### STAFF REPORT: INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REQUIREMENTS T O REDUCE IDLING EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE TRUCKS, BEGINN ING IN 2008



### Date of Release: September 1, 2005 Scheduled for Consideration: October 20-21, 2005

This report has been prepared by the staff of the C alifornia Air Resources Board. Publication does not signify that the contents nece ssarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does mention of tra de names or commercial products

constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.i TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .....................................

................................................... .................. iii

LIST OF FIGURES....................................

................................................... .................. iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................

................................................... ........... v

I. INTRODUCTION .......................................

................................................... ............ 1

II. BACKGROUND .........................................

................................................... ........... 3

III. NEED FOR CONTROL ...................................

................................................... ...... 7

IV. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS................... ................................... 8

V. TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY .......................... ............................................... 27

VI. REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES............................ .............................................. 33

VII. ECONOMIC IMPACTS...................................

................................................... ..... 36

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE .............................. .................................................. 4 2

IX. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS....... ...................... 43

X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ..................... ................................... 53

XI. REFERENCES.........................................

................................................... ........... 54

APPENDIX A

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 13, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, SECTION 1956.8, EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES
FOR 1985 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL YEAR HEAVY-DUTY ENGIN ES AND

VEHICLES........................................................................... A-1

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 13, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, SECTION 2404, EMISSION CONTROL LABELS AND CONSUMER INFORMATION –

1995 AND LATER SMALL OFF-ROAD ENGINES .................................

............ A-1

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 13, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, SECTION 2424, EMISSION CONTROL LABELS – 1996 AND LA TER OFF-ROAD

COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES............................................. A-1ii

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 13, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, SECTION 2425, DEFECTS WARRANTY REQUIREMENTS FOR 199 6 AND LATER

OFF-ROAD COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES .................................

............ A-1

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 13, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, SECTION 2485, AIRBORNE TOXIC CONTROL MEASURE TO LIM IT DIESELFUELED COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE IDLING ..............................

...... A-1

APPENDIX B – PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA EXHAUST

EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR 2004 AND SUBSEQUENT

MODEL HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL-ENGINES AND VEHICLES..................... .......... B-1iii LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Certification Test Cycle ..................

................................................... .............. 12

Table 2: Net Fuel and Maintenance Savings..........

................................................... .... 40

Table 3: Fleet Average Idle Emission Factors.......

................................................... ..... 44

Table 4: Off-Road Diesel Emission Standards (g/kW-h r) .............................................. 45

Table 5: Diesel Fueled APS Emission Rates ..........

................................................... ... 46

Table 6: 2010 Estimated Statewide Idling Emission B enefits........................................ 48

Table 7: 2020 Estimated Statewide Idling Emission B enefits........................................ 48

Table 8: 2010 Estimated South Coast Air Basin Idlin g Emission Benefits..................... 49

Table 9: 2020 Estimated South Coast Air Basin Idlin g Emission Benefits..................... 49

Table 10: Cost-Effectiveness in Dollars per Pound o f NOx+ROG Reduced ................. 51iv LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Impacts on Operators – 2008 and Newer Cal ifornia Truck ........................20

Figure 2. Impacts on Operators – 2007 and Newer Out -of-State Trucks and

2007 California Trucks ...................................................... ........................ 21

Figure 3. Impacts on Operators – Pre-2007 Out-of-St ate and California Registered

Trucks ............................................

.................................... .................... 22

Figure 4. Label for an engine meeting the optional NOx standard ................................ 26

Figure 5. Label for an APS with additional PM contr ol ................................................. . 26

Figure 6. Hologram.................................

................................................... .................... 26

Figure 7. California GHG emissions by Type of Gas in 2003 (Bemis, 2005)................ 47

Figure 8. Sources of California’s 2003 GHG Emissio ns (by End-Use Sector) (Bemis, 2005)......................................

................................................... ................. 47v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

California’s plan for reducing reactive organic gas es (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which contribute to both ozone and particula te matter (PM) formation, is set forth in the 2003 State and Federal Strategy for the Cali fornia State Implementation Plan (2003 SIP). Diesel engines produce a significant p ortion of the state’s air pollution and toxic emissions. Controlling these emissions is th erefore an important element of California’s strategy for attaining air quality sta ndards and constitutes a significant part of the 2003 SIP. Staff’s proposal reduces emission s resulting from the idle operation of diesel trucks, and is part of the 2003 SIP’s propos ed on-road heavy-duty vehicle control measure “ON-ROAD HEAVY DUTY 3”. Staff’s proposal w ill contribute to fulfillment of

the committed emission reductions from this control measure.

Impacts of Idling In California, emissions generated by idling trucks pose a significant air quality problem. Truck operators generally idle their engines at tru ck stops and rest areas during layover hours to provide heat or cooling to the sleeper ber th, to operate on-board electrical accessories, to maintain battery charge, and to war m the engine for easy start-up during cold weather. Truck idling is also significant at warehouse/distribution centers and port terminals where loading and unloading freight requi re long waiting periods. The high density of idling trucks at such locations for exte nded periods of time can produce highly localized and concentrated emissions, which adverse ly affect the health of the drivers and the neighboring communities. The health concer ns become more serious when these idling centers are located in low income comm unities that are already disproportionately impacted by air pollution. Truc k idling also consumes fuel, produces greenhouse gas emissions, and increases engine main tenance costs.

Existing Regulations The Air Resources Board (ARB) on December 12, 2002 adopted requirements that operators of school buses, transit buses, and other commercial vehicles manually shut off their engines upon arriving at a school. Resta rting the engines is limited to no more than 30 seconds before departing. The ARB subseque ntly adopted at its public hearing of July 22, 2004 more general requirements to limit emissions from idling trucks and buses. Operators of commercial trucks and buses ar e required to manually shut off their engines before the idling time limit of five minutes is reached. However, this requirement does not apply to idling sleeper berth equipped trucks unless they are

located within 100 feet from residential homes or s chools.

Proposed Regulation Staff’s proposal would limit the amount of time sle eper berth equipped trucks are operated at idle and provide other options to accom modate driver comfort during times when the truck is not being driven. The proposal w ill also reduce fuel consumption and engine maintenance costs, thereby benefiting owners of compliant trucks. The proposal consists of two major components, affecting new eng ines and trucks, and existing engines and trucks.vi

Proposed Requirements for New Trucks The new engine requirements apply to 2008 and subse quent model year diesel engines in trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating greate r than 14,000 pounds. The proposal requires that they be equipped with a non-programma ble engine shutdown system that automatically shuts down the engine after five minu tes of continuous idling. The system would activate when the truck is stopped, the trans mission is set in the “neutral” or “park” position, and the parking brake is engaged. If the parking brake is not engaged, the shutdown system would automatically shut down t he engine after 15 minutes of continuous idling. This avoids undesirable or freq uent engine shutdowns, such as when a truck is stopped in traffic congestion. In addit ion, the proposal allows the driver to reset the engine shutdown system timer as long as h e or she is present inside the truck. It also includes override provisions when the engin e is operating power take-off equipment.

Trucks with an engine that utilizes the idle shutdo wn system would need to provide other methods for heating/cooling the cabin and pow ering accessories when the truck is not being driven. To meet those needs the truck ma nufacturer may install an auxiliary power system (APS), fuel-fired heater, thermal ener gy storage system, and/or a power inverter/charger with an electrically driven heatin g and air conditioning system. These systems are currently commercially available.

If cab comfort devices such as those listed above a re not offered by the engine or truck manufacturer, the owner may choose to equip his/her truck with aftermarket

cab comfort devices. Other alternatives include parking at a t ruck stop that offers an off-board air conditioning or heating system, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies.

To avoid incorporating a new engine shutdown system , an engine manufacturer may certify an engine to a NOx idling emission standard of 30 grams per hour. This option is proposed because it may be possible to control NOx emissions during idling. However, this option isn’t likely to become available prior to 2010 because that is when more advanced NOx controls are expected to be used for a ll heavy-duty engines.

If manufacturers succeed in developing engines whic h meet the NOx idling emission standard, operators would be allowed to idle the ma in engine continuously to provide cab comfort and electrical power during rest period s, and would not need to install alternative cab comfort devices. However, they wou ld still be subject to the existing five minute idling restriction when the truck is located within 100 feet of a restricted area.

The proposed new engine requirements do not apply t o gasoline engines or engines produced for use in buses (commercial buses as well as school buses), and

recreational vehicles.vii

Proposed Requirements for Existing Trucks Starting on January 1, 2008, operators of sleeper b erth equipped trucks would be required to shut down their engines before a five-m inute idle time limit is reached. This would apply to trucks registered in California and out-of-state.

Owners of pre-2008 model year sleeper berth equippe d trucks where drivers rest for extended periods in California, may need to retrofi t their trucks to provide cab comfort during these rest periods. These cab comfort devic es include, but are not limited to, APSs, fuel-fired heaters, thermal energy storage sy stems, and power inverter/chargers with electrically driven heating and air conditioni ng systems. Owners may also choose to park at a truck stop and plug in to on-shore ele ctrical power to run an on-board electrically driven climate control system and acce ssories or use an off-board air conditioning or heating system, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies.

Owners of 2008 and subsequent model year sleeper be rth equipped trucks may also need to retrofit their trucks to provide cab comfor t for rest periods if cab comfort devices are not offered by the engine or truck manufacturer at the time the truck is initially

offered for sale.

Proposed Emission Performance Requirements for Cab Comfort Devices Some of the cab comfort devices, such as internal c ombustion APSs and fuel-fired heaters, produce emissions. Performance requiremen ts are proposed for these systems which differ depending on whether the truck ’s engine is a 2007 or later model.

All APS engines will have to be certified to the of f-road emission standards. Currently available APSs are already doing this. Beginning i n 2008, trucks with 2007 and subsequent model year engines equipped with a PM fi lter, or “trap”, will have the additional requirement to either route the APS’s ex haust through the PM trap of the main truck engine or to retrofit the APS separately with a “level 3” PM reducing device (likely to be a PM trap) which achieves an 85% redu ction in emissions. Because of warranty issues, staff believes connecting main eng ine and APS exhaust systems together to control PM emissions will occur at the engine or truck manufacturer level rather than by aftermarket APS manufacturers.

Trucks equipped with 2006 or older model year engin es do not have PM aftertreatment systems and so owners may use a diesel-fueled APS w ithout adding PM control

devices.

Beginning in 2008, all 2007 and subsequent model ye ar trucks equipped with fuel-fired heaters will need to comply with the fuel-fired hea ter emissions requirements specified in the Low Emission Vehicle Program to operate in C alifornia. Several manufacturers currently produce fuel-fired heaters for heavy-duty trucks that meet the proposed requirement.

The following flow chart summarizes in general staf f’s proposed requirements and their impacts on truck operators.viii Certified to

the low NOx

idle standard? SLEEPER TRUCKS OPERATED IN CALIFORNIA

Truck will not be equipped with

automatic idle

shutdown timer.

Operator may idle truck’s engine for extended periods of time, except within 100

feet of schools or homes.

Operator may choose topark at locations with offboard heating and cooling (e.g., IdleAire Technology.) Is truck modified with

an alternative cab

comfort device that meets the proposed requirements ? Is truck equipped

with automatic 5

minute idle

shutdown timer? Truck is either federally or pre-2008 California certified. YES

NO

YES NO

YES NO

Operator may use this

technology for cab comfort

.ix

Proposed Label Requirements Beginning in 2008, trucks equipped with 2007 and su bsequent model year PM-trap equipped engines and meeting the NOx idling emissio n standard or equipped with an internal combustion APS will be required to have a label affixed to the hood of the truck in order for these engines to operate during rest p eriods in California. The label requirements are being proposed to help enforce the idling requirements in the field by enforcement personnel.

Economic Impacts to Businesses When the proposed amendments to the new engine and in-use idling ATCM requirements take effect in 2008, trucking business es that own or purchase new trucks with sleeper berths may incur additional expenses d ue to the need to buy cab comfort devices to provide sleeper berth climate control an d power for accessories. Similarly, owners of out-of-state trucks that frequently opera te in California may also need to buy cab comfort devices to provide sleeper berth climat e control and power for accessories. However, these expenses will be offset by the savin gs resulting from reduced fuel use and reduced maintenance requirements. Staff estima tes these additional costs can be recovered within 1 to 2.5 years, depending on the n umber of idle hours reduced and the type of technology used. Therefore, overall the pr oposed requirements will benefit truck owners and operators because of reduced operating c osts.

