio n wa s i n complianc e wit hth e diese l fue l standard s whe n i t wa s delivere d t o th e nex t part yi nth e distributio n scheme . (3 ) I n an

ycas e i n whic ha distributo r o r reselle r woul d b e i n violatio n unde r paragraph s (c)(1) , (d)(1) , (e)(2 ) o r (f)(2 ) o f thi s section , th e distributo r o r reselle r shal l no t b e deeme d i n violatio ni f h e can demonstrate : (i ) Tha t th e violatio nwa s no t cause d byhi mo r hi s employe e or agent ; an d

-10

-P.8 2 (ii ) Bill s o f lading , invoices , deliverytickets , loadin g ticket s o r othe r document s fro m th e refine r a t whos e refiner

yth e diese l fue l wa s produced , th e importe r a t whos e facilit ythe diese l fue l wa s imported , o r th e carrier , reselle r o r distributo r fro mwhomth e diese l fue l wa s received , whic hrepresente d t o th e distributo r o r reselle r tha t the diese l fue l wa s i n complianc e wit hth e diese l fue l standard s whe n delivere d t o th e distributo r o r reseller ; an

d (iii ) Evidenc e o f a noversigh t progra mconducte d b

y th e distributo r o r reseller , suc ha s periodi c sampling an d testing o f diese l fuel , fo r monitoring th e sulfu r percentag e an

d cetan e indexo f th e diese l fue l tha t th e distributo r o r reselle r sells , supplies , offer s fo r sal e o r supply , o r transports . (4 ) I n an

ycas e i n whic ha refine r woul d b e i n violatio n unde r paragraph s (c)(3 ) o r (e)(4 ) o f thi s section , th e refine r shal l no t b e deeme d i n violatio ni f h e can demonstrat e al l o f th e following : (i ) Tes t results , performe d i naccordanc e wit hth e sampling an

d testing methodologie s se t fort hi n Appendi xG t o thi s part , ASTMtes t metho d D-2622-8 2 fo r sulfur percentage , o r ASTMtes t metho d D-97 6 for cetan e index , a t

-11

-P.8 3

th e refiner

ya t whic hth e diese l fue l wa s produced , whic h evidenc e tha t th e diese l fue l determine d t o b e i nviolatio n wa s i n complianc e wit hth e diese l fue l standard s whe n transporte d fro

mth e refinery ; (ii ) Tha t th e violatio n wa s no t cause d b yhi mor hi s employe e o r agent ; an d (iii ) Tha t th e violation : (A ) Wa s cause d b

ya nac t i n violatio no f la w(othe r than th e Ac t o r thi s part) , o r anac t o f sabotag e o r vandalism , whethe r o r no t suchact s ar e violation s o f la w i n the jurisdictio n wher e th e violatio no f th e requirement s o f thi s par t occurred , or (B ) Wa s cause d b yth e actio n o f a reselle r o r a retaile r supplie d b ysuchreseller , i n violatio n o f a contractua l undertaking imposed b yth e refine r o n suc h reselle r designe d t o preven t suc haction , an d despit e reasonabl e effort s b yth e refine r (sucha s periodi c sampling an

d testing ) t o insur e complianc e wit hsuc h contractua l obligation , or (C ) Wa s cause d b yth e actio no f a retaile r wh o i s supplie d directl yb yth e refine r (an

d no t b

ya reseller) , i n violatio n o f a contractua l undertaking impose d b y.the
-12

-P.8 4

refine r o n suchretaile r designe d t o preven t suc haction , an d despit e reasonabl e effort s b yth e refine r (sucha s periodi c sampling an d testing ) t o insur e complianc e wit h suchcontractua l obligation , or (D ) Wa s cause d b yth e actio no f a distributo r subjec t t o a contrac t wit hth e refine r fo r transportatio n o f diese l fue l fro ma termina l t o a distributor , retaile r o r wholesal e purchaser-consumer , i nviolatio no f a contractua l undertaking imposed b yth e refine r o nsuc h distributo r designe d t o preven t suc haction , an d despit e reasonabl e effort s b yth e refine r (sucha s periodi c sampling an

d testing ) t o ensur e complianc e wit hsuc h contractua l obligation , o r (E ) Wa s cause d b

ya carrie r o r othe r distributo r no t subjec t t o a contrac t wit hth e refine r bu t engage d b yhi m fo r transportatio n o f diese l fue l fro ma termina l t o a distributor , retaile r or wholesal e purchaser-consumer , despit e reasonabl e effort s b yth e refine r (sucha s specificatio n or inspectio n o f equipment ) t o preven t suc h action , o r (F ) Occurre d a t a wholesal e purchaser-consume r facility : Provided , however , tha t i f suc hwholesal e purchaser-consume r wa s supplie d b ya reseller , th e refine r mus t demonstrat e tha t th e violatio n coul d no t hav e bee n -13

-P.8 5

prevente d b

ysuchreseller' s complianc e wit ha contractua l undertaking impose d b ythe refine r o n suc hreselle r a s provide d i n paragraph(g)(4)(iii)(B ) o f thi s section . (iv ) I n paragraph s (g)(4)(iii)(A ) through(E ) o f thi s section , th e term"wa s caused " mean s tha t th e refine r mus t demonstrat e b

yreasonabl yspecifi c showings , b ydirec t o r circumstantia l evidence , tha t th e violatio nwa s cause d o r mus t hav e bee n cause d b yanother . (5 ) I n an

ycas e i nwhic ha retaile r o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r woul d b e i nviolatio n unde r paragraph s (e)(1 ) o r (f)(1 ) o f thi s section , th e retaile r o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r shal l no t b e deeme d i nviolatio ni f h e can demonstrat e tha t th e violatio nwa s no t cause d b yhi mo r hi s employe e o r agent . (6 ) I n paragraph s (g)(l)(iii) , (g)(2)(i) , (g)(3)(i) , (g)(4)(ii ) an

d (g)(5 ) o f thi s section , th e respectiv e part y mus t demonstrat e b

yreasonabl yspecifi c showings , bydirec t o r circumstantia l evidence , tha t i t o r it s employe e or agen t di d no t caus e th e violation . 5 . Ne wAppendi xGi s propose d t o b e adde d t o read a s follows :

-14

-APPENDI XG —SAMPLIN GPROCEDURE S FORDIESE L FUE L Scop e 1. 1 Thi s metho d cover s procedure s fo r obtaining representative sample s o f diese l fue l fo r th e purpos e o f testing for complianc e wit hth e cetan e indexan d sulfur percentag e standard s se t fort hi n § 80.29 . 2 . Summaryo f Metho d
2. 1 I t i s necessarytha t th e sample s b e trul y representativ e o f th e diese l fue l i n question . Th e precaution s require d t o ensur e th e representativ e characte r o f th e sample s ar e numerou s an d depend upo n th e tank , carrier , containe r o r lin e fro mwhic hth e sampl e i s being obtained , th e typ e an d cleanlines s o f th e sampl e container , an d th e sampling procedure s tha t ar e t o b e used . Asummary o f th e sampling procedure s an d thei r applicatio ni s presente d i n Tabl e 1 . Eac hprocedur e i s suitabl e fo r sampling a materia l unde r definit e storage , transportation , o r containe r conditions . Th e basi c principl e o f eac h procedur e i s t o obtai n a sampl e i n suc hmanne r an d fro m suc hlocation s i n th e tank o r othe r containe r tha t th e sampl e wil l b e trul yrepresentativ e o f th e diese l fuel .

-15

-3 . Descriptio no f Term s 3. 1 "Averag e sample " i s on e tha t consist s o f proportionat e part s fro mal l section s o f th e container . 3. 2 "All-level s sample " i s on e obtaine d b y submerging a stoppere d beake r o r bottl e t o a poin t a s nea r a s possibl e t o th e draw-of f level , the nopening th e sample r an d raising i t a t a rat e suc htha t i t i s abou t 3/ 4 ful l (maximu m8 5 percent ) a s i t emerge s fro m th e liquid . A

n all-level s sampl e i s no t necessaril ya naverag e sampl e becaus e th e tank volume mayno t b e proportiona l t o th e dept han

d becaus e th e operato r mayno t b e abl e t o rais e th e sample r a t th e variabl e rat e require d fo r proportionat e filling . Th e rat e o f filling i s proportiona l t o th e squar e roo t o f the dept ho f immersion . 3. 3 "Running sample " i s on e obtaine d b ylowering an unstoppere d beake r o r bottl e fro mth e to p o f th e gasolin e t o th e leve l o f th e bottomo f th e outle t connectio nor swing line , an

d returning i t t o th e top o f th e top o f th e diese l fue l a t a uniform rat e o f spee d suc htha t th e beake r o r bottl e i s abou t 3/ 4 ful l whe nwithdraw n fro mth e diese l fuel .

-16

-P.8 8

3. 4 "Spo t sample " i s on e obtaine d a t some specifi c location i n th e tank b ymean s o f a thie f bottle , or beaker . 3. 5 "To

p sample " i s a spo t sampl e obtaine d 6 inche s (150mm ) belowth e top surfac e o f the liqui d (Figur e 1 o f Appendi xD) . 3. 6 "Uppe r sample " i s a spo t sampl e take na t th e mid-poin t o f th e uppe r third o f th e tank content s (Figur e 1 o f Appendi xD) . 3. 7 "Middl e sample " i s a spo t sampl e obtaine d from th e middl e o f th e tank content s (Figur e l o f Appendi xD) . 3. 8 "Lowe r sample " i s a spo t sampl e obtaine d a t th e leve l o f th e fixe d tank outle t o r th e swing lin e outle t (Figur e 1 o f Appendi xD) . 3. 9 "Clearanc e sample " i s a spo t sampl e take n 4 inche s (10 0 mm ) belo wth e leve l o f th e tank outle t (Figur e 1 o f Appendi xD) . 3.1 0 "Botto

msample " i s on e obtaine d fro mth e materia l o n th e bottomsurfac e o f the tank , container , o r line a t it s lowes t point .