Air Quality Impacts and Cost-Effectiveness To estimate the emission reductions from the propos al, staff assumed pre-2007 model year sleeper berth equipped California and out-of-s tate trucks will use California certified off-road or federally certified non-road diesel-fueled APSs and that dieselfueled APSs retrofitted with a level 3 verified PM control strategy will be used for 2007 and subsequent model year sleeper berth equipped Ca lifornia and out-of-state trucks.

Statewide emission reductions are estimated to be a pproximately 46 tons per day (tpd) of NOx, 4.2 tpd of ROG, 1930 tpd (0.7 million tons per year) of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), and 0.42 tpd of PM emissions in 2010. For the Sout h Coast Air Basin, the corresponding emission reductions are estimated as 18 tpd of NOx, 1.6 tpd of ROG, 740 tpd (0.3 million tons per year) of CO 2 , and 0.15 tpd of PM in 2010.

Staff’s proposal is expected to provide a cost savi ngs to truck owners over the useful life of the cab comfort device by reducing the amount of fuel consumed and the truck’s maintenance requirements. Under these circumstance s, the emission reductions would be “free”, and the cost-effectiveness could not be calculated. If cost savings were set to zero as a worst case, cost-effectiveness can be est imated and compared to other emission control regulations adopted by the ARB.

For a 2008 and subsequent model year California cer tified truck equipped with a nonprogrammable engine shutdown system which uses a di esel fueled APS with a level 3 verified PM trap, the cost-effectiveness is estimat ed to be $2.00 per pound of NOx plus

ROG reduced.x

For a 2007 model year truck, the engine would not h ave the automatic shutdown system but the truck would have a PM trap. Thus, u se of an APS would subject it to the 2008 requirement. Retrofitting a 2007 truck with a diesel-fueled APS with a level 3 verified PM trap produces a cost-effectiveness esti mate of $1.98 per pound of NOx plus

ROG reduced.

For a 2006 and older model year California truck eq uipped with a certified diesel-fueled APS with no additional PM control, the cost-effecti veness is estimated to be $1.44 per pound of NOx plus ROG reduced.

Fleets have a distribution of truck model years. T aking this into account produces a fleet average cost-effectiveness estimated to be $1 .51 per pound of NOx plus ROG

reduced in 2008. These worst-case estimates all co mpare favorably to the costeffectiveness of other ARB regulations recently ado pted.1

I. INTRODUCTION

Over the last thirty years, the California Air Reso urces Board (ARB or the “Board”) has adopted a number of emission control regulations th at have resulted in significant

emission reductions from both on- and off-road mobi le sources. While these regulations have greatly improved air quality, many regions of California continue to exceed state and federal air quality standards for ozone and fin e particulate matter. Therefore, more measures need to be taken to improve California’s a ir quality and to protect the health

of its citizens.

California’s plan for reducing the reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions that contribute to both ozone and p articulate matter (PM) formation, is set forth in the 2003 State and Federal Strategy fo r the California State Implementation

Plan (2003 SIP).

In 2010, on-road heavy-duty diesel trucks are estim ated to account for as much as 28 percent, or 559 tons per day (tpd), of the statewid e mobile source NOx emission inventory and nine percent, or 12 tpd, of the state wide mobile source PM emission inventory 1 . This is of particular concern since these estima tes already take into account the stringent 2007 on-road heavy-duty diesel engine (HDDE) exhaust emission standards recently adopted by the ARB and the Unite d States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Therefore, more reductions are needed from these sources.

The proposed regulation has two related, yet distin ct, goals. One goal is to reduce idling emissions primarily from new sleeper berth e quipped trucks (hereinafter referred to as “sleeper trucks”) starting with the 2008 mode l year. Specifically, the proposed regulation would require new trucks to meet an emis sions standard when idling or have a timer system that would automatically shut the en gine off after five minutes of continuous idling. The manufacturers using timers may provide heating and cooling for driver comfort using an alternative technology such as an auxiliary power system (APS). Such an alternative technology would have to be com parable, from an emissions standpoint, to the proposed idling requirements.

The other goal of staff’s proposal targets the exis ting fleet of sleeper trucks, registered

in both California and out-of-state. For these tr ucks, the proposed regulation would require the truck operator to manually shut down hi s/her engine after five minutes of continuous idling. To provide for cab comfort, the operator may choose to retrofit his/her truck with an alternative technology such a s an APS which meets specific emissions standards. A more detailed description o f staff’s proposal is provided below.

Staff’s proposal amends sections 1956.8 and 2485 of title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR). Section 1956.8 of the CCR speci fies exhaust emissions standards and test procedures applicable to 1985 and subseque nt model year HDDEs. Staff’s

1 Based on California Almanac Emissions Projection D ata (Published 2005). Idle emissions from heavy-du ty diesel vehicles were adjusted to reflect revised average i dle times for medium heavy-duty diesel vehicles.2

proposal would modify this section by requiring new 2008 and subsequent model year on-road diesel engines with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds to be equipped with an engine shutdown syste m that automatically shuts down the engine after five minutes of continuous idling. In lieu of the engine shutdown system requirement, manufacturers may optionally certify t heir engines to a NOx idling emission standard of 30 grams per hour under loaded, low and high idle operating conditions. For purposes of discussion in this document, staff’ s proposed modifications to section 1956.8 are hereinafter referred to as “new engine r equirements”.

Section 2485 of the CCR is an airborne toxic contro l measure (ATCM) that limits idling

to no more than five minutes for in-use diesel-fuel ed commercial vehicles with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds. However, the ATCM curr ently exempts sleeper trucks when the operator is resting in the sleeper berth a nd idling the main engine for climate control or to power on-board accessories. Starting in 2008, staff’s proposal would extend section 2485’s applicability to existing and future sleeper trucks. For purposes of discussion in this document, staff’s proposed mo difications to section 2485 are hereinafter referred to as “in-use idling ATCM requ irements”.

The proposal also allows the use of alternative tec hnologies to supply power needed for cab/sleeper comfort and/or other on-board accessori es that would otherwise have been generated by the continuous idling of the truck’s m ain engine. These technologies include, but are not limited to, internal combustio n engine driven APSs and fuel-fired heaters. Such technologies would need to comply wi th defined performance requirements set forth in this proposal to operate in California and are also supported by the proposed modifications to section 2402, 2424, a nd 2425 of the CCR. Other technologies that do not directly produce emissions , such as battery electric APSs, fuel cell APSs, thermal energy storage devices, and powe r inverter chargers for use with battery and grid-supplied electricity are also allo wed. Any technology that is not identified in this proposal may also be used provid ed it is approved by the Executive Officer. The use of these devices in lieu of opera ting the truck’s main engine at idle will result in significant NOx and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emission reductions. Reductions in ROG and PM emissions are also expected, but to a le sser degree, depending on the alternative technology used.

The following chapters of the staff report provide background information, a summary of the proposed amendments, regulatory alternatives ev aluated, an economic impact analysis, environmental impact and cost-effectivene ss analysis, and conclusions and

recommendations.3

II. BACKGROUND

This chapter provides an overview of the applicable vehicle classes included in this proposal, a brief description of the truck idling c oncern, associated emissions, existing regulations, and the 2003 SIP commitments.

A. VEHICLE CLASSES

The proposed new diesel engine requirements apply t o trucks with a GVWR greater than 14,000 pounds. Examples of trucks subject to the proposal are line-haul trucks, delivery trucks, trash trucks, bulk-hauling trucks, tankers, utility trucks, and construction

vehicles.

The proposed changes to the in-use idling ATCM appl y to sleeper trucks with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds. The majority of the sl eeper trucks are in the heavy-heavy duty diesel vehicle class category (over 33,000 pou nds GVWR).

B. TRUCK IDLING EMISSIONS CONCERNS

Emissions from idling trucks pose a significant air quality problem. Idling emissions are particularly significant at locations such as truck stops, travel centers, rest areas, and at warehouse/distribution centers and port terminals w here loading and unloading freight require long waiting periods. Such locations can e xperience a very high density of trucks idling together for extended periods of time , thereby producing highly localized

and concentrated emissions. These emissions affect the health of the drivers, truck stop, warehouse, and ports personnel, and the neigh boring community. The health concerns in particular become more serious when suc h locations are located in low income communities that are already disproportionat ely impacted by air pollution.

C. EXTENT OF IDLING

Diesel trucks operate significant periods of time a t idle. The amount of idling varies widely among trucks depending on season, location, company policy, and driver needs. The U.S. EPA estimates a typical long haul sleeper truck to idle approximately 2,400 hours over the course of a year (U.S. EPA, 2004). While a report by the United States Department of Energy (Stodolsky et al., 2000) estim ates that long-haul sleeper trucks idle for about 1,800 hours per year. Based on thes e studies, staff used the average of the U.S. EPA and the Department of Energy estimates , and thus has assumed that sleeper trucks idle for 2,100 hours per year. Norm alized over 365 days, the average idling time is therefore assumed to be approximatel y six hours per day.

The reasons for truck idling vary greatly. Drivers often operate their engines at idle to provide cab climate control, to power on-board acce ssories and/or to keep the engine warm to avoid cold-start problems during winter mon ths. Many drivers of sleeper and non-sleeper trucks also operate the main engine at idle for extended periods of time simply because of habit and to mask outside noise. But according to a pilot survey on4

truck idling trends conducted in Northern Californi a, the majority of drivers operate their engines at idle mainly for heating (67 percent) and air conditioning (83 percent) purposes (Brodrick et al., 2001). These survey res ults suggest that if heating and air conditioning can be maintained using an alternative idle reduction strategy, truck idling emissions in California can be significantly reduce d.

D. FUEL CONSUMPTION

Besides generating emissions, engine idling also in creases fuel consumption, engine

wear and maintenance costs. Studies have shown tha t during idling, trucks consume approximately 0.4 to 1.6 gallons per hour of fuel d epending on engine size, engine speed, heating, air conditioning and electrical loa ds (Lambert et al., 2001; Lim, 2002). It should also be noted that during idle operation, dr ivers sometimes operate their engines at elevated engine speeds to provide more power to operate climate control devices and on-board accessories, to reduce cab noise and v ibration, and to reduce engine wear associated with low speed idling. Tests have also shown that as engine speed increases, fuel consumption increases proportionall y (Lambert et al., 2001; Lim, 2002). Assuming an average fuel consumption of one gallon per hour for an idling diesel truck engine, staff estimates that in 2005 the diesel fue l consumption due to idling of California registered sleeper trucks is approximate ly 162,000 gallons per day statewide.

E. EMISSIONS INVENTORY

Diesel trucks are major contributors to California’ s air quality problems. On a per truck basis, they emit relatively high levels of NOx and PM emissions, both of which contribute to serious public health problems. As p reviously mentioned, it is projected that in 2010, both California and out-of-state regi stered diesel trucks will contribute approximately 28 percent of the statewide mobile so urce NOx emissions and nine percent of the statewide mobile source PM emissions

.

California’s emissions inventory model, EMAFC2002 v ersion 2.2, estimates that, in 2010, the number of diesel tucks (GVWR greater than 33,000 pounds) on the road on a typical day in California to be approximately 180,0 00 and that 25 percent of these trucks come from out-of-state. Furthermore, based on an a nalysis of the 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey database (U.S. Census Bure au, 2005) 20 percent of the California registered diesel trucks are estimated t o be sleepers. The majority of the outof-state trucks are sleeper trucks idling for an ex tended period of time. Staff assumes that 90 percent of the out-of-state diesel trucks i n California are sleepers.

Thus, statewide emissions in 2010 from extended idl ing of California registered sleeper trucks are estimated to be 20 tpd of NOx and 0.39 t pd of PM emissions. Similarly for the South Coast Air Basin, the 2010 idling emission s from California registered sleeper trucks are estimated to be approximately 8 tpd of N Ox and 0.14 tpd of PM emissions.

Statewide emissions in 2010 from extended idling of out-of-state sleeper trucks are estimated to be 33 tpd NOx and 0.34 tpd of PM emiss ions. Similarly for the South5

Coast Air Basin, the 2010 idling emissions from out -of-state trucks are estimated to be approximately 13 tpd of NOx and 0.12 tpd of PM emis sions.

F. EXISTING REGULATIONS

ARB’s 2004 diesel engine standards reduced NOx emis sions from these engines by 50 percent from the 1998 levels (ARB, 1998a). ARB’s 2 007/2010 diesel engine aftertreatment forcing emission standards will redu ce both NOx and PM emissions from new engines by another 90 percent (ARB, 2001a). In addition, California also has a heavy-duty vehicle inspection program aimed at redu cing emissions from the existing

fleet 2

.

While ARB has successfully adopted regulations to r educe emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines, it has not, until recently, specifi cally sought to control idling emissions. In December of 2002, ARB adopted an ATCM to limit s chool bus idling at or near

schools 3 . This ATCM requires a driver of a school bus, tra nsit bus, or other commercial vehicle to manually turn off the bus or vehicle eng ine upon arriving at a school and to restart it no more than 30 seconds before departing . In July 2004, ARB adopted an inuse idling ATCM that limits idling of diesel-fueled commercial vehicles and buses to no

more than five minutes 4 . However, this ATCM does not apply to idling slee per trucks that are located further than 100 feet from any res tricted area (residential homes and schools).

Section 40720 of the Health and Safety Code require s marine terminals to limit truck idling to no longer than 30 minutes. Failure to co mply with this requirement subjects the marine terminal to a fine of $250 per vehicle per v iolation. The local air pollution control district with jurisdiction over the terminal has th e responsibility of enforcing this requirement.

The ARB has also initiated voluntary incentive and demonstration programs to reduce idling. For example, the Carl Moyer Program 5 promotes the introduction of APSs as an idle reduction device for sleeper trucks by providi ng monetary incentives for the installation costs of APSs. In addition, ARB also provides funds to accelerate the deployment of truck stop electrification. One such grant, for example, is the $2 million grant fund awarded to IdleAire to subsidize the use of 200 new advanced truck stop electrification spaces in the San Joaquin Valley.

2 California currently has two heavy-duty vehicle in spection programs, the Heavy-Duty Vehicle Inspectio n Program (HDVIP) and the Periodic Smoke Inspection Program ( PSIP). Under the HDVIP, heavy-duty diesel trucks a nd

buses are tested for excessive smoke emissions and inspected for tampering at random roadside location s, weigh stations and fleet facilities. The PSIP compliment s the HDVIP by requiring California-based truck and bus fleets with two or more HDDVs to annually test their own v ehicles to measure smoke opacity and to check for t ampering. Title 13, California Code of Regulations sections 2 180 et seq. and 2190 et seq., respectively.

3 Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section 2480.

4 Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section 2485.

5 An ARB program, implemented in 2000, that provides incentive money to help promote the introduction o f emission reduction technologies into California.6

G. STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP)

Although many of the measures in the 1994 ozone SIP have been adopted, federal air quality standards will not be attained in many area s of the state by the statutory deadlines. As a result, ARB updated the 1994 SIP a nd generated a revised 2003 SIP.

The 2003 SIP includes new measures to further reduc e emissions and to move towards achieving the federal air quality standards for ozo ne and PM. One on-road heavy-duty

vehicle measure contained in the 2003 SIP is measur e “ON-ROAD HEAVY-DUTY-3.”

This measure in turn consists of several other cont rol measures such as PM In-Use Emission Control, Engine Software Upgrade, On-Board Diagnostics, Manufacturers’ InUse Compliance, and Reduced Idling. It commits to achieve between 1.4 and 4.5 tpd of ROG reductions and between 8 and 11 tpd of NOx redu ctions in the South Coast Air Basin in 2010. This proposal is part of measure ON -ROAD HEAVY-DUTY-3 and will

contribute towards fulfillment of the committed emi ssion reductions in the 2003 SIP.7

III. NEED FOR CONTROL

As previously mentioned, on-road heavy-duty diesel trucks contribute significantly to the statewide NOx and PM emissions inventory. NOx is o ne of the two primary contributors

to the formation of ozone and contributes to seriou s public health issues (ARB, 2001b). Diesel PM has been identified by ARB as a toxic air contaminant based on its potential to cause cancer (ARB, 1998b), and can also result i n other serious health problems such as asthma and reduced lung function (ARB, 2001 b).

Besides generating excess ROG, NOx, CO and PM emiss ions, unnecessary engine idling also produces undesirable CO 2 emissions. CO 2 is one of the major greenhouse gas emissions responsible for global warming (ARB, 2002b).

Staff’s proposal would significantly reduce NOx emi ssions and associated health risks by reducing the time sleeper trucks are operated at idle. The benefits from this proposal are particularly significant in low-income communit ies located close to truck stops, travel centers, rest areas, ports, warehouse/distribution centers, and other locations where extended truck idling activity occurs. The proposa l will also help reduce CO 2 emissions and the state’s dependence on foreign oil (via redu ced fuel consumption). It will also result in a net benefit for trucking businesses ove r the useful life of the truck by saving money through improved fuel economy and reduced mai ntenance requirements.8

IV. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS

Staff recommends the Board amend Sections 1956.8, 2 404, 2424, 2425, and 2485 of title 13, CCR, and the incorporated “California Exh aust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles”, as set forth in Appendices A and B. Staff’s propos al consists of two major components, affecting new engines and trucks, and existing engi nes and trucks. The component that targets new engines and trucks would require engine manufacturers to install on new 2008 and subsequent model year engines a non-progra mmable engine shutdown system or optionally certify engines to a low NOx i dling emission limit. The second component involves changes to the in-use idling ATC M and affects existing as well as future sleeper trucks. The proposed changes would require operators of sleeper trucks to comply with the existing five minute idling rest riction, beginning in 2008. The following sections discuss each element of the prop osal in detail, including impacts on truck owners and operators, and the available optio ns.

A. PROPOSED NEW ENGINE REQUIREMENTS

i. Applicability

The proposed new engine requirements apply to new C alifornia certified 2008 and subsequent model year diesel engines installed in t rucks with a GVWR greater than 14,000 pounds.

The proposed new engine requirements do not apply t o gasoline engines or engines produced for use in buses (commercial buses as well as school buses), and

recreational vehicles. Gasoline fueled vehicles ar e excluded because the hot and cold start emissions associated with gasoline engines co uld cancel out or even exceed the benefits from reduced idling. Commercial buses and school buses are excluded because they have large volumes and window areas th at necessitate operating the vehicle’s main engine to power an air conditioning system with high heating and/or cooling capacity. The majority of recreational veh icles sold in California are gasolinefueled and are equipped with generators 6 . Their contribution to idling emissions is negligible and thus these vehicles are also exclude d from the proposed requirements.

ii. Engine Shutdown System

The effectiveness of anti-idling measures is largel y dependent on the effectiveness of

California’s enforcement of such measures. However , effective enforcement of antiidling measures is challenging since it requires co nsiderable enforcement resources throughout the state. Staff believes that anti-idl ing rules can be an effective emission control strategy, if in addition to enforcement, en gine technologies are also used. For example, a truck equipped with an engine that autom atically shuts down after a

6 According the Recreational Vehicle Industry Associ ation, approximately 95 percent of the recreational vehicles sold in California in 2002 are equipped with genera tors (RVIA, 2003). Based on EMFAC2002 ver2.2, 93 p ercent of these vehicles are gasoline-fueled (ARB, 2003).9

prescribed time period without the assistance of th e operator can ensure compliance with statewide in-use idle requirements without dep ending solely on enforcement personnel. Requiring a non-programmable engine shu tdown system on all new engines would significantly reduce extended idling of both new sleeper and non-sleeper trucks, and will help ensure compliance with the statewide in-use idling ATCM rule. As these new trucks eventually replace the older trucks, the resources needed for an effective idling enforcement program will be significantly re duced.

The proposed new engine requirements would require engine manufacturers to install, on new California certified 2008 and subsequent mod el year diesel engines, an engine shutdown system that automatically turns the engine off after five minutes of continuous idle operation, or, as an option, control engine em issions during extended idling (discussed in section iii below). Engines equipped with the engine shutdown system must have systems that are tamper resistant and non -programmable and must include the following provisions.

Conditions for Shutdown

The engine shutdown system must automatically activ ate when the truck comes to a stop, the transmission is set in the “neutral” or “park” position, and the parking brake is engaged. Upon activation, the sys tem will shut down the engine after five minutes of continuous engine operation a t idle. The requirement that the parking brake be engaged as a condition for the system’s activation eliminates the possibility of undesirable engine sh utdown, such as when the truck is stopped in traffic idling for more than five min utes. However, there is a possibility that drivers may use this feature to ov erride the engine shutdown system. That is, a driver could park a truck witho ut engaging the parking brake and operate the engine at idle indefinitely. To pr event this, the proposal would require that the engine shutdown system be activate d and shut down the engine after 15 minutes of continuous idling if the parkin g brake is not engaged but the truck is stopped and the transmission is in neutral or in park.

Engine Shutdown Reset

The truck operator would be allowed to reset the en gine shutdown system timer before engine shutdown. A warning signal, such as a light or sound indicator inside the truck cabin, may be used to alert the op erator up to 30 seconds prior to engine shutdown. The operator could then reset the engine shutdown system by momentarily changing the position of the accelerato r, clutch, or brake pedal or any other mechanism only during the last 30 seconds of the five-minute shutdown time limit (or the last 30 seconds of the 15 minutes when the parking brake is not engaged). This will allow the truck o perator to continue operating the engine at idle as long as the truck is being dr iven.10

Power Take-Off Devices

The engine shutdown system could be overridden when the engine is operating power take-off (PTO) equipment. A PTO device uses the truck’s engine to transfer power to auxiliary equipment. So during p eriods when the truck’s engine is “working” while it is idling, the engine shutdow n system would not be activated. Examples of trucks with PTO equipment include trash trucks, cement mixers, mobile cranes, dump trucks, and vehicles with conve yors or other loading or unloading devices. The proposal does not consider equipment such as the truck’s air conditioning system and on-board access ories (e.g., a television, microwave, etc.,) as PTO equipment.

Engine Warm Up

The engine shutdown system could also be overridden to warm up the engine if the engine coolant temperature is below 60 ° F. Thus, the engine shutdown timer would be activated once the coolant temperature rea ches 60 ° F. The engine coolant temperature must be measured using the engi ne’s existing engine coolant temperature sensor designed for engine prot ection. However, a manufacturer may request the Executive Officer’s ap proval to use other methods of measuring the engine coolant temperature.

Enforcement Mechanism

To discourage tampering and to detect malfunctions of engines, the Board, in July of 2005, adopted On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) sys tem requirements for heavy-duty trucks that will include monitoring of a ll emission control systems, including tracking the truck engine run time at idl e and monitoring proper performance of sensors controlling the engine shutd own system. The OBD system requirements will be implemented starting wi th 2010 and later model year diesel engines and will monitor the proper function of the engine shutdown system. The OBD system will log fault codes if any sensor malfunctions. The fault codes can then be downloaded from the OBD sys tem and inspected by ARB field inspectors in current or future heavy-dut y truck roadside inspection programs. Field inspectors that connect to the truc k’s OBD system will also be able to analyze the amount of engine run time at id le, providing another way to evaluate whether the engine shutdown system is malf unctioning or has been tampered with.

Furthermore, because engine manufacturers must incl ude a statement in their applications for certification that their engines w ill comply with the engine shutdown system requirement, violations of this req uirement are enforceable through applicable penalty provisions of the Health and Safety Code.11

iii. Optional NOx Idling Emission Standard

During the development of this proposal, several en gine manufacturers indicated that NOx aftertreatment devices may to some degree reduc e NOx idling emissions 7 and requested an option to certify engines to a new NOx idling emission standard as an alternative to meeting the engine shutdown system r equirements. Another method suggested by the manufacturers was to take advantag e of other strategies, such as advanced combustion processes or operational contro ls such as cylinder deactivation, to reduce NOx emissions during idling.

To accommodate the engine manufacturer’s request, s taff’s proposal includes an optional NOx idling emission standard and test proc edure. To determine the appropriate emission standard, staff evaluated curr ently available technologies that could provide all the operator needs as an alternat ive cab comfort device. Staff identified the diesel-fueled APS as the most likely and cost-effective cab comfort technology in 2008, when this proposal is to be imp lemented. The standard was based on the average NOx emission level of 2005 certifica tion test data of off-road diesel engines used in APSs (engines with power ratings be tween 5 to 19 kilowatts). The proposed standard takes into account what the avera ge NOx emissions levels will be over the useful life of the engine by incorporating a deterioration factor as part of the certification emission level. Staff’s analysis res ulted in a proposed optional NOx emission standard of 30 grams per hour. This stand ard is based on an APS providing 5 kilowatts of power, typically the peak power demand to provide all the necessary cab comfort and on-board accessory demands. The 30 gra ms per hour standard will provide significant NOx emission reduction, when co mparing average NOx idling emissions of 165 grams per hour from late model tru ck engines, and will be equivalent to trucks operating a diesel-fueled APS as an alter native cab comfort device. A truck equipped with an engine certified to the optional N Ox idling emission standard would also be required to have a label affixed to its hoo d that would permit the truck engine to idle beyond the five-minute idle time limit require ment imposed by the amendments made to the in-use idling ATCM (discussed in sectio n B below).