-17

-P.8 9

3.1 1 "Drai n sample " i s on e obtaine d fro m th e draw-of f o r discharg e valve . Occasionally , a drai nsampl e mayb e th e same a s a bottomsample , a s i n the cas e o f a tank car . 3.1 2 "Continou s sample " i s on e obtaine d fro ma pipelin e i n suchmanne r a s t o giv e a representativ e averag e o f a moving stream . 3.1 3 "Mixed sample " i s on e obtaine d afte r mixing o r vigorousl ystirring th e content s o f th e origina l container , an d the n pouring ou t o r drawing of f th e quantit ydesired . 3.1 4 "Nozzl e sample " i s on e obtaine d fro ma diese l pum p nozzl e whic hdispense s diese l fue l fro ma storag e tank a t a retai l outle t o r a wholesal e purchaser-consume r facility . 4 . Sampl e Container s 4. 1 Sampl e container s mayb e clea r o r brow nglas s bottles , o r cans . Th e clea r glas s bottl e i s advantageou s becaus e i t mayb e examine d visuall yfo r cleanliness , an d als o allow s visua l inspectio n o f th e sampl e fo r fre e wate r o r soli d impurities . Th e brow nglas s bottl e afford s some protectio n fro

m light . Th e onl ycan s permissibl e ar e thos e wit hth e seams soldere d o n th e exterio r surfac e wit ha flu x

-18

-o f rosi n i n a suitabl e solvent . Suc ha flu xi s easil y remove d wit hgasoline , wherea s man yother s ar e very difficul t t o remove . 4. 2 Containe r closure . Cork , rubbe r o r glas s stoppers , or screwcap s o f plasti c or metal , mayb e use d fo r glas s bottles ; screwcap s onl yshal l b e use d fo r can s t o provid e a vapor-tigh t closur e seal . An yclosur e metho d wil l b e satsifactorya s lon g a s n o leakag e wil l occur no r wil l th e stoppe r o r ca p affec t sampl e results . 4. 3 Cleaning procedure . Al l sampl e container s mus t b e absolutel yclea n an d fre e o f water , dirt , lint , washing compounds , naphths , o r othe r solvents , soldering fluxe s o r acids , corrosion , rust , an d oil .

-19

-P.9 1

5 . Sampling Apparatu s
5. 1 Sampling apparatu s i s describe d i ndetai l unde r eac ho f th e specifi c sampling procedures . Clean , dry , an d fre e al l sampling apparatu s fro man ysubstanc e tha t migh t contaminat e th e material , using th e procedur e describe d i n 4.3 . 6 . Time an

d Plac e o f Sampling 6. 1 Whe n loading o r discharging diese l fuel , tak e sample s fro

mbot hshipping an d receiving tanks , an d from th e pipelin e i f required . 6. 2 Shi p or barg e tanks . Sampl e eac hproduc t afte r th e vesse l i s loaded o r jus t befor e unloading . 6. 3 Tank cars . Sampl e th e produc t afte r th e ca r i s loade d o r jus t befor e unloading . NOTE : Whe n taking sample s fro mtank s suspecte d o f containing flammabl e atmospheres , precaution s shoul d b e take n t o guard agains t ignition s du e t o stati c

-20

-P.9 2

electricity . Meta l o r conductiv e objects , sucha s gag e tapes , sampl e containers , an d thermometers , shoul d no t b e lowere d int o o r suspende d i n a compartmen t o r tank whic hi s being fille d o r immediatel yafte r cessatio no f pumping . A waiting perio d o f approximatel yon e minut e wil l generall y permi t a substantia l relaxatio no f th e electrostati c charge ; unde r certai n condition s a longe r perio d mayb e deeme d advisable . 7 . Obtaining Sample s 7. 1 Direction s for sampling canno t b e mad e explici t enought o cove r al l cases . Extreme car e an d goo d judgemen t ar e necessaryt o ensur e sample s tha t represen t th e genera l characte r an

d averag e conditio no f th e material . Clea n hand s ar e important . Clea n glove s mayb e wor nbu t onl y whe n absolutel ynecessary , sucha s i n col d weather , o r whe n handling material s a t hightemperature , o r fo r reason s o f safety . Selec t wiping cloth s s o tha t lin t i s no t introduced , contaminating samples . 7. 2 A s man

ypetroleu

mvapor s ar e toxi c an d flammable , avoi d breathing themo r igniting them from an ope n flame o r a spark produce d b ystatic . Follo wal l safet yprecaution s specifi c t o th e materia l being sampled .

-21

-P.9 3

8 . Handling Sample s 8. 1 Containe r outage . Neve r completel yfil l a sampl e container , bu t allowadequat e roo m fo r expansion , taking int o consideratio nth e temperatur e o f th e liqui d a t the time o f filling an d th e probabl e maximu m temperatur e t o whic hth e fille d containe r mayb e subjected . 9 . Shipping Sample s 9. 1 T o preven t los s o f liqui d during shipment , an d t o protec t agains t moistur e an d dust , cove r wit hsuitabl e vapo r tigh t caps . Th e cap s o f al l container s mus t b e screwe d dow

n tightl yan

d checke d fo r leakage . Posta l an d expres s offic e regulation s applying t o th e shipmen t o f flammabl e liquid s mus t b e observed . 10 . Labeling Sampl e Container s 10. 1 Labe l th e containe r immediatel yafte r a sampl e i s obtained . Us e waterproo f an d oilproo f in

k o r a penci l har d enought o den t th e tag , sinc e sof t penci l an d ordinary in k marking s ar e subjec t t o obliteratio nfro mmoisture , oi l smearing an

d handling . Includ e th e following information :

-22

-P.9 4
10.1. 1 Dat e an d time (the perio d elapse d during continuou s sampling) ;
10.1. 2 Name o f th e sample ; 10.1. 3 Name o r numbe r an d owne r o f th e vessel , car , o r container ; 10.1. 4 Bran

d an d grad e o f material ; an d
10.1. 5 Referenc e symbo l o r identificatio n number . 11 . Sampling procedure s 11. 1 Th e standard sampling procedure s describe d i n thi s metho d ar e summarize d i nTabl e 1 . Alternativ e sampling procedure s mayb e use d i f a mutuall ysatisfactory agreemen t ha s bee n reache d b yth e party(ies ) involve d an d EPAan d suc hagreemen t ha s bee npu t i n writing an d signe d b yauthorize d officials .

-23

-P.9 5

Tabl e 1 Summaryo f Diese l Fue l Sampling Procedure s an

d Applicabilit y Typ e o f Containe r Procedur e Paragraph Storag e tanks , shi p an d barg e tanks , tank cars , tank trucks . Storag e tank s wit h tap s Pip e an d line s Retai l outle t an

d whole-sal e purchaser

consume r facilit y storag e tanks . Bottl e sampling

Tap sampling Continuou s line sampling Nozzl e sampling 11. 2

11. 3 11. 4
11. 5

-24

-P.9 6
11. 2 Bottl e o r beake r sampling . Th e bottl e o r beake r sampling procedur e i s applicabl e fo r sampling liquid s o f 1 6 pound s (1.1 2 kgf/cm) RVP or les s i n tan k cars , tan

k trucks , shor e tanks , shi p tanks , an d barg e tanks . 11.2. 1 Apparatus . Asuitabl e sampling bottl e or beake r a s show

n i n Figur e 2 o f Appendi xD i s required . 11.2. 2 Procedure . 11.2.2. 1 All-level s sample . Lowe r th e weighted , stoppere d bottl e o r beake r a s nea r a s possibl e t o th e draw-of f level , pul l ou t th e stoppe r wit ha sharp jer k o f th e cord o r chai n an d rais e th e bottl e a t a uniformrat e s o tha t i t i s abou t 3/ 4 ful l a s i t emerge s fromth e liquid . 11.2.2. 2 Running sample . Lowe r th e unstoppere d bottle s o r beake r a s nea r a s possibl e t o th e leve l o f th e bottomo f th e outle t connectio n o r swing line an d the n rais e th e bottl e o r beake r t o th e top o f th e gasolin e a t a uniformrat e o f spee d suc htha t i t i s abou t 3/ 4 ful l whe n withdraw

n from th e diese l fuel .

-25

-P.9 7

11.2.2. 3 Upper , middle , an d lowe r samples . Lowe r th e weighted , stoppere d bottl e t o th e prope r depth s (Figur e 1 o f Appendi xD ) a s follows : Uppe r sampl e middl e o f uppe r third o f th e tank

content s Middl e sample... . middl e o f th e tank content s

Lowe r sampl e leve l o f th e fixe d tank outle t o r

th e swing-lin e outle t A t th e selecte d leve l pul l ou t th e stoppe r wit ha sharp jerk o f th e cord o r chai nan d allowth e bottl e o r beake r t o fil l completely , a s evidence d b yth e cessatio no f ai r bubbles . Whe n full , rais e th e bottl e o r beaker , pour of f a smal l amount , an d stoppe r immediately . 11.2.2. 4 Top sample . Obtai nthi s sampl e (Figur e 1 o f Appendi xD ) i n th e same manne r a s specifie d i n11.2.2. 3 bu t a t si xinche s (15 0 mm ) belowth e top surfac e o f th e tank contents . 11.2.2. 5 Handling . Stoppe r an d labe l bottl e sample s immediatleyafte r taking them , an d delive r t o th e laborator

yi n th e origina l sampling bottles .

-26

-11. 3 Tap sampling . Th e ta p sampling procedur e i s applicabl e fo r sampling liquid s o f twenty-si xpound s (1.8 3 2 kgf/cm) RVP o r les s i ntank s whic har e equippe d wit h suitabl e sampling tap s or lines . Th e assembl yfo r tap sampling i s show

n i n Figur e 3 o f Appendi xD . 11.3. 1 Apparatu s 11.3.1. 1 Tank taps . Th e tank shoul d b e equippe d wit ha t leas t thre e sampling tap s place d equidistan t throughou t th e tan k heigh t an

d extending a t leas t thre e fee t (0. 9 meter ) insid e th e tan k shell . Astandard 1/ 4 inchpip e wit hsuitabl e valv e i s satisfactory . 11.3.1. 2 Tube . Adeliverytub e tha t wil l no t contaminat e the produc t being sample d an d long enought o reac ht o th e bottom o f th e sampl e containe r i s require d t o allowsubmerge d filling . 11.3.1. 3 Sampl e containers . Us e clean , dryglas s bottle s o f convenien t siz e an d strengt hor meta l container s t o recieve th e samples . 11.3. 2 Procedur e

-27

-P.9 9

11.3.2. 1 Befor e a sampl e i s drawn , flus hth e tap (or gag e glas s drai ncock ) an d line unti l theyar e purge d completely . Connec t th e cleandeliverytube t o th e tap . Drawupper , middle , or lowe r sample s directl yfro mth e respective tap s afte r th e flushing operation . Stoppe r an d labe l th e sampl e containe r immediatel yafte r filling , an d delive r i t t o th e laboratory . 11. 4 Continuou s sampling . Th e continuou s sampling procedur e i s applicabl e fo r sampling liquid s o f 1 6 pound s

2 (1.1 2 kgf/cm) RVP or les s an d semiliquid s i n pipelines , filling lines , an

d transfe r lines . Th e continuou s sampling mayb e don e manuall yor b yusing automati c devices . 11.4. 1 Apparatu s 11.4.1. 1 Sampling probe . Th e functio no f the sampling prob e i s t o withdrawfromth e flowstrea ma portio n tha t wil l b e representative o f th e entir e stream . Th e apparatu s assembl yfo r continuou s sampling i s show ni n Figur e 4 o f Appendi xD . Prob e design s tha t ar e commonl y use d ar e a s follows :
11.4.1.1. 1 Atub e extending t o th e cente r o f th e line an d bevele d a t a 4 5 degre e angl e facing upstrea m(Figur e 4(a ) o f Appendi xD) .

-28

-P. 1

11.4.1.1. 2 Along-radiu s forge d elbowo r pip e bend extending t o th e cente r line o f th e pip e an d facing upstream . Th e en

d o f th e prob e shoul d b e reame d t o giv e a shar p entranc e edg e (Figur e 4(b ) o f Appendi xD) . 11.4.1.1. 3 Aclosed-en d tub e wit ha roun d orific e spaced nea r th e closed en d whic hshoul d b e positione d i n suc ha waytha t th e orific e i s i nth e cente r o f th e pipelin e an

d i s facing th e strea ma s show

n i nFigur e 4(c ) o f Appendi xD) . 11.4.1. 2 Prob e location . Sinc e th e flui d t o b e sample d mayno t i n al l case s b e homogeneous , th e location , th e positio n an

d th e siz e o f th e sampling prob e shoul d b e suc ha s t o minimiz e stratificatio n o r dropping ou t o f heavie r particle s withi n th e 'tube or th e displacemen t o f th e produc t withi n th e tub e a s a resul t o f variatio ni n gravit yo f th e flowing stream . Th e sampling prob e shoul d b e locate d preferabl yi n a vertica l ru no f pip e an

d a s nea r a s practicabl e t o th e poin t wher e th e produc t passe s t o th e receiver . Th e prob e shoul d alway s b e i na horizonta l position . 11.4.1.2. 1 Th e sampling line s shoul d b e a s shor t a s practicabl e an

d shoul d b e cleare d befor e an ysample s ar e taken .

-29

-P. 2
11.4.1.2. 2 Wher e adequat e flowing velocit yi s no t available , a suitabl e devic e for mixing the flui d flowt o ensur e a homogeneou s mixtur e a t al l rate s o f flowan d t o eliminat e stratificatio n shoul d b e installe d upstreamo f th e sampling tap . Some effectiv e device s fo r obtaining a homogeneou s mixtur e ar e a s follows : Reductio ni n pip e size ; a serie s o f baffles ; orific e o r perforate d plate ; an d a combinatio n o f an yo f thes e methods . 11.4.1.2. 3 Th e designo r sizing o f thes e device s i s optiona l wit hth e user , a s lon g a s th e flowpas t th e sampling poin t i s homogeneou s an d stratificatio n i s eliminated . 11.4.1. 3 T o contro l th e rat e a t whic hth e sampl e i s withdrawn , th e prob e o r probe s shoul d b e fitte d wit hvalve s or plug cocks . 11.4.1. 4 Automati c sampling device s tha t mee t th e standard s se t ou t i n11.4.1. 5 mayb e use d i nobtaining sample s o f diese l fuel . Th e qualit yo f sampl e collecte d mus t b e o f sufficien t siz e fo r analysis , an d it s compositio n shoul d b e identica l wit hth e compositio n o f th e batc hflowing i n th e lin e whil e th e sampl e i s being taken . An automati c sample r installatio nnecessaril yinclude s no t onl yth e automati c sampling devic e tha t extract s th e

-30

-P. 3

sample s fro

m the line , bu t als o a suitabl e probe , connecting lines , auxiliaryequipment , an d a containe r i n whic hth e sampl e i s collected . Automati c sampler s mayb e classifie d a s follows :
11.4.1.4. 1 Continuou s sampler , time cycl e (nonproportional ) type . Asample r designe d an d operate d i n suc ha manne r tha t i t transfer s equa l increment s o f liqui d fro mth e pipelin e t o th e sampl e containe r a t a uniformrat e o f on e o r mor e increment s pe r minut e i s a continou s sampler . 11.4.1.4. 2 Continuou s sampler , flow-responsiv e (proportional ) type . Asample r tha t i s designe d an d operate d i n sucha manne r tha t i t wil l automaticall yadjus t th e quantit yo f sampl e i nproportio n t o th e rat e o f flowi s a flow-responsiv e (proportional ) sampler . Adjustmen t o f th e quantit yo f sampl e mayb e mad e eithe r b yvarying th e frequencyo f transferring equa l increment s o f sampl e t o th e sampl e container , o r b yvarying th e volume o f th e increment s whil e maintaining a constan t frequenc yo f transferring th e increment s t o th e sampl e container . Th e apparatu s assembl yfor continuou s sampling i s show ni n Figur e 4 o f Appendi xD . 11.4.1.4. 3 Intermitten t sampler . Asample r tha t i s designe d an

d operate d i nsuc ha manne r tha t i t transfer s equa l increment s o f liqui d fro ma pipelin e t o th e sampl e
-31

-P. 4

containe r a t a uniformrat e o f les s thanon e incremen t pe r minut e i s an intermitten t sampler . 11.4.1. 5 Standard s o f installation . Automati c sample r installation s shoul d mee t al l safet yrequirement s i n th e plan t o r are a wher e used , an d shoul d compl ywit h American Nationa l Standard Cod e for Pressur e Piping , an d othe r applicabl e code s (ANS I B31.1) . Th e sample r shoul d b e s o installed a s t o provid e ampl e acces s spac e fo r inspectio n an

d maintenance . 11.4.1.5. 1 Smal l line s connecting variou s element s o f th e installatio n shoul d b e s o arrange d tha t complet e purging o f th e automati c sample r an d o f al l line s ca nb e accomplishe d effectively . Al l flui d remaining i nth e sample r an

d th e line s fro

m th e preceding sampling cycl e shoul d b e purge d immediatel ybefor e th e star t o f an ygive n sampling operation . 11.4.1.5. 2 I n thos e case s wher e th e sample r designi s suchtha t complet e purging o f th e sampling line s an d th e sample r i s no t possible , a smal l pum p shoul d b e installe d i n orde r t o circulat e a continuou s strea mfromth e sampling tub e pas t o r throughth e sample r an d bac k int o th e line . Th e automati c sample r shoul d the n withdrawth e sampl e from th e sidestrea

mthroughth e shortes t possibl e connection .

-32

-P. 5
11.4.1.5. 3 Unde r certai nconditions , ther e ma yb e a tendencyfor wate r an d heav yparticle s t o drop ou t i nth e discharg e line fro m th e sampling devic e an d appea r i nth e sampl e containe r during some subsequen t sampling period . T o circumven t thi s possibility , th e discharg e pip e fro m th e sampling devic e shoul d b e fre e o f pocket s or enlarge d pip e areas , an

d preferabl yshoul d b e pitche d downward t o th e sampl e container . 11.4.1.5. 4 T o ensur e clean , free-flowing lines , piping shoul d b e designe d for periodi c cleaning . 11.4.1. 6 Fiel d calibration . Composit e sample s obtaine d fro

m th e automati c sample r installatio nshoul d b e verifie d fo r quantit yperformanc e i na manne r tha t meet s wit hth e approva l o f al l partie s concerne d (including EPA) , a t leas t onc e a mont han d mor e ofte ni f condition s warrant . I n th e cas e o f time-cycl e samplers , deviation s i n quantit yo f th e sampl e take n shoul d no t excee d + fiv e percen t fo r an

ygive nsetting . I n th e cas e o f flow-responsive samplers , th e deviatio ni nquantit yo f sampl e take n pe r 1,00 0 barrel s o f flowing strea mshoul d no t excee d + 5 percent . Fo r th e purpos e o f field-calibrating an installation , th e composit e sampl e obtaine d fro mth e automati c sample r unde r tes t shoul d b e verife d fo r qualit y b e comparing o n th e basi s o f physica l an d chemica l

-33

-P. 6

properties , wit heithe r a properl ysecure d continuou s nonautomati c sampl e o r tank sample . Th e tan k sampl e shoul d b e take n unde r th e following conditions : 11.4.1.6. 1 Th e batc hpumpe d during th e tes t interva l shoul d b e diverte d int o a cleantan k an d a sampl e take n withi n on e hour afte r cessatio n o f pumping . 11.4.1.6. 2 I f th e sampling o f th e deliverytank i s t o b e delaye d beyond on e hour , the n th e tank selecte d mus t b e equippe d wit han adquat e mixing means . Fo r vali d comparison , th e sampling o f th e deliverytank mus t b e complete d withi n eigh t hour s afte r cessatio no f pumping , eve n thoughth e tan k i s equippe d wit ha motor-drive nmixer . 11.4.1.6. 3 Whe n making a norma l full-tan k deliveryfro

ma tank , a properl ysecure d sampl e mayb e use d t o chec k th e result s o f th e sample r i f th e partie s (includin

g EPA ) mutuall yagre e t o thi s procedure . 11.4.1. 7 Receiver . Th e receive r mus t b e a clean , drycontaine r o f convenien t siz e t o receive th e sample . Al l connection s fro mth e sampl e prob e t o th e sampl e containe r mus t b e fre e o f leaks . Two type s o f containe r mayb e used , depending upo n servic e requirements .