The test procedure was developed to account for the varied operation of truck engines at idle. Typically, truck operators elevate the id le speed to provide more power for cab comfort and accessory devices. Higher engine speed also reduces truck vibration when idling and thus provides more comfort for the opera tor during rest periods. The test procedure requires engine testing at “curb idle” an d at 1100 revolutions per minute (rpm) idle speed, under loaded and unloaded conditi ons (described in more detail below).

7 NOx aftertreatment devices, such as NOx adsorbers, typically operate most efficiently when exhaust te mperatures

are above 200 ° C (MECA, 2000). Exhaust temperatures during extend ed idling typically reach no more than 150 ° C (Hallstrom, 2005). Thus, while it is known that NO x adsorbers can significantly reduce NOx emissions, it is unclear

at this time what level of reductions can be achiev ed by using NOx adsorbers during extended idling co nditions.12

Certification Test Procedure

The proposed test cycle for demonstrating complianc e with the optional NOx idling standard utilizes an engine dynamometer oper ated in accordance with a 2- mode steady-state test cycle summarized in Table 1. Staff believes this test cycle accurately represents the range of sleeper an d non-sleeper truck idling operations commonly practiced by truck operators.

Mode 1 involves operating the engine at its manufac turer’s recommended curb idle speed. An engine load is applied and must inc lude truck power demands for operating engine accessories, such as the engine co oling fan, alternator, coolant pump, air compressor, engine oil and fuel pumps and any other engine accessory operated during engine curb idle. Mode 1 does not include truck power demands to operate the air conditioning compr essor or on-board electrical accessories such as a television, refrigerator, mic rowave, computer, etc.

Mode 2 involves operating the engine on a dynamomet er at a speed of 1100 rpm. The engine load applied must include tru ck power demands to operate engine accessories at 1100 rpm, power deman ds to operate the air conditioning compressor at maximum capacity, and an additional load of 2kW to account for power demands for operating on-board ac cessories such as a television, refrigerator, microwave, computer, etc.

Table 1: Certification Test Cycle

Mode Engine Speed

(rpm) a Time in mode

(seconds) Engine Load

1 Manufacturer

Recommended

Curb idle 1800 Vehicle power demands to operate engine accessories at curb idle. Engine accessories include, but are not limited to, cooling fan, alternator, fuel and oil pumps, coolant pump, air compressor, etc., (excluding air conditioning compressor and on-board accessories)

2 1100 1800 Vehicle power demands to operate (1) engine accessories (same as for mode 1) at 1100 rpm, (2) the air conditioning compressor operating at maximum capacity, and (3) an additional 2 kW to

take into account on-board electrical accessories such as television,
computer, etc.

a revolutions per minute13

Exhaust emissions measurements are taken under hot stabilized conditions. If the engine is cold, the engine would be preconditio ned prior to taking any emission measurements by operating it on an engine dynamometer at any speed above peak-torque speed and between 65 to 85% of ma pped power until the engine coolant temperature stabilizes. Once the en gine coolant temperature stabilizes, emission measurements would be taken co ntinuously for a minimum of 30 minutes for each mode. For each test mode, m odal average emissions are then calculated for each regulated pollutant. The calculated average NOx emissions must then be less than 30 grams per hour. Further details on this procedure can be found in Appendix B.

iv. Impact on Truck Operators

2008 and Subsequent Model Year California Certified Truck Engines

If the truck engine is equipped with the non-progra mmable engine shutdown system, the truck operator would not be able to idle the tr uck engine for long periods of time, regardless of whether the truck operator’s engine i dling needs occur in California or outof-state. This means that sleeper trucks equipped with the engine shutdown system would need to provide other methods for heating/coo ling the cabin and powering accessories when the truck is not being driven and the operator is resting in the sleeper berth. Currently available methods include the use of an internal combustion APS, battery electric APS, fuel-fired heater, thermal en ergy storage system, and/or a power inverter charger with an electrically driven air co nditioning system. The engine or truck manufacturer may equip the truck with such a cab co mfort device. If not offered by the manufacturer, the owner may choose to equip his/her truck with an aftermarket cab comfort device. However, in order to operate in Ca lifornia, cab comfort devices that produce emissions would need to comply with defined performance requirements set forth in this proposal (see section C.i., below). Other alternatives, that do not require installation of any cab comfort device, include par king at a truck stop that offers an offboard air conditioning, heating and power, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies (see section C.ii.2., below).

If an owner purchases a truck equipped with a diese l engine meeting the optional NOx idling emission standard, the engine would not have an engine shutdown system. Operators of such trucks would be allowed to idle t he main engine continuously to provide cab comfort and electrical power during res t periods and would not need to install alternative cab comfort devices. However, they would still be subject to the existing five minute idling restriction when the tr uck is located within 100 feet of a restricted area and the truck would be required to have a label affixed to its hood (see section D, Label Requirements). It should be noted that staff does not expect this option to become widely available to truck owners/o perators before the 2010 timeframe since NOx aftertreatment devices are not anticipate d to be employed until 2010 and other engine idling controls/strategies have not ye t been fully demonstrated.14

2008 and Subsequent Model Year Federally Certified Truck Engines

It is expected that most of the 2008 and subsequent model year out-of-state trucks will be equipped with a federally certified truck engine that does not incorporate the nonprogrammable engine shutdown system requirements or meet the optional NOx idling emission standard. Operators of such trucks would be able to operate their truck engine continuously at idle outside of California. However, they would not be able to continuously idle their truck engine in California as he/she would also be subject to the five minute idling restriction under the proposed c hanges to the in-use idling ATCM requirements, discussed in section B, below. As a result, 2008 and subsequent model year federally certified trucks that operate and re st for extended periods in California

would also need an alternative cab comfort device t o provide for cab cooling/heating and power for accessories during these rest periods . These cab comfort devices are

the same as the ones identified above for Californi a certified trucks, and include an internal combustion APS, battery electric APS, fuel -fired heater, thermal energy storage system, and/or a power inverter charger with an ele ctrically driven air conditioning system. Other alternatives, that do not require ins tallation of any cab comfort device, include parking at a truck stop that offers off-boa rd air conditioning, heating and power, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies. Similarl y as required for California certified truck engines, in order to operate in California, c ab comfort devices that produce emissions would also need to comply with defined pe rformance requirements set forth in this proposal (see section C below for details). Also, to comply with the in-use idling ATCM requirements, a truck equipped with internal c ombustion engine APS will be required to have a label affixed to the hood of the truck in order to operate the APS in California (see section D below for details).

B. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO IN-USE IDLING ATCM AFFECT ING

EXISTING TRUCKS

i. Applicability

The proposed amendments to the in-use idling ATCM a pply to existing and future sleeper trucks greater than 10,000 pounds GVWR, beg inning in January 1, 2008. The in-use idling ATCM also applies to out-of-state reg istered trucks that operate in California. Emergency vehicles performing emergenc y services, military tactical vehicles during training, and vehicles with engines operating power take-off (PTO) equipment (a more detailed description of a PTO dev ice is provided in section A.ii of this Chapter) are exempted. Other exemptions are specif ied in the existing in-use idling ATCM, section 2485 of the CCR.

ii. Idling Restriction

The existing in-use idling ATCM, section 2485 of th e CCR, prohibits the driver of a diesel-fueled commercial truck with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds from idling the truck’s main engine for more than five minutes at a ny location. The existing rule15

exempts sleeper trucks from this prohibition if the y are located more than 100 feet from a restricted area. This exemption was provided at the time the rule was adopted because although staff had identified the diesel-fu eled APS as a reliable cab comfort technology that would provide emission benefits on 2006 and older model year trucks,

there were unresolved issues related to what these benefits might be when compared to “cleaner” 2007 and subsequent model year trucks. T herefore, staff recommended to the Board to delay consideration of sleeper trucks until 2005 in order to thoroughly evaluate all commercially available options to main engine idling.

Staff is now proposing to remove this exemption so that sleeper trucks would have to comply with the five-minute idling restriction at a ll times and at any location starting on January 1, 2008. Staff’s proposal to remove the ex emption is based on the current availability of cost-effective alternatives to truc k idling and the resulting emission

benefits.

Starting in 2007, trucks will be “cleaner” as a res ult of new emission standards that will reduce PM emissions by 90 percent or more using exh aust aftertreatment devices such as particulate traps. However, when the proposed n o-idling requirements take effect in 2008, diesel-fueled APSs will be certified to the T ier 4 off-road standards, which are less stringent than the 2007 aftertreatment based diesel PM emission standards. Thus, to control the expected excess PM emissions that may r esult from operating a dieselfueled APS as an alternative to idling the truck’s trap-equipped engine, the proposal requires, starting January 1, 2008, that diesel-fue led APSs installed on trucks equipped with 2007 and subsequent model year diesel engines be retrofitted with a PM control strategy verified as a "level 3" device (i.e., achi eve 85% PM reduction efficiency). Based on discussions with PM trap manufacturers, st aff also believes that the proposed additional PM control requirement for diesel-fueled APSs is feasible within the timeframe of the proposed regulation.

Staff’s proposal also allows the use of other strat egies in combination with a dieselfueled APS that result in an equivalent reduction i n PM emissions. This could include, for example, installing a power inverter/charger wi th an electrically driven air conditioning and heating system in combination with the use of a diesel-fueled APS. A truck equipped with such an APS would also be requi red to have a label affixed to its hood to operate the APS. As previously mentioned, the labeling requirements are described in Section D of this chapter.

PM emissions from Tier 4 certified APSs are usually lower or, at worst, are the same as idling PM emissions from 2006 or older model year t ruck engines 8 . Therefore, the proposal allows the use of any Tier 4 certified APS with no additional PM emission control requirements with pre-2007 model year truck engines.

8 A Tier 4 certified diesel-fueled APS emitting at t he certification PM emission standard of 0.4 g/kW-h our and providing an average power of 2.7 kW produces about 1.08 grams per hour of PM emissions. This is lowe r than the estimated average idling PM emission rate of 1.59 g rams per hour for a 2006 model year truck engine.16

iii. Impact on Truck Operators

The proposed changes to the in-use idling ATCM will apply to existing and future sleeper trucks, including those registered out-of-s tate. Starting on January 1, 2008, it will require operators of sleeper trucks to shut do wn their engine before the five-minute idle time limit is reached and will affect truck op erators of California and federal certified engines in different ways. The discussion that fol lows provides details on how truck operators will be impacted. Following the discussi on, a summary of these impacts is graphically depicted in two flow chart diagrams, Fi gures 1, 2 and 3.

Operators of 2008 and Subsequent Model Year Califor nia Certified Diesel Engines

Under staff’s proposal, California certified trucks with 2008 and subsequent model year diesel engines will be equipped with either 1) a no n-programmable engine shutdown system, or 2) an engine certified to the optional N Ox idling emission standard.

Trucks equipped with the engine shutdown system wil l automatically shut down the engine after five minutes of continuous idling, reg ardless of whether the truck is in

California or in another state. In cases where own ers of such trucks rest for extended periods (such as owners of sleeper trucks), it is l ikely that the owner will want to equip his/her truck with cab comfort devices. Currently available cab comfort devices include the use of an internal combustion APS, battery elec tric APS, fuel-fired heater, thermal energy storage system, and/or a power inverter char ger with an electrically driven air conditioning system. The engine or truck manufactu rer may equip the truck with such a cab comfort device. If not offered by the manufact urer, the owner may choose to equip
his/her truck with an aftermarket cab comfort device. However, in order to operate in California, cab comfort devices that produce emissi ons would need to comply with defined performance requirements set forth in this proposal (see section C.i., below). Also, to comply with the in-use idling ATCM require ments, a truck equipped with an internal combustion engine APS will be required to have a label affixed to the hood of the truck in order to operate the APS in California . Other alternatives, that do not require installation of any cab comfort device, inc lude parking at a truck stop that offers off-board air conditioning, heating, and power, suc h as offered by IdleAire Technologies (see section C.ii.2., below).

Trucks equipped with engines certified to the optio nal NOx idling emission standard will not be equipped with an automatic engine shutdown s ystem. Those trucks will not shut down during continuous idling and will not require the owner to have any alternative cab

comfort device installed when he/she rests in their truck during layover hours. Thus, the operator of such a truck will not be required to ch ange the way they currently operate their truck during layover hours. However, to comp ly with the in-use idling ATCM requirements in California, the engine or truck man ufacturer will need to ensure that a label is provided and properly affixed to the hood of the truck in order to operate the main engine at idle for more than five minutes.17

Also, all 2008 and subsequent model year trucks equ ipped with fuel-fired heaters will be required to meet the LEV II fuel-fired heater emiss ion requirements (see section C below) to operate them in California.