-34

-P. 7 11.4.1.7. 1 Atmospheri c container . Th e atmospheri c containe r shal l b e constructe d i n suc ha waytha t i t retard s evaporatio n los s an d protect s th e sampl e fro m extraneou s materia l sucha s rain , snow , dust , an d trash . Th e constructio n shoul d allowcleaning , interio r inspection , an

d complet e mixing o f th e sampl e prio r t o removal . Th e containe r shoul d b e provide d wit ha suitabl e vent . 11.4.1.7. 2 Close d container . Th e close d containe r shal l b e constructe d i n sucha manne r tha t i t prevent s evaporatio n loss . Th e constructio nmus t allowcleaning , interio r inspectio n an d complet e mixing o f th e sampl e prio r t o removal . Th e containe r shoul d b e equippe d wit ha pressure-relie f valve . 11.4. 2 Procedure . 11.4.2. 1 Nonautomati c sample . Adjus t th e valv e o r plug coc k fro

mth e sampling prob e s o tha t a stead ystrea

m i s draw n fromth e probe . Wheneve r possible , th e rat e o f sampl e withdrawa l shoul d b e suc htha t th e velocit yo f liqui d flowing throughth e prob e i s approximatel yequa l t o th e averag e linea r velocit yo f th e strea m flowing through th e pipeline . Measur e an d record th e rat e o f sampl e withdrawa l a s gallon s pe r hour . Diver t th e sampl e strea m

-35

-P. 8

t o th e sampling containe r continuousl yo r intermittentl yt o provid e a quantit yo f sampl e tha t wil l b e o f sufficien t siz e for analysis . 11.4.2. 2 Automati c sampling . Purg e th e sample r an d th e sampling line s immediatel ybefor e th e star t o f a sampling operation . I f th e sampl e design i s suc htha t complet e purging i s no t possible , circulat e a continuou s strea mfro mth e prob e pas t or throughth e sample r an d bac k int o th e line . Withdrawthe sampl e fro mth e sid e strea

m throughth e automati c sample r using th e shortes t possibl e connections . Adjus t th e sample r t o delive r no t les s tha n on e an d no t mor e than4 0 gallon s (15 1 liters ) o f sampl e during the desire d sampling period . Fo r time-cycl e samplers , record the rat e a t whic hsampl e increment s wer e take n pe r minute . Fo r flow-responsive samplers , record th e proportio n o f sampl e t o tota l stream . Labe l th e sample s an d delive r themt o th e laborator yi nth e container s i n whic htheywer e collected .

-36

-P. 9 11. 5 Nozzl e sampling . Th e nozzl e sampling procedur e i s applicabl e for sampling diese l fue l fro ma retai l outle t o r wholesal e purchaser-consume r facilit ystorag e tank . 11.5. 1 Apparatus . Sampl e container s conforming wit h4. 1 shoul d b e used . Aspacer , i f appropriate , an d a nozzl e extensio n a s show ni n Figure s 6 an

d 7 o f Appendi xD shal l b e use d whe n nozzl e sampling . 11.5. 2 Procedure . Immediatel yafte r diese l fue l ha s bee n delivere d fro mth e pum

p an d th e pum

p ha s bee n reset , delive r a smal l amoun t o f produc t int o th e sampl e container . Rins e sampl e containe r an d dum p produc t int o wast e container . Inser t nozzl e extensio n(Figur e 7 o f Appendi xD ) int o sampl e containe r an d inser t pum

p nozzl e int o extensio n wit hslo t ove r ai r blee d hole . Fil l slowl y throughnozzl e extensio n t o 70-8 0 percen t ful l (Figur e 8 o f Appendi xD) . Remov e nozzl e extension . Cap sampl e containe r a t once . Chec k fo r leaks . 12 . Specia l Precaution s an d Instructions . 12. 1 Precautions . Officia l sample s shoul d b e take n by , o r unde r the immediat e supervisio n of , a perso no f judgement , skill , an d sampling experience . Neve r prepar e composit e sample s fo r thi s test . Mak e certai ntha t container s whic har e t o b e shippe d b ycommo n carrie r confor m t o applicabl e Interstat e Commerc e Commission , -37

-P.1 0

state , an

d loca l regulations . Whe n flushing o r purging line s o r containers , observ e th e pertinen t regulation s an d precaution s agains t fire , explosion , an d othe r hazards . 12. 3 Sampl e containers . Us e container s o f no t les s tha n on e quar t (0. 9 liter ) no r mor e tha ntw o gallon s (7. 6 liters ) capacity , o f sufficien t strengt ht o withstand th e pressur e t o whic htheymayb e subjected . Open-typ e container s hav e a singl e opening whic hpermit s sampling b y immersion . Closed-typ e container s hav e two openings , on e i n eac hen

d (or th e equivalen t thereof) , fitte d wit hvalve s suitabl e for sampling b ywate r displacemen t o r b ypurging . 12. 4 Transfe r connections . Th e transfe r connectio n fo r th e open-typ e containe r consist s o f an ai r tub e an d a liqui d deliverytub e assemble d i n a cap o r stopper . Th e ai r tub e extend s t o th e bottomo f th e container . On e en d o f th e liqui d deliverytub e i s lon g enought o reac hth e bottomo f th e diese l fue l chambe r whil e the sampl e i s being transferre d t o the chamber . Th e transfe r connectio n fo r th e closed-typ e containe r consist s o f a singl e tub e wit ha connectio n suitabl e for attaching i t t o on e o f th e opening s o f th e sampl e container . Th e tub e i s long enought o reac h th e bottomo f th e diese l chambe r whil e th e sampl e i s being transferred .

-38

-P.1 1

12. 5 Sampling ope ntanks . Us e clean container s o f th e ope n typ e whe n sampling ope n tank s an d tank cars . An all-leve l sampl e obtaine d b yth e bottl e procedur e describe d i n 11. 2 i s recommended . Befor e taking th e sample , flus h the containe r b

yimmersing i t i nth e produc t t o b e sampled . The n obtai nth e sampl e immediately . Pour of f enoughs o tha t th e containe r wil l b e 70-8 0 percen t ful l an d clos e i t promptly . Labe l th e containe r an d delive r i t t o th e laboratory . 12. 6 Sampling close d tanks . Container s o f eithe r th e ope n o r close d typ e mayb e use d t o obtai nsample s from close d o r pressur e tanks . I f the close d typ e i s used , obtai n th e sampl e using th e wate r displacemen t procedur e describe d i n 12. 8 o r th e purging procedur e describe d i n 12.9 . Th e wate r displacemen t procedur e i s preferabl e becaus e th e flowo f produc t involve d i nth e purging procedur e mayb e hazardous . 12. 8 Wate r displacemen t procedure . Completel yfil l th e closed-typ e containe r wit hwate r an d clos e th e valves . Whil e permitting a smal l amoun t o f produc t t o flowthrough th e fittings , connec t th e top o r inle t valv e o f th e containe r t o th e tank sampling tap o r valve . The nope nal l valve s o n th e inle t sid e o f th e container . Ope n th e bottom o r outle t valv e slightl yt o allowth e wate r t o b e displace d
-39

-P.1 2

slowl yb

ythe sampl e entering th e container . Regulat e th e flows o tha t ther e i s n o appreciabl e chang e i npressur e withi n th e container . Clos e th e outle t valv e a s soo na s diese l fue l discharge s fromth e outlet ; the ni nsuccessio n clos e th e inle t valv e an d th e sampling valv e o nth e tank . Disconnec t th e containe r an d withdrawenougho f th e content s s o tha t i t wil l b e 70-8 0 percen t full . I f th e vapo r pressur e o f th e produc t i s no t highenought o forc e liqui d fro

mth e container , ope n bot hth e uppe r an d lowe r valve s slightl yt o remov e th e excess . Promptl ysea l an d labe l th e container , an d delive r i t t o th e laboratory . 12. 9 Purging procedure . Connec t th e inle t valv e o f th e closed-typ e containe r t o th e tank sampling tap o r valve . Throttl e th e outle t valv e o f th e containe r s o tha t th e pressur e i n i t wil l b e approximatel yequa l t o tha t i n th e containe r being sampled . Allo wa volume o f produc t equa l t o a t leas t twic e tha t o f th e containe r t o flow throughth e sampling system . The n clos e al l valves , th e outle t valv e first , th e inle t valv e o f th e containe r second , an

d th e tank sampling valv e last , an d disconnec t th e containe r immediately . Withdrawenougho f th e content s s o tha t th e sampl e containe r wil l b e 70-8 0 percen t full . I f th e vapo r pressur e o f th e produc t i s no t highenought o forc e liqui d fro

mth e container , ope n bot hth e uppe r an d lowe r valve s slightl yt o remove th e excess . Promptl ysea l an d labe l th e container , an d delive r i t t o th e laboratory . -40

-P.1 3

Fo r th e reason s se t fort hi nth e Preamble , Par t 8 6 o f Titl e 4 0 o f th e Cod e o f Federa l Regulation s i s revise d to , a s se t fort h below : 6 . Th e authorit ycitatio n for Par t continue s t o read a s follows : Authority : Sees.202 , 203 , 206,207 , 208 , 215 , 301(a) , o f th e Clea n Ai r Ac t a s Amended ; 4 2 U.S.C . 7521 , 7522 , 7524 , 7525 , 7541 , 7542 , 7549 , 755 0 an d 7601(a) . 7 . Ane wSectio n86.113-9 1 i s propose d t o b e adde d t o Subpar t B , t o read a s follows : §86.113-9 1 Fue l specifications . (a ) Otto-cycl e tes t fuel . (l ) Gasolin e having th e following specification s wil l b e use d b yth e Administrato r i n exhaus t an

d evaporativ e emissio n testing o f petroleum-fuele d Otto-cycl e vehicles . Gasolin e having th e following specificatio n o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b

yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d b yth e manufacture r i n exhaus t an d evaporativ e testing excep t tha t octan e specification s d o no t apply .

-41

-P. M

Ite m Octane , research , Sensitivity , Lead (organic) , Distillatio n Range :

IBP[2] , 1 0 pet . point , 5 0 pet . point , 9 0 pet . point , EP , (max. ) Sulfur , weigh t pet . Phosphorus , max . RVP[3,4] , ASTMTes t M min . min . g/U.S . gal . (g/litter ) ° F (°C ) ° F (°C ) o p (°C ) o p (°C ) o p (°C )

, max . g/U.S . gal . (g/liter ) ps i (kPa ) Hydrocarbo n composition : Olefins , Aromatics , Saturate s max . pet. , max . pet. , etho d No .

D269 9

... . D323 7 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D126 6 D323 1 D323 1 D131 9 D131 9 D131 9 Valu e 9 3 7. 5 0.050[1 ] (0.013M1 ] 75-9 5 (23.9-35 ) 120-13 5 (48.9-57.2 ) 200-23 0 (93.3-110 ) 300-32 5 (148.9-162.8 ) 41 5 (212.8 ) 0.1 0 0.00 5 (0.0013 ) 8.7-9. 2 (60.0-63.4 ) 1 0 3 5 [5 ] [1 ] Maximum . [2 ] Fo r testing a t altitude s above 1,21 9 m(4,00 0 ft ) th e specifie d rang e i s 75°-l05° F (23.9°-40.6°C) . [3 ] Fo r testing whic hi s unrelate d t o evaporativ e emissio n control , th e specifie d rang e i s 8.0-9. 2 ps i (55.2-63. 4 kPa) . [4 ] Fo r testing a t altitude s above 1,21 9 m(4,00 0 ft ) th e specifie d rang e i s 7.9-9. 2 ps i (54.5-63. 4 kPa) . [5 ] Remainder .

-42

-P.1 5 (2 ) Unleade d gasolin e representative o f commercia l gasolin e whic hwil l b e generall yavailabl e throughretai l outlet s shal l b e use d i nservic e accumulatio n fo r petroleum-fuele d Otto-cycl e vehicles . Leade d gasolin e wil l no t b e use d i n servic e accumulation . (i ) Th e octan e rating o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e n o highe r than l . 0 Researc hoctan e numbe r abov e th e minimu m recommende d b

yth e manufacture r an d hav e a minimu m sensitivit yo f 7. 5 octan e numbers , wher e sensitivit yi s define d a s th e Researc hoctan e numbe r minu s th e Moto r octan e number . (ii ) Th e Rei d Vapo r Pressur e o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e characteristi c o f th e moto r fue l use d during th e seaso n i n whic hth e servic e accumulatio n take s place . (3 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i n servic e accumulatio n o f methanol-fuele d Otto-cycl e vehicle s shal l b e representativ e o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio ni n accordanc e wit hparagraph(3) .

-43

-P.1 6 (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation . (4 ) Othe r methano l fuel s mayb e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) Theyar e commerciall yavailable , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph(a)(3 ) o f thi s sectio n woul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o nemission s o r durability , an

d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (5 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (a)(2) , (a)(3) , an d (a)(4 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) . (b ) Diese l tes t fuel . (l ) Th e petroleu mfuel s employe d fo r testing diese l vehicle s shal l b e clea nan d

-44

-P.1 7

bright , wit hpour an d cloud point s adequat e fo r operability . Th e petroleu mfue l maycontai n nonmetalli c additive s a s follows : cetan e improver , meta l deactivator , antioxidant , dehazer , antirust , pour depressant , dye , dispersan t an

d biocide . (2 ) Petroleu

mfue l fo r diese l vehicle s meeting th e following specifications , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n exhaus t emissio n testing . Th e grad e o f petroleu mfue l recommende d b

yth e engin e manufacturer , commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 2-D " grad e diesel , shal l b e used .

Ite m Cetan e Numbe r Distillatio n range :

IBP , 1 0 pet . point , 5 0 pet . point , 9 0 pet . point ,

EP , Gravity , Tota l sulfur , o p <°C ) o p 

## C O o p (°C ) o p (°C ) o p (°C ) °AP I pet . Hydrocarbo n compositio n Aromatics , min . pet . Paraffins , naphthenes , olefin s Flashpoint , min . Viscosity , centistoke s o p (°C ) AST MTes t

Metho d No . D61 3 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D131 9
D9 3 D44 5 Typ e 2- D

42-5 0 340-40 0 (171.1-20 4 400-46 0 (204.4-23 7 470-54 0 (243.3-28 2 560-63 0 (293.3-33 2 610-69 0 (321.1-36 5 32-3 7 0.08-0.1 2 2 7 [1 ] 13 0 (54.4 ) 2.2-3. 4 4 )

8 ) 2 )

• 2 ) .6 )

[1 ] Remainde r

-45

-P.1 8 (3 ) Petroleu

mfue l fo r diese l vehicle s meeting th e following specifications , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulation . Th e grad e o f petroleu mdiese l fue l recommende d b yth e engin e manufacturer , commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 2-D " grad e diese l fuel , shal l b e used .

Ite m Cetan e Numbe r Distillatio n range : 9 0 pet . poin t Gravity , Tota l sulfur , Flashpoint , min . Viscosity , ° F (°C ) °AP I pet . o p 

### CC ) centistoke s ASTMTes t

Metho d D61 3 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D9 3 D45 5 No . Typ e 2- D

38-5 8 540-65 0 (282.2-343.3 ) 30-3 9 0.08-0.1 2 13 0 (54.4 ) 1.5-4. 5 (4 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i n servic e accumulatio no f methanol-fuele d diese l vehicle s shal l b e representativ e o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio ni n accordanc e wit hparagraph(4) . (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation .

-46

-P.1 9 (5 ) Othe r fuel s mayb e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) Theyar e commerciall yavailable , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl ythe designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph s (b)(2 ) an d (b)(3 ) or (b)(4 ) o f thi s sectio nwoul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o n emission s o r durability , an d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (6 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (b)(2) , (b)(3) , (b)(4) , an d (b)(5 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i naccordanc e wit h §86.090-21(b)(3) . (c ) Fuel s no t meeting th e specification s se t fort h i n thi s sectio n mayb e use d onl ywit hth e advanc e approva l o f th e Administrator .

-47

-P.2 0
(d ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s fo r flexibl e fue l vehicles . (1 ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an

d servic e accumulatio nfor flexibl e fue l vehicle s shal l b e withi n th e rang e o f fue l mixture s fo r whic hth e vehicl e wa s designed . (2 ) Manufacture r testing an d servic e accumulatio n mayb e performe d using onl ythos e mixture s (mixture s mayb e differen t fo r exhaus t testing , evaporativ e testing , an d servic e accumulation ) expecte d t o resul t i nth e highes t emissions , provided : (i ) Th e fuel s whic hconstitut e th e mixtur e wil l b e use d i n custome r service , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d b

yth e manufacture r t o showtha t th e designate d fue l mixture s woul d resul t i nthe highes t emissions , an d (iii ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (3 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph(d)(1 ) o f thi s sectio nshal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3 ) .

-48

-P.2 1

8 . AnewSectio n86.113-9 4 i s propose d t o b e added t o Subpar t B , t o read a s follows : §86.113-9 4 Fue l specifications . (a ) Otto-cycl e tes t fuel . (1 ) Gasolin e having th e following specification s wil l b e use d b yth e Administrato r i n exhaus t an

d evaporative emissio ntesting o f petroleum-fuele d Otto-cycl e vehicles . Gasolin e having th e following specificatio n o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d b yth e manufacture r i n exhaus t an d evaporativ e testing excep t tha t octan e specification s d o no t apply .