Operators of 2008 and Subsequent Model Year Federal Certified Diesel Engines

Trucks equipped with federal certified engines will not be equipped with an automatic engine shutdown system or have engines that meet th e optional NOx idling emission standard. Those trucks will not shut down during c ontinuous idling and will not be affected by staff’s proposal when they are operated outside of California. However, when operating in California, the operators will al so be subject to the in-use idling ATCM requirements. The in-use idling ATCM rule will req uire the operator of a federally certified truck to manually shut down his/her engin e after five minutes of idling. Thus, operators of out-of-state trucks that want to rest in their truck during layover hours in

California will need an alternative cab comfort dev ice to provide for cab cooling/heating and power for accessories during these rest periods . These cab comfort devices are

the same as the ones identified above for Californi a certified trucks, and include an internal combustion APS, battery electric APS, fuel -fired heater, thermal energy storage system, and/or a power inverter charger with an ele ctrically driven air conditioning system. Other alternatives, that do not require in stallation of any cab comfort device, include parking at a truck stop that offers off-boa rd air conditioning, heating and power, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies.

Similarly as required for 2008 and subsequent model year California certified trucks, in order to operate in California, cab comfort devices that produce emissions would also need to comply with defined performance requirement s set forth in this proposal (see section C below for details). A truck equipped wit h an internal combustion engine APS will be required to have a label affixed to the hoo d of the truck in order to operate the

APS in California.

Also, all 2008 and subsequent model year trucks equ ipped with fuel-fired heaters will be required to meet the LEV II fuel-fired heater emiss ion requirements (see section C below) to operate them in California.

Operators of 2007 Model Year California or Federal Certified Diesel Engines

Beginning in 2008, operators of trucks equipped wit h California or federal certified 2007 model year diesel engines will be required to manua lly shut down their idling engines after five minutes in California to comply with sta ff’s proposed amendments to the in-use idling ATCM rule. These trucks will not be equippe d with a non-programmable engine shutdown system, nor will they be equipped with eng ines meeting the optional NOx idling emission standards. Owners will need to ret rofit their truck with a cab comfort device if they plan to rest in their truck during l ayover hours in California. Currently available cab comfort devices, as previously mentio ned include the use of an internal combustion APS, battery electric APS, fuel-fired he ater, thermal energy storage system, and/or a power inverter charger with an electricall y driven air conditioning system.18

Other alternatives, that do not require installatio n of any cab comfort device, include parking at a truck stop that offers off-board air c onditioning, heating, and power, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies (see section C.ii. 2., below).

Because a truck equipped with a 2007 model year die sel engine is also equipped with a PM aftertreatment system, an owner who chooses to i nstall a diesel-fueled APS as a

cab comfort device will also need to make sure the APS meets additional PM emission control requirements, specified in section C below, if it is to be operated in California. This requirement is meant to prevent an over-all in crease in PM emissions from trucks equipped with 2007 diesel engines if owners choose to meet the proposed in-use idling ATCM by installing a diesel-fueled APS. A truck eq uipped with an internal combustion engine APS will be required to have a label affixed to the hood of the truck in order to operate the APS in California.

Also, beginning in 2008, all 2007 model year trucks equipped with fuel-fired heaters will be required to meet the LEV II fuel-fired heater em ission requirements (see section C below) to operate them in California.

Operators of 2006 and Older Model Year California o r Federal Certified Diesel Engines

Beginning in 2008, operators of trucks equipped wit h California or federal certified 2006 and older model year diesel engines will be require d to manually shut down their idling engines after five minutes in California to comply with staff’s proposed amendments to the in-use idling ATCM rule. These trucks will not be equipped with a nonprogrammable engine shutdown system, nor will they be equipped with engines meeting the optional NOx idling emission standards. As with owners of 2007 trucks,

owners of 2006 and older trucks will need to retrof it their truck with a cab comfort device if they plan to rest in their truck during layover hours in California. As previously mentioned, currently available cab comfort devices include the use of an internal combustion APS, battery electric APS, fuel-fired he ater, thermal energy storage system, and/or a power inverter charger with an electricall y driven air conditioning system. Other alternatives, that do not require installatio n of any cab comfort device, include parking at a truck stop that offers an off-board ai r conditioning, heating, and power, such as offered by IdleAire Technologies (see section C. ii.2., below).

Unlike the requirements for 2007 and subsequent mod el year PM trap-equipped trucks, owners of trucks with 2006 and older model year die sel engines who choose to install diesel-fueled APSs will not need to comply with any additional PM emission requirements. As previously mentioned, this is bec ause trucks equipped with 2006 and older model year diesel engines are not equipped wi th a PM aftertreatment system and thus the PM idling emissions from those engines are the same or greater than the emissions from diesel-fueled APSs. Also, 2006 and older trucks will not be required to have a label on the truck hood to operate their APS . For those trucks equipped with fuel-fired heaters, they will also not be required to meet the LEV II fuel-fired heater emission requirements.19

As previously mentioned, the following flow chart d iagrams (Figures 1, 2, and 3) graphically summarize how truck operators will be i mpacted by staff’s proposal. As shown, the impacts will differ somewhat, depending on the model year of the truck/engine and whether the truck is registered in California or out-of-state.20Certified to thelow NOx idlestandard?2008 OR NEWER CALIFORNIA TRUCKTruck willnotbeequipped withautomatic idleshutdown timer.YESOperator may idle truck’sengine for extended periodsof time, except within 100feet of schools or homes.Truck will be equippedwith automatic idleshutdown timerNOModified with adiesel-fueledAPS w/85%PM control?Truck engineautomatically shuts downafter 5 minutes of idlingOperator may choose to parkat locations with off-boardheating and cooling (e.g.,IdleAire Technology.)YESModified with fuelfired heatermeetingULEVstandard?Modified withthermalenergystorage?Operator may use thistechnology for cab comfort.NONONONOYESYESYESYESYESFigure 1: Impacts on Operators - 2008 or Newer California TruckIs truck modifiedwith analternative cabcomfort device?NOModified withother cleantechnology?Modified withinverter/chargerwith electric AC?212007 AND NEWER OUT-OF-STATETRUCKSAND 2007 CALIFORNIA TRUCKSOperator must manually shut down thetruck’s engine after 5 minutes of idlingNOYESYESFigure2:Impacts on Operators–2007 and Newer Out-of-State Trucks and 2007 California TrucksNOModified with adiesel-fueledAPS w/85%PM control?Operator may choose to parkat locations with off-boardheating and cooling (e.g.,IdleAire Technology.)Modified with fuelfired heatermeetingULEVstandard?Modified withthermalenergystorage?Operator may use thistechnology for cab comfort.NONONOYESYESYESModified withother cleantechnology?Modified withinverter/chargerwith electric AC?Is truck modifiedwith analternative cabcomfort device?YES22PRE-2007 OUT-OF-STATE ANDCALIFORNIA REGISTERED TRUCKSFigure3:Impacts on Operators-Pre-2007 Out-of-State and California Registered TrucksOperator must manually shut down thetruck’s engine after 5 minutes of idlingNOYESYESNOModified with acertified dieselfueled APS (noadditional PMcontrol)?Operator may choose to parkat locations with off-boardheating and cooling (e.g.,IdleAire Technology.)Modified with fuelfired heater(ULEV standardoptional)?Modified withthermalenergystorage?Operator may use thistechnology for cab comfort.NONOYESYESYESModified withother cleantechnology?Modified withinverter/chargerwith electric AC?Is truck modifiedwith analternative cabcomfort device?YESNO23

C. PROPOSED EMISSION PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR C AB

COMFORT DEVICES

When the proposed in-use idling and new engine requ irements take effect in 2008, staff expects operators of sleeper trucks will use some t ype of alternative cab comfort technology to provide power for sleeper berth clima te control, engine heating, and electrical power to charge batteries and operate on -board accessories. Some of the commonly used, presently commercially available cab comfort technologies capable of providing some or all of this power include devices such as an internal combustion APS, battery electric APS, fuel-fired heater, thermal en ergy storage system, and/or a power inverter charger and electrically driven air condit ioning system with truck stop

electrification 9 (U.S. EPA, 2005). The proposal allows the use of such alternative cab comfort devices. However, some of these devices ha ve associated emissions that must be evaluated and compared to emissions generated fr om the main engine under idling conditions to ensure the devices do not emit greate r emissions than operating the main engine. Thus, staff proposes the following emissio ns performance requirements for

some of the cab comfort devices.

Auxiliary Power Systems

In order to operate in California, internal combust ion engines used in APSs must currently comply with applicable California off-roa d or federal non-road emission standards and test procedures for their fuel type a nd horsepower category. Staff proposes that diesel-fueled APSs installed on PM tr ap-equipped 2007 and subsequent model year diesel trucks must also meet additional PM controls

because PM emissions from Tier 4 certified off-road diesel engines (less than 19 kW ratings) are expected to be higher than the PM e missions from an idling PM trap-equipped 2007 model year diesel engine 10 . Therefore, diesel-fueled APSs installed on trucks equipped with 2007 and subseque nt model year diesel engines will be required to control emissions by ei ther equipping the APS with a

level 3 11 verified PM control strategy or by integrating the APS’s exhaust system

with that of the truck’s so that the APS’s PM emiss ions are controlled by the truck’s PM trap. Subject to the Executive Officer’ s advance approval, manufacturers may also use other procedures to demo nstrate an equivalent level of emissions compliance (compared to a level 3 veri fied PM control strategy).

Battery electric and fuel cell APSs have recently b een developed and are inherently emissions free. Battery electric APSs, in particular, are currently commercially available and can provide the same per formance as diesel-fueled

9 A comprehensive list with detailed information of commercially available alternative technologies is available at

the U.S. EPA website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/idlingtechnologies .htm

. 10 2007 and subsequent model year on-road HDDEs must comply with a PM exhaust emission standard of 0.01 gram per brake-horsepower-hour.

11 The PM trap verification procedure and in particula r, the level 3 verification level, are specified in sections 2700
to 2710 of title 13, CCR.24

APSs. For example, Idling Solutions 9000 is a heav y-duty battery powered APS reportedly capable of providing power for cab comfo rt and on-board accessories for 8 to 15 hours between charges. Approximately 1 20 of these systems are currently installed on various fleets including J.B . Hunt Transportation Services, Swift Transportation, John Christner Trucking, Moto r Lines, Inc., Wild West Express, etc. (Jay, 2005). Fuel cell APSs are pres ently not commercially available but are being demonstrated with some truc k fleets.

Fuel-Fired Heaters

Beginning in 2008, staff proposes that 2007 and sub sequent model year trucks operate only fuel-fired heaters that comply with th e requirements specified in the Low Emissions Vehicle program (LEV II) regulations 12 in California. The LEV II regulations require fuel-fired heaters to meet the Ultra Low Emission Vehicle exhaust emission standards for light duty vehicles. However, unlike the LEV II program requirement that limits the operation of fu el-fired heaters to ambient temperatures of 40oF or less, the proposed regulati on would allow the operation of fuel-fired heaters at any ambient temperature. S everal manufacturers currently produce fuel-fired heaters for heavy-duty trucks th at meet the proposed requirement.

Other Idle Reduction Devices

In addition to the above mentioned technologies, ot her devices may also be used to supply power that would otherwise be generated b y idling the truck’s main engine. Such devices could include, for example, t hermal energy storage devices or power inverter chargers for use with bat teries and/or grid supplied electricity. Other devices, not identified here, c ould also be used, subject to the Executive Officer’s advance approval.

D. LABELING REQUIREMENTS

Engine Labeling Requirements

In order to clearly identify compliant diesel engin es, staff proposes that each truck engine be equipped with a permanent label indicatin g that the subject engine complies with the California regulations. Currently, engine manufacturers produce the same engine for all 50 states and therefore produce and affix the same engine label on all diesel engines. The existing engine label indicate s that the engine conforms to both U.S. EPA and California regulations. Staff’s propo sed requirement would not modify a manufacturer’s existing engine labeling practice fo r diesel engines sold in California, but will indirectly require a modification of the engin e label placed on federally certified diesel engines for sale outside of California, unle ss federally certified engines also

12 The standards are specified in title 13, CCR, sect ion 1961(a)(15) and (d), or in Part I.E.1.13 of the “California

Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Dut y Trucks and Medium-Duty Vehicles” (adopted August 5, 1999, last amended in May 28, 2004)25

comply with the proposed requirements. Therefore, unless federally certified diesel engines also meet the proposed requirements, engine labels for federally certified engines cannot state that the engine conforms to Ca lifornia regulations. This requirement is proposed to serve as an effective to ol for in-use compliance testing and other enforcement programs.