-49

-P.2 2

Ite m Octane , research , Sensitivity , Lead (organic) , Distillatio n Range :

IBP[2] , 1 0 pet . point , 5 0 pet . point , 9 0 pet . point , EP , (max. ) Sulfur , weigh t pet. , Phosphorus , max . RVP[3,4] , ASTMTes t Metho d No . min . m m . g/U.S . gal . (g/litter ) o p 

### CC ) o p 

### CC ) o p 

### CC ) o p 

### CC ) o p 

## C O max . g/U.S . gal . (g/liter ) ps i (kPa ) Hydrocarbo n composition : Olefins , Aromatics , Saturate s max . pet. , max . pet. , D269 9

... . D323 7 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D126 6 D323 1 D323 1 D131 9 D131 9 D131 9 Valu e 9 3 7. 5 0.050[1 ] (0.013H1 ] 75-9 5 (23.9-35 ) 120-13 5 (48.9-57.2 ) 200-23 0 (93.3-110 ) 300-32 5 (148.9-162.8 ) 41 5 (212.8 ) 0.1 0 0.00 5 (0.0013 ) 8.7-9. 2 (60.0-63.4 ) 1 0 3 5 [5 ] [1 ] Maximum . [2 ] Fo r testing a t altitude s above 1,21 9 m(4,00 0 ft ) th e specifie d rang e i s 75°-105° F (23.9°-40.6°C) . [3 ] Fo r testing whic hi s unrelate d t o evaporativ e emissio n control , th e specifie d rang e i s 8.0-9. 2 ps i (55.2-63. 4 kPa) . [4 ] Fo r testing a t altitude s above 1,21 9 m(4,00 0 ft ) th e specifie d rang e i s 7.9-9. 2 ps i (54.5-63. 4 kPa) . [5 ] Remainder .

-50

-P.2 3 (2 ) Unleade d gasolin e representativ e o f commercia l gasolin e whic hwil l b e generall yavailabl e throughretai l outlet s shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulatio nfo r petroleum-fuele d Otto-cycl e vehicles . Leade d gasolin e wil l no t b e use d i n servic e accumulation . (i ) Th e octan e rating o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e n o highe r than 1. 0 Researc hoctan e numbe r above th e minimu m recommende d b

yth e manufacture r an d hav e a minimu m sensitivit yo f 7. 5 octan e numbers , wher e sensitivit yi s define d a s th e Researc hoctan e numbe r minu s th e Moto r octan e number . (ii ) Th e Rei d Vapo r Pressur e o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e characteristi c o f th e moto r fue l use d during th e seaso n i n whic hth e servic e accumulatio n take s place . (3 ) Methano l fue l use d for exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i nservic e accumulatio no f methanol-fuele d Otto-cycl e vehicle s shal l b e representativ e o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio n i n accordanc e wit hparagraph(3) .

-51

-P.2 4 (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation . (4 ) Othe r methano l fuel s mayb e use d for testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) Theyar e commerciall yavailable , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l listed unde r paragraph(a)(3 ) o f thi s sectio n woul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o nemission s o r durability , an

d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (5 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (a)(2) , (a)(3) , an d (a)(4 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) . (b ) Diese l tes t fuel . (1 ) Th e petroleu mfuel s employe d for testing diese l vehicle s shal l b e cleanan d

-52

-P.2 5

bright , wit hpour an d clou

d point s adequat e for operability . Th e petroleu mfue l maycontai nnonmetalli c additive s a s follows : cetan e improver , meta l deactivator , antioxidant , dehazer , antirust , pour depressant , dye , dispersan t an

d biocide . (2 ) Petroleu

mfue l fo r diese l vehicle s meeting th e following specifications , or substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n exhaus t emissio ntesting . Th e grad e o f petroleu mfue l recommende d b

yth e engin e manufacturer , commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 2-D " grad e diesel , shal l b e used .

Cetan e Cetan e Ite m

Numbe r Inde x Distillatio n range : 1 0 pet . 5 0 pet . 9 0 pet . Gravit y IBP ,

point , point , point , EP ,

t Tota l sulfur , o p 

### CC ) o p 

### CC ) o p 

### CC ) o p C C ) o p C C ) °AP I pet . Hydrocarbo n compositio n Aromatics , min . pet . Paraffins , naphthenes , ole f Flashp o Viscos i in s

int , min . ty , centistoke s o p

C C ) ASTMTes t

Metho d No . D61 3 D97 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D131 9
D9 3 D44 5 Typ e 2- D

40-4 8 40-4 8 340-40 0 (171.1-20 4 400-46 0 (204.4-23 7 470-54 0 (243.3-28 2 560-63 0 (293.3-33 2 610-69 0 (321.1-36 5 32-3 7 0.03-0.0 5 2 7 [1 ] 13 0 (54.4 ) 2.2-3. 4 4 )

8 ) 2 ) 2 )

• 6 )

[1 ] Remainde r

-53

-P.2 6 (3 ) Petroleu

mfue l fo r diese l vehicle s meetin g th e following specifications , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulation . Th e grad e o f petroleu m diese l fue l recommende d byth e engin e manufacturer , commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 2-D " grad e diese l fuel , shal l b e used .

Ite m Cetan e Numbe r Distillatio n range : 9 0 pet . poin t Gravity , Tota l sulfur , Flashpoint , min . Viscosity , o p 

### CC ) "AP I pet . o p C C ) centistoke s ASTMTes t

Metho d D61 3 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D9 3 D45 5 No . Typ e 2- D

38-5 8 540-63 0 (282.2-343.3 ) 30-3 9 0.03-0.05 . 13 0 (54.4 ) 1.5-4. 5 (4 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i n servic e accumulatio n o f methanol-fuele d diese l vehicle s shal l b e representativ e o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d for testing an d servic e accumulatio n i n accordanc e wit hparagraph(4) . (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation .

-54

-P.2 7 (5 ) Othe r fuel s mayb e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) Theyar e commerciall yavailable , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph s (b)(2 ) an d (b)(3 ) o r (b)(4 ) o f thi s sectio n woul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o n emission s o r durability , an d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (6 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (b)(2) , (b)(3) , (b)(4) , an d (b)(5 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i naccordanc e wit h §86.090-21(b)(3) . (c ) Fuel s no t meeting th e specification s se t fort h i n thi s sectio n mayb e use d onl ywit hth e advanc e approva l o f th e Administrator .

-55
-P.2 8 (d ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s fo r flexibl e fue l vehicles . (1 ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an

d servic e accumulatio n for flexibl e fue l vehicle s shal l b e withi n th e rang e o f fue l mixture s fo r whic hth e vehicl e wa s designed . (2 ) Manufacture r testing an d servic e accumulatio n mayb e performe d using onl ythos e mixture s (mixture s mayb e differen t for exhaus t testing , evaporativ e testing , an d servic e accumulation ) expecte d t o resul t i nth e highes t emissions , provided : (i ) Th e fuel s whic hconstitut e th e mixtur e wil l b e use d i n custome r service , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d b

yth e manufacture r t o showtha t th e designate d fue l mixture s woul d resul t i nth e highes t emissions , an d (iii ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (3 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph(d)(1 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) .

-56

-P.2 9

9 . AnewSectio n 86.1313-9 1 i s propose d t o b e adde d t o Subpar t N , t o read a s follows : §86.1313-9 1 Fue l specifications . (a ) Otto-cycl e tes t fuel . (1 ) Gasolin e having the specification s listed i nTabl e N90- 1 wil l b e use d b yth e Administrato r i n exhaus t emissio ntesting petroleum-fuele d Otto-cycl e engines . Gasolin e having thes e specification s o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d b yth e manufacture r i nexhaus t emissio n testing , excep t tha t th e octan e specificatio n doe s no t apply .

-57
-P.3 0

Tabl e Ite m Octane , research , min . Sensitivity , min . Lead (organic) , g/U.S . gal . (g/liter ) Distillatio n range : IBP , ° F



## C O 1 0 pet . point , ° F



## CC ) 5 0 pet . point , ° F C C ) 9 0 pet . point , ° F C C ) EP , max . °F ,



## C O Sulphur , max . wt . pet . Phosphorus , max. , g/U.S . gal . (g/liter ) RVP , p s i (kPa ) Hydrocarbo n composition : Olefins , max . pet . Aeromatics , max . pet . Saturate s N91- 1 ASTM D269 9 D323 7 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D126 6 D323 1 D32 3 D131 9 D131 9 D131 9 Valu e 9 3 7. 5 (0.050H1 ] (0.013H1 ] 75-9 5 (23.9-35 ) 120-13 5 (48.9-57.2 ) 200-23 0 (93.3-110 ) 300-32 5 (148.9-162.8 ) 41 5 (212.8 ) 0.1 0 0.00 5 (0.0013 ) 8.0-9. 2 (60.0-63.4 ) 1 0 3 5 [2 ] [1 ] Maximum . [2 ] Remainde r (2 ) Unleade d gasolin e representative o f commercia l gasolin e whic hwil l b e generall yavailabl e throughretai l outlet s shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulation . (i ) Th e octan e rating o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e no t highe r than on e Researc hoctan e numbe r above th e minimu mrecommende d b

yth e manufacture r an d hav e a minimu

m sensitivit yo f 7. 5 octan e numbers , wher e sensitivit yi s

•58

-P.3 1

define d a s th e Researc hoctan e numbe r minu s th e Moto r octan e number . (ii ) Th e Rei d Vapo r Pressur e o f the gasolin e use d shal l b e characteristi c o f th e moto r fue l use d during th e seaso n i n whic hth e servic e accumulatio ntake s place . (3 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i nservic e accumulatio n o f methanol-fuele d Otto-cycl e engine s shal l b e representative o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio ni n accordanc e wit hparagraph(3) . (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation . (4 ) Othe r methano l fuel s mayb e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) Theyar e commerciall yavailable , an d

-59

-P.3 2 (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph(a)(3 ) o f thi s sectio n woul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o n emission s or durability , an

d (iv ) Writte n approva l fromth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (5 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (a)(2) , (a)(3) , an d (a)(4 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) . (b ) Diese l tes t fuel . (1 ) Th e petroleu

mfuel s for testing diese l engine s employe d fo r testing shal l b e cleanan d bright , wit hpou r an d clou d point s adequat e fo r operability . Th e petroleu m fue l maycontai n nonmetalli c additive s a s follows : Cetan e improver , meta l deactivator , antioxidant , dehazer , antirust , pour depressant , dye , dispersant , an d biocide . 