Vehicle Labeling Requirements

The proposal would also require that engine manufac turers, original vehicle equipment manufacturers (OEM), or internal combustion engine APS manufacturers, as applicable, to produce and affix a standardized permanent label to the hood of the truck. This vehicle label would aide enforcement personnel in c learly and easily identifying diesel engines and diesel trucks equipped with APSs that c omply with the proposed requirements. Staff therefore proposes that a stan dardized label be affixed on: (1) trucks equipped with an engine certified to the pro posed optional NOx idling emission standard, and (2) trucks produced or retrofitted wi th an internal combustion engine APS that meets the proposed requirements applicable to APSs.

The standardized labels would be required to have t he following characteristics: 1. oval in shape

2. minimum dimensions of 6 inches wide and 4 inches high 3. permanently attached and easily destroyed or def aced upon removal 4. includes a hologram (to prevent counterfeit labe ls)

Figures 4 and 5 are facsimiles of the proposed labe ls. Figure 6 shows an example of the hologram that would be embedded within the prop osed labels. For new engines certified to the proposed optional NOx idling emiss ion standard or engines equipped with an integrated engine-APS exhaust system for wh ich the engine manufacturer is responsible, the engine manufacturer will be respon sible for producing the labels and supplying them to the OEM. The OEM would then affi x the label to the hood of the truck. For aftermarket internal combustion engine APSs that meet California requirements, the aftermarket manufacturer would be responsible for producing the label and affixing it to the hood of the truck if i nstalled by the APS manufacturer. If the APS manufacturer does not install the APS, the APS manufacturer would supply the label to the party that installs the APS (OEM or an y other APS installer).26 Figure 4. Label for an engine meeting the optional NOx standard

Figure 5. Label for an APS with additional PM contr ol

Figure 6. Hologram 

## I 

# C E R T I I F I I E D

C L E A N I I D L E

V E R I I F I I E D

C L E A N A P S27

V. TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY

Truck idling can be significantly reduced by using currently available idle control technologies. Some of these technologies can also provide sleeper/cab heating and cooling, heat for engine warming, and electrical po wer for battery charging and onboard accessories. Each technology has its advanta ges and drawbacks. These technologies include electronically controlled idle engine limiters, on-board auxiliary devices, and grid-supplied electrical power.

A. ENGINE SHUTDOWN DEVICES

Electronic engine shutdown devices are software bas ed idle limit controls and are standard features in most commercially available on -road heavy-duty engines. These systems are built into the engine’s electronic cont rol software and enable the engine to shut down automatically if the engine idles more th an the programmed time. For example, Detroit Diesel Corporation’s system can be programmed to shut down automatically between 2 to 100 minutes, Cummins’ sy stem can be programmed to shut down between 2 to 1440 minutes, and Caterpillar’s s ystem can be programmed to shut down between 3 to 60 minutes. These systems can al so electronically turn off the ignition switch to avoid battery discharge that may occur if accessories, such as lights and/or the radio, were left in the “on” position du ring engine shutdown. Although shutdown systems are available as standard features in modern electronically controlled engines, in most cases fleet owners and operators d o not activate or program these systems to limit idling. All features of the engin e shutdown system required by this proposal, such as overriding the system by pressing the gas or clutch pedal, overriding the system if the engine is in PTO mode, conditions for activation of the system, etc., are currently available in modern electronically co ntrolled engines. Therefore, with only minor modifications in the programming of the elect ronic control software to prevent adjustment or tampering, the key requirement in sta ff’s proposal can already be met with currently available engine shutdown systems.

B. OPTIONAL NOx IDLING STANDARD

The proposed optional NOx emission standard may be met with engines equipped with NOx catalysts. However, this may require a supplem ental heat source to raise the exhaust temperatures to a level that would enable t he catalyst to sufficiently reduce NOx emissions, since exhaust temperatures during ex tended idling are generally lower than the catalyst’s light-off temperatures. Advanc ed combustion processes, operational controls such as cylinder deactivation and/or other idling emission control strategies may also be used to achieve the proposed NOx idling emission standard. An engine manufacturer would be required to demonstrate its e ngines’ compliance with the proposed optional NOx idling standard, on average, using the test cycle described in section A of Chapter IV, without increasing other c riteria pollutant emissions such as PM, ROG, and CO.28

Staff does not expect that engine manufactures will certify to the optional NOx idling

emission standard before the introduction of 2010 m odel year diesel engines. This is because, until that time, it is unlikely that manuf acturers will equip their engines with NOx aftertreatment devices capable of meeting the p roposed emission standard. Nevertheless, the option to certify to a NOx idling emission standard is being proposed at the request of several engine and truck manufact urers as an alternative to requiring a non-programmable engine shutdown system.

C. ALTERNATIVES TO IDLING

i. On-Board Auxiliary Devices

On-board auxiliary devices are truck mounted and ca n supply some or all of the power for necessities that would otherwise be generated b y idling the truck’s engine. The most widely used on-board auxiliary devices on slee per trucks are diesel-fueled APSs, fuel-fired heaters, and inverter chargers. However , newer on-board based auxiliary devices are also currently being developed and intr oduced to the market. Examples include battery electric APSs and cold storage syst ems. Fuel cell-based APSs are also being developed and are currently in the demonstrat ion stage.

1. Auxiliary Power Systems

Most currently available APSs use a small internal combustion engine equipped with a generator/alternator to provide climate control, he at to the engine for cold weather starting, 12-volt DC electrical power to charge the batteries and 110-volt AC power for on-board accessories. Most of the APSs currently u sed as alternatives to idling are diesel-fueled and typically use fuel from the truck ’s fuel system. The fuel consumption of diesel-fueled APSs ranges from 0.08 to 0.3 gal/h r (Stodolsky et al., 2000). This represents a significant fuel savings (and lower CO 2 emissions) compared to the truck’s main engine idling fuel consumption rate of one gal lon or more per hour for trucks (Lambert et al., 2001; Lim, 2002). Drawbacks to di esel APSs are their initial cost, additional weight, and maintenance requirements. Th e cost for an APS ranges from $5,000 to $8,000 (U.S. EPA, 2005). Opponents of th is approach argue that the added weight of an APS reduces the capacity of the truck to carry a full load, resulting in the potential loss of revenue. The APS typically weigh s 250 to 400 pounds, which is less than 0.5 percent of the 80,000 pounds a fully laden truck can weigh, so this impact is

minor. APSs can have shorter maintenance intervals than the main engine, requiring the operator to modify its periodic maintenance sch edules to include APS maintenance. Some engine manufacturers such as Cummins and Cater pillar are currently developing integrated main engine/APS systems that they expect to offer as factory options in 2006. Such systems are expected to significantly m inimize the perceived APS drawbacks associated with the high initial cost, sh orter maintenance intervals, and the added weight.

Currently, internal combustion engine APSs provide significant NOx emission reductions, ranging from 89 to 94 percent less than NOx emissions generated when the29

truck’s main engine is idling and the air condition ing system is engaged (Lim, 2002). Other criteria pollutants such as CO and ROG are al so reduced. PM emissions may be greater or less than the main engine depending on t he model year of the truck engine on which the APS is installed. That is, if the APS is installed on pre-2007 model truck engine, PM emissions are usually lower or, at worst , are the same as main engine idle emissions. However, diesel-fueled APSs installed o n 2007 and subsequent model year PM trap-equipped truck engines are expected to prod uce higher PM emissions than the main engine. Therefore, staff is proposing additio nal diesel-fueled APS PM emission requirements for those APS engines installed on tru cks with 2007 and subsequent model year diesel engines.

Staff’s proposed PM emission reduction requirement could be met by retrofitting the APS with a level 3 verified particulate trap. The trap may require an active regeneration scheme, since the APS exhaust temperature may not b e high enough for passive regeneration to occur. Based on verbal communicati on with a manufacturer developing PM traps for diesel engines less than 25 hp, it is likely that PM traps for APSs could be used to achieve the level 3 verification requiremen ts with modifications. The modifications would require the design of an active system that would increase the exhaust temperature periodically to reduce the capt ured PM emissions. These PM trap systems are currently designed for applications in generator sets and transportation refrigeration units, but can readily be adapted for diesel-fueled APSs since they use the same engines and also operate in a similar way as g enerator sets.

Integration of main engine/APS exhaust systems and passing the APS exhaust through the trap of the main engine may also be used to con trol PM emissions from the APS. Because of warranty issues, staff believes integrat ion of main engine/APS exhaust systems to occur at the engine or vehicle manufactu rer level rather than by aftermarket APS manufacturers. The cost of retrofitting an APS with a diesel-particulate trap is estimated to be approximately $1,200 to $1,500 (Lam be, 2005). However, staff’s analysis assumes a conservative incremental cost of $2,000 to comply with the additional PM requirements. With the current avera ge diesel fuel prices of approximately $2.40 per gallon 13 , the payback period is estimated to be 1.5 to 2.5 years for a truck that idles approximately 2,100 hours pe r year.

2. Fuel-Fired Heaters

Fuel-fired heaters are used to provide heat to the cab/sleeper berth and/or to preheat the engine block for easy engine start-up during co ld weather. Different models exist for a variety of applications, such as pick-up trucks, buses, and marine vessels. They can operate 20 or more hours on a gallon of diesel fuel , and typically use the fuel from the truck’s fuel tank. They are relatively small, inex pensive, and consume much less fuel than an idling truck engine. A report by the U.S. EPA estimates that compared to the truck’s main engine, diesel fuel-fired heaters redu ce NOx emissions by approximately 99 percent and fuel consumption (and CO 2 emissions) by 50 to 80 percent (U.S. EPA,

13 Average weekly on-highway diesel price for the wee ks from January 1 to August 1, 2005. (http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/wohdp/diesel.asp )30

2002). The only drawback of this technology is its inability to provide cooling. Costs of fuel-fired heaters range from $1,000 to $3,000 per unit (U.S. EPA, 2005).

For applications in light-duty and medium-duty vehi cle classes, fuel-fired heaters must meet the Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standard s found in the LEV II regulations (13 CCR 1961(a)(15) and (d)). Staff’s proposed req uirement that fuel-fired heaters meet the ULEV standards in sleeper trucks can be me t with existing, commercially available, fuel-fired heaters, since many models us ed for sleeper truck applications are currently meeting the ULEV standards. For example, all of Espar’s and Webasto’s fuelfired heaters currently meet the ULEV standards.

3. Battery Electric and Fuel cell APS

Battery electric APSs provide cooling and heating f or sleeper berth climate control without the need to idle the main engine or operate a diesel powered APS. Such systems include an independent electrically driven heating and air-conditioning system and an inverter to provide 120 Volt AC electrical p ower for on-board accessories. They are capable of providing more than ten hours of con tinuous cab comfort between charges. Depending on the number of batteries inst alled and alternator capacity, such systems typically require two to six hours of charg ing time. Fuel consumption and emissions from the truck engine will increase sligh tly when the batteries are being charged during engine operation. However, the over all emissions from the truck will be reduced by eliminating the need to idle the truck e ngine during layover hours. The cost of the commercially available battery systems range s between $4,000 to $10,000 per unit, the higher amount corresponding to a system w ith an advanced battery system (higher capacity and longer life), higher capacity heating and air conditioning system, and an inverter charger. Staff estimates that this system would pay for itself in 1 to 2.5 years. Examples of commercially available battery electric APS systems include Idling Solutions’ Idling Solutions 9000 and Bergstrom’s Ni te System.

An auxiliary power source that appears to offer a p romising possibility of eliminating truck idling emissions is the fuel cell APS. A fue l cell produces electricity by converting the chemical energy of fuel directly to electrical power in a controlled chemical reaction. Fuel cells are clean and efficient. They can provi de sufficient power to heat or cool a cab/sleeper compartment and run on-board electrical equipment. However, technical and economic issues, such as availability and infra structure of a suitable fuel, the production costs of the units, and integration of t he units with other on-board truck systems need to be resolved before such systems can become cost-effective for commercial truck operators.

4. Thermal Energy Storage

Cold storage systems utilize the truck’s air condit ioning system to store cooling energy when the truck is operated which is later used to c ool the sleeper berth when the truck is stopped and the driver is resting. Some afterma rket systems are currently, commercially available. These systems may be used in conjunction with a fuel-fired31

heater to provide both heating and cooling. As wit h battery electric APSs, these systems must routinely be recharged (approximately 4 to 6 hours of truck operation is required). Also, fuel consumption will increase sl ightly due to the need to operate the air conditioning system compressor continuously. H owever, staff believes that the fuel savings from reducing idling of the main engine wil l offset this potential drawback. An example of a cold storage system that is currently commercially available is Webasto’s BlueCool Truck system. The system costs, including installation, $3,600 per unit, or $4,600 if it includes a heater.

ii. On-Shore Electrical Power

The development of an electrical power infrastructu re at truck stops and other locations is another option to reduce engine idling emissions . On-shore electrical power involves the electrification of truck parking spaces to prov ide power for heating, cooling and onboard accessories. It provides significant emissio ns benefits at the truck stop area or the site where it is installed. However, it is not available everywhere and may take many years before the system becomes widely availab le at truck stops. Even if such systems become widely available in the future, truc k operators located away from such installations may still need an alternative cab com fort technology that is portable with the truck. There are currently two methods of usin g on-shore electrical power today. One method allows the truck to “plug-in” to the ele ctrical power grid to power on-board air conditioning and heating systems, referred to a s “on-board power infrastructure.” The other method relies on heating and air conditio ning provided at the location where the infrastructure is installed, referred to as “of f-board power infrastructure.”

1. On-Board Power Infrastructure

This technology provides trucks with 110-volt AC el ectrical power at truck stops, or other locations, to run the air conditioning, heati ng and on-board accessories. This requires truck stops to be equipped with electrical outlets throughout the parking spaces and trucks need to be equipped or retrofitted with inverter/chargers, electrical power connections and electrically driven heating and air conditioning units. The inverter/chargers are used to charge the truck batt eries from grid supplied electricity and

to convert the truck batteries' 12-volt DC to 120-v olt AC power for all on-board accessories. The drawbacks of this system include t he high initial infrastructure cost, cost for equipment add-ons to trucks, and its avail ability, which is limited to where the

infrastructure is installed. The aftermarket cost for add-on parts and installation including inverter/chargers, electrical air conditi oning system, wiring, outlets, circuit breakers, etc., is approximately $4,000 per truck ( Perrot et al., 2004). Power infrastructure installation cost is approximately $ 3,500 to $6,000 per truck parking space depending on number of pedestals installed (Perrot et al., 2004). The payback period for the truck owner is estimated at about 1.5 years (Perrot et al., 2004) 14

.

14 The payback period was estimated assuming a diesel fuel cost of $1.50 per gallon and idling 1800 hour s per year. With the current higher diesel fuel prices ($2.40 p er gallon, California average for the weeks from Ja nuary 1 to August 1, 2005) the payback period would be much sh orter than the period estimated by Perrot.32

2. Off-Board Power Infrastructure

An alternative to the on-board power infrastructure has been recently introduced by IdleAire Technologies. This system provides 110-vo lt AC electrical power for on-board accessories, an externally installed heating and ai r conditioning unit and hook-ups for basic telephone, internet and television (access to cable/satellite) services at each truck parking space. The unit is connected to the truck through a console installed to the truck window using a template insert. The console contains all the necessary connections and controls, including a card reader f or the billing system. Currently, the basic services cost about $1.25 to $1.50 per hour. The drawbacks are the high

infrastructure installation and maintenance costs a nd its availability limited to where the infrastructure is installed. The off-board power i nfrastructure installation cost is approximately $12,000 to $ 20,000 per parking space depending on the number of parking spaces installed (Antares, 2005). The adva ntage of this type of infrastructure is

that the truck does not need to be modified with an y alternative cab comfort technology, resulting in immediate benefits to the truck owner using the service through reduced fuel consumption and maintenance savings.33

VI. REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES

Staff evaluated several alternatives to the propose d requirements. The first alternative considered was taking no action and solely relying on ARB’s existing anti-idling regulatory programs and on voluntary compliance. T he second alternative considered was requiring engine/vehicle manufacturers to eithe r certify their engines to a low NOx idling emission standard or to install a compliant APS system on every sleeper truck

sold in California. The third alternative consider ed was staff’s current proposal except that the available heating and cooling options for sleeper trucks would be limited to zero emission alternative technologies such as battery e lectric APSs, fuel cells or truck stop electrification. A description of the alternatives and the rationale for rejecting them are

as follows:

A. NO ACTION

This alternative would rely on educational and ince ntive programs to encourage sleeper truck owners and operators to voluntarily reduce idling and use cab comfort devices. It would not require engine shutdown systems on new tr ucks nor mandate the five-minute idle time limit on sleeper trucks.

Educational programs would require considerable on- going state resources, and the effectiveness of reducing idle emissions is unknown . ARB’s Carl Moyer Program has

offered incentives to reduce emissions from truck i dling by encouraging the purchase

and installation of cab comfort devices. It offers funds to cover APS installation costs of up to $1,600 per diesel-fueled APS installation and up to $3,100 per alternative fuel, electric motor, or fuel cell APS installation. To date no applications have been received for this incentive program. Although the cost of c urrently available cab comfort devices can be recovered within 1 to 2.5 years from fuel sa vings and reduced maintenance requirements, trucking businesses have not been mot ivated to use these technologies. Hence, the emission reductions expected from volunt ary programs that target truck idling have not been realized. Staff therefore bel ieves that reducing truck idling only through voluntary programs will not be sufficient t o achieve ARB’s emission reduction goals.

B. IN LIEU OF ENGINE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS, REQUIRE ENGINE

MANUFACTURERS TO CERTIFY ENGINES THAT MEET THE LOW IDLE
EMISSION STANDARD OR BE EQUIPPED WITH A COMPLIANT A PS.

INCLUDE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE IN-USE IDLIN G ATCM

AFFECTING SLEEPER TRUCKS

This alternative provides only two options for comp liance. Beginning with 2008 model year diesel engines, an engine manufacturer would b e required to either certify its main engine to the low NOx idling emission standard or t o install an APS on all sleeper trucks sold in California. As in the proposed requirement s, the engine’s NOx idling emission standard would be comparable to that of a diesel-fu eled APS. If the engine or vehicle34

manufacturer instead chooses to install an APS, the APS would meet additional PM reduction requirements if it were a diesel-fueled A PS.

This alternative would also amend the in-use ATCM, consistent with staff’s proposal, to include all sleeper trucks beginning in 2008. Thus , California and out-of-state trucks resting during layover hours in California would ne ed to purchase alternative cab comfort devices that meet all the emission performa nce requirements for their applicable model year and/or technology selected (s ee section IV.C. and D. above).

Staff did not pursue this alternative primarily bec ause of how it would impact buyers of California certified trucks. Specifically, althoug h this alternative would require all trucks resting during layover hours in California to contr ol idling emissions, it presumes that all California certified sleeper trucks undergo and nee d extended idling operation in California. This may not be the case; some Califor nia trucking companies only idle for extended periods outside of California, or if they do need heating and/or cooling in California for extended rest periods, their drivers may either sleep in a hotel or they rely on available off-board power infrastructure for the ir needs. Thus, this alternative would force California truck buyers to pay a higher price for a new or used (i.e., 2008 and subsequent model year) truck equipped with cab comf ort systems they may never need or use, resulting in their inability to recover the ir initial cost which would put them in an economic disadvantage with businesses operating out -of-state.

C. REQUIRE ENGINE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS AND ONLY ZERO-EM ITTING

ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES. INCLUDE THE PROPOSED

AMENDMENTS TO THE IN-USE IDLING ATCM AFFECTING SLEE PER

TRUCKS

Similar to staff’s proposal, this alternative would require 2008 and subsequent model year trucks to be equipped with engine shutdown sys tems that would shut down the engine after five minutes. It would also require, consistent with staff’s proposal, that all sleeper trucks control idling emissions beginning i n 2008 (see the previous alternative B). This alternative would allow the option of usi ng alternative cab comfort devices but, unlike staff’s proposal, it would only allow zero e mitting technologies such as battery electric APSs, fuel cell APSs, thermal storage syst ems, truck stop electrification, or any other zero emitting technology. In other words, it would not allow manufacturers to certify their engines to an optional NOx idling sta ndard or use cab comfort devices such as diesel or gasoline powered APSs, fuel-fired heat ers or any other on-board device that produces emissions during its operation. Staf f considered this alternative but does not recommend it for the following reasons:

• Truck stop electrification is currently not availa ble everywhere and would take beyond the 2008 timeframe before it is widely avail able. Thus, truck operator needs could not be met at every location and would require other alternatives.

• Battery electric APS technology would likely be th e only available near-term technology that could provide for all the truck ope rator heating and cooling needs as long as the truck is in operation long eno ugh to recharge the system35

after layover periods (typically up to 6 hours of o peration is needed to fully charge the APS). However, this technology has only just recently been introduced commercially and acceptance by the indus try will be limited until enough units have been placed into service and the technology is proven to be

a durable and cost-effective solution. Several fle ets are currently evaluating this technology with promising results.

• Fuel cell APSs are a promising technology but are still in the development and demonstration phase and may not be commercially ava ilable or cost-effective

until after 2010.

Staff believes that most of these alternatives are viable options to comply with staff’s regulatory proposal, but availability and commercia l acceptance may be limited within the time period of the current proposal. However, as these technologies mature, production volumes increase, and more experience is gained, they will likely be widely used in the future. Thus, while they are certainly viable options, they should not, for the reason cited above, be the only options made availa ble to truck operators.

D. PURSUE REQUIREMENTS THAT ONLY TARGET NEW TRUCKS STARTING IN 2008 (DO NOT PROPOSE REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD IMP ACT THE EXISTING IN-USE FLEET)

This alternative would only impact California certi fied trucks beginning in 2008. California trucks would be equipped with either the proposed engine shutdown system or the engine would meet an optional NOx idling emi ssion standard. Also, this alternative would not modify the current in-use ATC M to include sleeper trucks.

Under this alternative, owners of 2008 sleeper truc ks with engines meeting the NOx idling standard, pre-2008 California sleeper trucks , and federal sleeper trucks would be allowed to idle their engines during layover hours. Owners of 2008 California sleeper trucks equipped with an engine shutdown system woul d be the only ones that may need to purchase cab comfort devices, regardless of whet her they idle their trucks in

California or in other states.

This alternative would be effective in controlling idle emissions from California sleeper trucks beginning with the 2008 model year. However , because it can take as long as 30 years before the fleet is fully turned over, the ne ar-term emission benefits would be small. Also, this alternative would not address id ling from existing California and out-ofstate sleeper trucks. In 2010, the existing pre-20 08 model year California sleeper trucks will contribute 30 percent to the total sleeper tru ck idling emissions in California, while out-of-state sleeper trucks will contribute 63 perc ent. The remaining 7 percent would be due to idling of new 2008 and subsequent model year California registered sleeper trucks. Therefore, because the idling emissions fr om existing California and out-of-state sleepers are significant, and controlling these emi ssions is both feasible and costeffective, staff rejected this alternative.36

VII. ECONOMIC IMPACTS

A. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

Government Code Sections 11346.3 and 11346.5(a) req uire state agencies adopting or amending any administrative regulations to identify and assess the potential for adverse economic impacts on California businesses and indiv iduals. The assessment must include a consideration of the impact of the propos ed regulation on California jobs, business expansion, elimination or creation of busi ness, and the ability of California businesses to compete with those of other states. State agencies are also required to estimate the cost or savings to any state or local agency, and school districts. The estimate must include any non-discretionary cost or savings to local agencies and the cost or savings in federal funding to the state.

B. AFFECTED BUSINESSES

Businesses that may be affected by the proposed reg ulation include heavy-duty engine and vehicle manufacturers, manufacturers of alterna tive idle reduction devices and trucking businesses. Based on certification data, ARB has identified 21 heavy-duty engine manufacturers worldwide that manufacture and certify their engines for sale in California. Approximately eight heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers manufacture and sell heavy-duty vehicles in California. However, none o f the heavy-duty engine or vehicle manufacturing businesses is located in California, and none is considered to be small

business.

The exact number of manufacturers of idle reduction devices is unknown. However,

staff estimates that there are at least 21 manufact urers that produce internal combustion APSs, fuel-fired heaters, truck stop ele ctrification, battery electric APSs, inverter chargers, etc. 15 Approximately 48 percent of these manufacturers p roduce diesel-fueled APSs and the remaining 52 percent pro duce other cab comfort devices such as fuel-fired heaters, truck stop electrificat ion, battery electric APSs, etc. Some of the APS manufacturers are part of bigger companies that design and manufacture specialty engineered products for the automotive, m arine, industrial, medical and aerospace industries. Such APS manufacturers are n ot considered small businesses.

Staff estimates that about 70% of the internal comb ustion APS manufacturers are small businesses. However, none of these manufacturers a re based in California.