# li -60

-P.3 3
(2 ) Petroleu

mfue l for diese l engine s meeting the specification s i n Tabl e N90-2 , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n exhaus t emission s testing . Th e grad e o f petroleu mfue l recommende d b

yth e engin e manufacture r commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 1-D " or "Typ e 2-D " grad e diese l fue l shal l b e used .

Ite m Cetan e Distillatio n range : IBP , ° F



## C O 1 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O 5 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O 9 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O EP , ° F



## C O Gravity , "AP I Tota l sulfur , pet . Hydrocarbo n composition : Aromatics , pet . Parafins , Naphthene s Olefin s Flashpoint , min. , °F ,



## C O Viscosity , centistoke s Tabl e N9 1 ASTM D61 3 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D131 9 J D131 9 D9 3 D44 5 - 2 Typ e 1-D

48-5 4 330-39 0 (165.6-198.9 ) 370-43 0 (187.8-221.1 ) 410-48 0 (210-248.9 ) 460-52 0 (237.8-271.1 ) 500-56 0 (260.0-293.3 ) 40-4 4 0.08-0.1 2 8[1 ] [2 ] 12 0 (48.9 ) 1.6-2. 0 Typ e 2- D

42-5 0 340-40 0 (171.1-204.4 ) 400-46 0 (204.4-237.8 ) 470-54 0 (243.3-282.2 ) 560-63 0 (293.3-332.2 ) 610-69 0 (321.1-365.6 )

32-3 7 0.08-0.1 2 27[1 ] [2 ] 13 0 (54.4 ) 2.2-3. 4 [1 ] Minimum . [2 ] Remainder ,

-61

-(3 ) Petroleu mfue l fo r diese l engine s meeting th e specification s i n Tabl e N90-3 , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulation . Th e grad e o f petroleu mdiese l fue l recommende d b yth e engin e manufacturer , commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 1-D " or "Typ e 2-D " grad e diese l fue l shal l b e used :

Ite m Cetan e Numbe r Distillatio n range : 9 0 pet . point , ° F

C C ) Gravity , °AP I Tota l sulfur , pet . Flashpoint , min. , °F ,



## C O Viscosity , centistoke s Tab l e N91

- ASTM D61 3 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D9 3 D45 5 3 Typ e 1-D

42-5 6 440-53 0 Typ e 2- D

30-5 8 540-63 0 (226.7-276.7)(282.2-332.2 )

39-4 5 0.08-0.1 2 12 0 (48.9 ) 1.2-2. 2 30-4 2

0.08-0.1 2 13 0 (54.4 ) 1.5-4. 5 (4 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i n servic e accumulatio n o f methanol-fuele d diese l engine s shal l b e .representative o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio ni n accordanc e wit hparagraph(4) .

-62

-P.3 5 (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation . (5 ) Othe r fuel s mayb e use d for testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) The yar e commerciall yavailable , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph s (b)(2 ) an d (b)(3 ) o r (b)(4 ) o f thi s sectio n woul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o n emission s or durability , an d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (6 ) Th e specificatio nrang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (b)(2) , (b)(3) , (b)(4) , an d (b)(5 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i naccordanc e wit h §86.090-21(b)(3) .

-63

-P.3 6 (c ) Fuel s no t meeting th e specification s se t fort h i n thi s sectio n mayb e use d onl ywit hth e advanc e approva l o f the Administrator . (d ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s fo r flexibl e fue l vehicles . (1 ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an

d servic e accumulatio n for flexibl e fue l vehicle s shal l b e withi n th e rang e o f fue l mixture s fo r whic hth e vehicl e wa s designed . (2 ) Manufacture r testing an d servic e accumulatio n mayb e performe d using onl ythos e mixture s (mixture s mayb e differen t for exhaus t testing , evaporativ e testing , an d servic e accumulation ) expecte d t o resul t i n th e highes t emissions , provided : (i ) Th e fuel s whic hconstitut e the mixtur e wil l b e use d i n custome r service , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d b

yth e manufacture r t o showtha t th e designate d fue l mixture s woul d resul t i n th e highes t emissions , an d (iii ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing .

-64

-P.3 7
(3 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f the fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph(d)(2 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) .

-65

-P.3 8

10 . AnewSectio n 86.1313-9 4 i s propose d t o b e adde d t o Subpar t N , t o rea

d a s follows : §86.1313-9 4 Fue l specifications . (a ) Otto-cycl e tes t fuel . (1 ) Gasolin e having th e specification s listed i n Tabl e N90- 1 wil l b e use d b yth e Administrato r i n exhaus t emissio ntesting petroleum-fuele d Otto-cycl e engines . Gasolin e having thes e specification s o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d b yth e manufacture r i n exhaus t emissio n testing , excep t tha t th e octan e specificatio n doe s no t apply .

-66

-P.3 9

Tabl e Ite m Octane , research , min . Sensitivity , min . Lead (organic) , g/U.S . gal . (g/liter ) Distillatio n range : IBP , ° F



### CC ) 1 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O 5 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O 9 0 pet . point , ° F



### CC ) EP , max . °F ,



### CC ) Sulphur , max . wt . pet . Phosphorus , max. , g/U.S . gal . (g/liter ) RVP , ps i (kPa ) Hydrocarbo n composition : Olefins , max . pet . Aeromatics , max . pet . Saturate s N94- 1 ASTM D269 9 D323 7 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D126 6 D323 1 D32 3 D131 9 D131 9 D131 9 Valu e 9 3 7. 5 (0.050)[1 ] (0.013M1 ] 75-9 5 (23.9-35 ) 120-13 5 (48.9-57.2 ) 200-23 0 (93.3-110 ) 300-32 5 (148.9-162.8 ) 41 5 (212.8 ) 0.1 0 0.00 5 (0.0013 ) 8.0-9. 2 (60.0-63.4 ) 1 0 3 5 [2 ] [1 ] Maximum . [2 ] Remainder . (2 ) Unleade d gasolin e representative o f commercia l gasolin e whic hwil l b e generall yavailabl e throughretai l outlet s shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulation . (i ) Th e octan e rating o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e no t highe r than on e Researc hoctan e numbe r above th e minimu m recommende d b

yth e manufacture r an d hav e a minimu

m sensitivit yo f 7. 5 octan e numbers , wher e sensitivit yi s

-67

-P.4 0

define d a s th e Researc hoctan e numbe r minu s th e Moto r octan e number . (ii ) Th e Rei d Vapo r Pressur e o f th e gasolin e use d shal l b e characteristi c o f th e moto r fue l use d during th e seaso n i n whic hth e servic e accumulatio ntake s place . (3 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i nservic e accumulatio no f methanol-fuele d Otto-cycl e engine s shal l b e representativ e o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio ni n accordanc e wit hparagraph(3) . (ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l fue l t o b e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulation . (4 ) Othe r methano l fuel s mayb e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio nprovided : (i ) Theyar e commerciall yavailable , an d

-68

-P.4 1 (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph(a)(3 ) o f thi s sectio n woul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o nemission s o r durability , an

d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (5 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (a)(2) , (a)(3) , an d (a)(4 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) . (b ) Diese l tes t fuel . (1 ) Th e petroleu

mfuel s fo r testing diese l engine s employe d fo r testing shal l b e clean an d bright , wit hpou r an d clou d point s adequat e fo r operability . Th e petroleu m fue l maycontai n nonmetalli c additive s a s follows : Cetan e improver , meta l deactivator , antioxidant , dehazer , antirust , pour depressant , dye , dispersant , an d biocide .

-69

-P.4 2 (2 ) Petroleu

m fue l fo r diese l engine s meeting th e specification s i n Tabl e N94-2 , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n exhaus t emission s testing . Th e grad e o f petroleu mfue l recommende d b

yth e engin e manufacture r commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 1-D " o r "Typ e 2-D " grad e diese l fue l shal l b e used . Tabl e N94- 2

Ite m Cetan e Numbe r Cetan e Index Distillatio n range : IBP , ° F



## C O 1 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O 5 0 pet . point , ° F



### CC ) 9 0 pet . point , ° F



### CC ) EP , ° F



## C O Gravity , °AP I Tota l sulfur , pet . Hydrocarbo n composition : Aromatics , pet . Pa r a f ins , Naphthenes , Olefin s Flashpoint , min. , °F ,



## C O Viscosity , centistoke s ASTM D61 3 D97 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D131 9 D131 9 D9 3 D44 5 Typ e 1-D

40-5 4 40-4 2 330-39 0 (165.6-198.9 ) 370-43 0 (187.8-221.1 ) 410-48 0 (210-248.9 ) 460-52 0 (237.8-271.1 ) 500-56 0 (260.0-293.3 ) 40-4 4 0.03-0.0 5 8[1 ] [2 ] 12 0 (48.9 ) 1.6-2. 0 Typ e 2- D

40-4 8 40-4 8 340-40 0 (171.1-204.4 ) 400-46 0 (204.4-237.8 ) 470-54 0 (243.3-282.2 ) 560-63 0 (293.3-332.2 ) 610-69 0 (321.1-365.6 )

32-3 7 0.03-0.0 5 27[1 ] [2 ] 13 0 (54.4 ) 2.0-3. 2 [1 ] Minimum . [2 ] Remainder .

-70

-P.4 3 (3 ) Petroleu

mfue l fo r diese l engine s meeting th e specification s i n Tabl e N94-3 , o r substantiall yequivalen t specification s approve d b yth e Administrator , shal l b e use d i n servic e accumulation . Th e grad e o f petroleu m diese l fue l recommende d b yth e engin e manufacturer , commerciall y designate d a s "Typ e 1-D " or "Typ e 2-D " grad e diese l fue l shal l b e used :

Ite m Tabl e N94- 3

ASTM Typ e 1-D Typ e 2- D Cetan e Numbe r Distillatio n range : 9 0 pet . point , ° F



## C O Gravity , °AP I Tota l sulfur , pet . Flashpoint , min. , °F ,



## C O Viscosity , centistoke s D61 3 D8 6 D28 7 D262 2 D9 3 D45 5 (226 .

0 40-5 6 440-53 0 7-276.7)(28 2 39-4 5 .03-0.0 5 ( 12 0 (48.9 ) 1.2-2. 2 30-5 8

540-63 0 .2-332.2 ) 30-4 2 3.03-0.0 5 13 0 (54.4 ) 1.5-4. 5 (4 ) Methano l fue l use d fo r exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an d i n servic e accumulatio no f methanol-fuele d diese l engine s shal l b e representativ e o f commerciall yavailabl e methano l fue l an d shal l consis t o f a t leas t 5 0 percen t methano l b yvolume . (i ) Manufacturer s shal l recommen d th e methano l fue l t o b e use d for testing an d servic e accumulatio ni n accordanc e wit hparagraph(4) .

•71

-(ii ) Th e Administrato r shal l determin e th e methano l

fue l t o b e use d for testing an d servic e accumulation . (5 ) Othe r fuel s mayb e use d fo r testing an d servic e accumulatio n provided : (i ) The yar e commerciall yavailable , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d t o showtha t onl yth e designate d fue l woul d b e use d i n custome r service , an d (iii ) Us e o f a fue l liste d unde r paragraph s (b)(2 ) an d (b)(3 ) o r (b)(4 ) o f thi s sectio nwoul d hav e a detrimenta l effec t o n emission s o r durability , an d (iv ) Writte n approva l fro mth e Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing . (6 ) Th e specificatio n rang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph s (b)(2) , (b)(3) , (b)(4) , an d (b)(5 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l b e reporte d i naccordanc e wit h §86.090-21(b)(3) .

-72

-(c ) Fuel s no t meeting th e specification s se t fort h

i n thi s section mayb e use d onl ywit hth e advanc e approva l o f th e Administrator . (d ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s fo r flexibl e fue l vehicles . (1 ) Mixture s o f petroleu man d methano l fuel s use d for exhaus t an d evaporativ e emissio n testing an

d servic e accumulatio n for flexibl e fue l vehicle s shal l b e withi n th e rang e o f fue l mixture s fo r whic hth e vehicl e wa s designed . (2 ) Manufacture r testing an d servic e accumulatio n mayb e performe d using onl ythos e mixture s (mixture s mayb e differen t for exhaus t testing , evaporativ e testing , an d servic e accumulation ) expecte d t o resul t i nth e highes t emissions , provided : (i ) Th e fuel s whic hconstitut e th e mixtur e wil l b e use d i n custome r service , an d (ii ) Information , acceptabl e t o th e Administrator , i s provide d b

yth e manufacture r t o showtha t th e designate d fue l mixture s woul d resul t i nth e highes t emissions , an d (iii ) Writte n approva l fro mthe Administrato r o f th e fue l specification s mus t b e provide d prio r t o th e star t o f testing .

-73

-P.4 6

(3 ) Th e specificatio nrang e o f th e fuel s t o b e use d unde r paragraph(d)(2 ) o f thi s sectio nshal l b e reporte d i n accordanc e wit h§86.090-21(b)(3) .

-74

-P.4 7

Background EPAhas

- initiate d a rulemaking whic hwoul d implemen t sulfur control s fo r on-highwayfuels . Since , unde r thi s proposal , EPAi s regulating onl yfuel s intende d fo r highway use , on e o f th e outcome s o f th e rulemaking wil l b e th e introductio n o f separat e grade s o f diese l fue l for on-highway an d off-highwayuses . A s note d i n EPA' s proposal , th e degre e t o whic hrefiner s and/o r marketer s wil l segregat e on-highway an d off-highwayfuel s i s unclear . Representative s o f th e Petroleu

mMarketer s Associatio n o f Americ a hav e expresse d concern s tha t th e nee d t o segregat e diese l fue l wil l hav e advers e impact s o n thei r members . Th e purpos e o f thi s stud yi s t o evaluat e th e potentia l effect s o f EPA' s propose d regulatio nfo r on-highwaydiese l fue l o n smal l independen t fue l marketer s fo r suc harea s a s cos t o f product , changing marke t share s o r plan t closings . Th e genera l approac hwil l b e t o characteriz e keyaspect s o f thi s segmen t o f th e fue l distributio n industryan d t o us e a "mode l plant " analysi s t o evaluat e th e economi c impact s o f variou s possibl e response s t o EPA' s requirements . Ther e wil l b e thre e phase s t o thi s project : identificatio n o f keyvariable s relevan t t o th e analysi s an

d collectio n o f associate d data , characterizatio n o f mode l plants , an

d a cas hflowanalysi s o f appropriat e response s o f eac ho f th e mode l plants . EPAi s no t onl yintereste d i n potentia l advers e impact s o n affecte d marketer s bu t als o i n potentia l benefits . Comment s submitte d b yth e Petroleu

m Marketer s Associatio n o f Americ a an d individua l marketer s t o EPAshoul d b e use d a s background o nth e issue s o f concern .P.4 8

Tas k Descriptio n Fulfillmen t o f thi s wor k assignmen t require s th e following : I . Characteriz e th e pertinen t economi c an d regulatoryaspect s o f th e marketing o f diese l fuel , especiall ythos e operator s independen t o f th e majo r refiners . Specia l attentio n shoul d b e pai d t o thos e marketer s servicing bot h on-highwayan

d on e o r bot ho f off-highwayo r home heating oi l customer s (marketer s no t handling bot hon-highwayan d unregulate d fue l type s ar e no t expecte d t o b e affecte d b y th e ne wrequirements) . Thi s characterizatio nshoul d procee d i n two steps : A . Identif ykeyparameter s bearing onth e analysi s an d formulat e an overal l approac ht o th e wor k assignment . Th e characteristic s considere d shoul d include , bu t no t b e limite d to , th e following items : a . Th e size s o f th e independen t marketer s o f diese l fuel . b . Th e type s o f product s carrie d b yindependen t marketers . c . Th e abilit yo f independen t marketer s t o us e an y existing capacit yt o handl e segregate d diese l fuel . d . Th e abilit yo f independen t diese l fue l marketer s t o absorbcapita l cost s neede d t o handl e segregate d diese l fuel . e . Th e competitiv e situatio n o f th e independen t marketer s o f diese l fuel . f . Relevan t economi c parameter s suc ha s deb t t o equit y ratios , profi t margins , cos t structur e (fixe d vs . variable) , constraint s o nfinancing additiona l facilities , ne t income befor e taxes , an d rat e o f retur n o n investment . Fo r eac ho f th e items i n thi s section , identif yth e media n an d th e rang e t o b e use d i n thi s analysis . Prio r t o dat a collection , obtai n th e approva l o f th e wor k assignmen t monito r fo r th e overal l approach , variable s t o b e studie d an d th e anticipate d source s fo r th e data . B . Procee d wit happrove d dat a collection . II . I n consultatio n wit hEPA , develop a smal l numbe r o f representativ e categories , o r "mode l plants, " int o whic h th e operation s o f affecte d independen t diese l fue l marketer s ca n b e classifie d an d parameteriz e th e relevan t economi c factor s fo r eac hmode l plant . Identif yth e mode l plan t typ e discriminator s base d upo n th e ke yfactor s affecting th e respons e o f tha t segmen t o f th e industry . Th e wor k assignmen t monito r mus t approv e th e mode l plan t criteri a an

d parameterizatio n befor e wor k proceed s t o step III .P.4 9

III . Fo r eac ho f th e mode l plants , perform a discounte d cas h flowanalysi s 'to evaluat e th e impact s o f possibl e response s t o EPA' s proposal . A s financia l dat a mayno t b e readil yavailable , thi s mayrequir e a goo d dea l o f informe d judgment . Possibl e industr yresponse s woul d include : a . Carrying low-sulfur diese l fue l a s a separat e segregate d produc t b yutilizing curren t capacit yo r developing ne wcapacit yt o stor e an d distribut e product . b . Distributing onl ylow-sulfur fue l t o al l customers , eve n thos e no t require d t o us e i t b yth e propose d regulations . c . Dropping eithe r th e on-highwayo r off-highwayan d heating fue l portio no f curren t customer s an d handling onl yon e grad e o f diese l fuel . Modeling result s shoul d evaluat e th e economi c implication s o f thes e choice s (withi nth e contex t o f othe r know n constraints ) o nsmal l marketers . Among othe r aspect s o f th e evaluation , output s shoul d includ e equivalen t cos t change s pe r gallo n o f fue l sol d necessitate d b

yeac hresponse , an assessmen t o f th e abilit yo f th e markete r t o pas s thes e cost s throught o customer s an

d effect s o nplan t profitabilit yan d marke t share . Base d upo n marke t share s represente d b yeac hmode l plan t categoryan d b yth e affecte d independen t fue l marketer s a s a whole , mode l plan t result s shoul d b e compile d separatel yfo r bot hindividua l segment s a s wel l a s industrywid e aggregate . Result s shoul d asses s overal l impacts , including likel ydegre e o f produc t segregation , fue l pric e impact , profitability , availabilit yo f on-highwayfue l t o consumers , potentia l plan t closures , resulting employmen t impact s an d an ylosse s o r increase s o f marke t share . Result s shoul d identif ybenefit s a s wel l a s potentia l advers e impacts . Th e repor t shoul d als o contai n th e dat a collecte d an d th e input s t o th e cas hflow analysi s i n an appendix .