The number of California trucking businesses affect ed by the proposal was estimated from California Highway Patrol’s Biennial Inspectio n of Terminals 16 Program database. Approximately 98 percent of California trucking bus inesses have fleet sizes of 24 trucks

15 The number of idle reduction technology manufactur ers is determined from a listing of idle reduction technologies at the U.S. EPA website ( http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/idlingtechnologies .htm ) and from a listing at http://www.truckinginfo.com

. 16 California Vehicle Code Section 34501.12 requires any person or organization directing the operation of trucks or trailers to participate in an inspection program co nducted by the California Highway Patrol to inspect California truck terminals every two years.37

or less. Assuming the fleet size of a small busine ss to consist of 24 trucks or less, approximately 98 percent of the California trucking businesses are in the small business category.

The number of out-of-state based trucking businesse s that operate in California is difficult to determine. However, staff analyzed th e 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey database (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005) to get a rough estimate of the fleet composition of the 49-states. Based on this analys is, staff assumes that the out-of-state fleet mix is representative of those trucks operati ng in California. Similar to California trucking businesses, 99 percent of out-of-state bus inesses have fleet sizes of 20 trucks or less, and thus could be considered small busines ses 17

.

C. POTENTIAL COSTS TO ENGINE MANUFACTURERS

The proposal would require engine manufacturers to install a non-programmable and tamper-proof engine shutdown system on new 2008 and subsequent model year California heavy-duty engines. As previously discu ssed, an engine shutdown system is a standard feature on current electronically contro lled on-road diesel engines, but are presently not programmed to shut the engine down af ter five minutes of idling. Setting the idle time is left to the truck owner, and the s ystem can easily be overridden to allow the engine to idle continuously. Staff therefore, expects engine manufacturers to comply with this requirement through a minor change in the programming of the electronic engine software. As a result, staff exp ects that engine manufacturers will not incur any significant additional cost in developing the engine shutdown technology to comply with the proposed requirement, as no additio nal hardware costs should be

needed.

In addition, engine manufacturers that certify engi nes meeting the proposed optional NOx idling emission standard or install a Californi a compliant APS system may incur additional cost due to the proposed vehicle labelin g requirements. However, staff believes this incremental cost to be negligible and absorbable within the purchase price of the main engine or the APS system, whichever is applicable.

Since the proposed new engine requirement is a Cali fornia only requirement, it is projected to have a minimal cost impact on engine m anufacturers. This cost is due to

additional administrative costs related to the need to separately manufacture and track those engines destined for sale in California from those for sale in the other 49-states

. However, these costs may be further reduced should engine manufacturers elect to also incorporate engine shut down systems in engines des tined for sale in the other 49- states. Staff has assumed a minimal price increase of $100 per engine to cover the additional administrative costs and the minimal rep rogramming costs.

17 The reason for using fleet size of 20 trucks or le ss as a cut point for the 49-state fleet analysis a s opposed to 24

trucks or less for the California fleet is because the 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey database bins fleet sizes
as 1 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 20, 21 to 50, etc., and t herefore, it was not possible to use 24 trucks as a cut-point for the 49- state analysis.38

D. POTENTIAL COSTS TO TRUCK MANUFACTURERS

The proposed regulation is not expected to result i n any significant increase in costs to truck manufacturers. Engine shutdown software is a lready present and integrated with the truck. Staff anticipates that current truck ma nufacturing practices will not be significantly affected by the proposed regulation. Manufacturers will continue to manufacture trucks according to their own or custom er specifications. Staff’s proposal may also create a demand for “factory installed” ca b comfort devices but offering them

would be a business decision that would also benefi t the manufacturer. However, since the proposed regulation is a California only requir ement, they may incur a minimal increase in administrative costs in assuring that t he engines installed on the trucks meet the proposed requirements. The proposed vehicle la beling requirements may also add to the cost of the truck, in instances where the tr uck manufacturer is responsible for producing and affixing the label to the outside of the truck. Staff assumes these incremental costs are negligible and absorbable wit hin current truck pricing since truck manufacturers already have to track engines, transm issions, and other customer order components in vehicle orders.

E. POTENTIAL COST TO DIESEL-FUELED APS MANUFACTURER S

The proposed regulation allows the use of any alter native technology provided that the APS complies with applicable California emission st andards and test procedures for their fuel and horsepower category. However, the p roposal requires diesel-fueled APSs produced for applications with 2007 and subsequent model year diesel engines to meet

additional PM controls. Manufacturers of diesel-fu eled APSs that comply with additional PM controls may incur an additional cost in develop ing a PM trap with an active regeneration scheme capable of reducing PM emission s by 85% from the off-road Tier 4 standards. Furthermore, trucks equipped with PM trap-equipped APSs would need a

label affixed to the outside of the truck. Accordi ng to one diesel PM trap manufacturer, the cost of retrofitting a diesel-fueled APS with a n active PM trap is estimated to be $1,200 to $1,500 (Lambe, 2005). However, staff ass umed a conservative incremental cost of $2,000 to comply with the additional PM con trol, including the cost of verifying the APS with a PM trap and creating a label.

F. POTENTIAL IMPACT ON TRUCKING BUSINESSES

The proposed requirements will affect both Californ ia and out-of-state trucking businesses that already own sleeper trucks and thos e that will purchase new ones in 2008. Although not required by the proposal, for p urposes of this analysis, staff assumes that all trucking businesses will incur add itional costs in purchasing alternative cab comfort technologies to provide for sleeper ber th comfort and electrical power for accessories. Assuming businesses will use the most commonly used alternative today, the diesel-fueled APS, staff expects that businesse s that own pre-2007 model year sleeper trucks will incur a cost of approximately $ 5,000 to $8,000, while businesses that purchase new 2007 and subsequent model year sleeper trucks will incur a cost of approximately $7,000 to 10,100 (cost of an APS with additional PM control and, for39

California certified trucks, an engine shutdown sys tem for 2008 and subsequent model year engines). These costs are based on purchasing an aftermarket diesel-fueled APS, which is expected to cost more than an APS offered by the vehicle manufacturer as a factory option.

While existing California and out-of-state trucking businesses will certainly be impacted by the proposed regulations, the impact will depend on how often their trucks require extended stays in California. For example, if exte nded stays for an owner/operator or a truck fleet rarely happen in California, a business decision would need to be made whether to equip its truck(s) with an alternative c ab comfort device. This decision would be based on how soon they could recover this additi onal incurred cost. Depending on the amount of idling hours reduced and the type of alternative cab comfort technology used, these additional costs can be recovered withi n 1 to 2.5 years through reduced fuel consumption and maintenance requirements. Therefor e, overall, the proposed requirements will benefit the truck owner because t hey will realize a net savings from improved operating costs. An example of how these savings will be achieved is shown below, in Table 2.

Table 2 shows the savings realized and the payback periods for a diesel-fueled APS. The savings were estimated assuming that a sleeper truck idling consumes one gallon per hour and idling is reduced by six hours per day . The cost of diesel fuel was estimated at $2.40 per gallon 18 . The Technology and Maintenance Council’s Recommended Practice 1108 (RP 1108) provides a meth od for estimating preventive maintenance and engine overhaul costs due to long d uration idling. Using RP 1108, reducing idling by one hour results in preventive m aintenance savings of $0.07 per hour, and engine overhaul savings of $0.16 per hour . It should be noted that the maintenance savings shown in Table 2 account for th e additional costs that would be incurred by the maintenance requirements of the die sel-fueled APS 19

.

18 The diesel fuel cost of $2.40 per gallon is obtain ed by averaging the weekly California diesel fuel p rices for the weeks from January 1 to August 1, 2005. Historic w eekly retail on-highway diesel prices are available from the U.S. DOE, Energy Information Administration at http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/wohdp/diesel.asp

. 19 The APS maintenance cost is based on the AXP 1000 maintenance requirements of $420. AXP 1000 is a di eselfueled APS manufactured and sold by Engine and Ener gy Technology Corporation ( http://www.eent.net /).40 Table 2: Net Fuel and Maintenance Savings

Vehicle Fuel Savings (gallons/year) Fuel Cost

Savings $/year Maintenance

Savings $/year Total

Savings $/year

Truck with a sleeper berth using

a diesel-fueled APS 1750 $ 4,200 $ 77 $ 4,280

Cost of APS Payback Period

APS without PM aftertreatment - $ 5,000 ~ 1.2 years

APS with PM aftertreatment + idle shutdown system - $10,100 ≤ 2.5 years

G. POTENTIAL IMPACT ON BUSINESS COMPETITIVENESS

The proposed regulation is not expected to adversel y impact the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other stat es. As previously discussed, although businesses owning or purchasing new trucks with sleeper berths will most likely require that they be equipped with an altern ative cab comfort technology, resulting in higher initial purchase costs, those businesses will also realize net savings in operating costs for those trucks. Staff’s proposal is expected to improve, over the useful life of the truck, California trucking busin esses’ competitiveness (compared to trucking businesses that do not have alternative ca b comfort technology on their trucks) by significantly reducing operating costs. Also, o ut-of-state trucking businesses that operate in California and install alternative cab c omfort technology will also benefit from the same competitiveness advantage.

H. POTENTIAL IMPACT ON JOBS AND BUSINESS CREATION, ELIMINATION,

OR EXPANSION

The proposed regulation is not expected to have a s ignificant effect on the creation, elimination or expansion of jobs and businesses in California. However, the regulation may result in an increase in demand for cab comfort devices, and this in turn may result in the creation or expansion of some businesses. T he increased demand for alternative cab comfort technologies may also result in the cre ation of new jobs related to research and development to further improve these technologi es, and jobs related to the manufacturing, distribution and marketing of these technologies. Most of the businesses and jobs created are expected to be loca ted near the engine and/or vehicle manufacturing facilities outside of California but some may be created in California.41

I. POTENTIAL COSTS TO LOCAL AND STATE AGENCIES

There are no additional net costs for local and sta te agencies associated with adopting the proposed regulation. Typically, local governme nt and state agencies purchase trucks without sleeper berths, so those trucks only require minimal modifications to the engine’s software, resulting in minimal cost to the purchaser. It is expected that agencies purchasing compliant trucks would realize net operating savings from reduced fuel consumption due to the engine shutdown technol ogy. Other costs, such as implementation costs to the state as a result of th is rulemaking, would be costs directed to the ARB to implement and enforce the requirement s, which should be absorbable within the existing ARB programs and budget.42

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

The ARB is committed to integrating environmental j ustice into all of its activities. State law defines environmental justice as the fair treat ment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adopti on, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. On December 31, 2001, the Board approved “Policies and Actions for Enviro nmental Justice”, which formally established a framework for incorporating environme ntal justice into the ARB's programs consistent with the directives of state la w. The policies developed apply to all communities in California, but recognize that envir onmental justice issues have been

raised more in the context of low income and minori ty communities.

These Policies are intended to promote the fair tre atment of all Californians and cover the full spectrum of ARB activities. Underlying th ese Policies is a recognition that the ARB needs to engage community members in a meaningf ul way as it carries out its activities. People should have the best possible i nformation about the air they breathe and what is being done to reduce unhealthy air poll ution in their communities. The ARB recognizes its obligation to work closely with all stakeholders--communities, environmental and public health organizations, indu stry, business owners, other agencies, and all other interested parties to succe ssfully implement these Policies (ARB, 2001c).

The proposed truck idling emission reduction requir ements would benefit the people of California by reducing their exposure to harmful po llutants and diesel toxics. In particular, the proposed requirements will provide significant air quality benefits to communities located in proximity to truck stops, po rts, distribution centers, and other truck idling centers where a high density of trucks idle together for extended periods of time. Furthermore, most of these locations are low -income areas that are already affected by the cumulative impact of air pollution from multiple mobile, commercial, industrial, areawide, and other sources. The adopt ion of this regulation, therefore,

affirms the Board’s commitment to the fair treatmen t of all people throughout California.43

IX. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS

This chapter presents the air quality benefits and cost-effectiveness resulting from the implementation of the proposed idle reduction requi rements.

A. AIR QUALITY BENEFITS

The proposed regulations achieve emission reduction s by reducing the idling operations of diesel engines and trucks through the use of exi sting, cost-effective technologies. For various reasons, it is difficult to precisely e stimate the emission benefits of the proposed regulations because staff can not accurate ly predict at this time the type and distribution of alternative technologies used to co mply with the proposed regulation.

Another major uncertainty is the idling emission ra te estimates associated with aftertreatment-based NOx and PM control technologie s to be used with the 2007 and later model year diesel engines. Staff is not awar e of any data that describe the performance of trap-based technologies or NOx catal ysts during extended diesel idling operation. However, based on staff’s understanding of how these technologies work, the following assumptions have been made for estima ting the baseline emissions of 2007 and later model year diesel engines:

1. PM traps by nature of their construction are exp ected to trap PM at the same efficiency during idling as when the truck is opera ting under other typical driving conditions. Thus, the 2007 and later model year PM idling emission rates reflect the use of highly efficient PM traps.

2. NOx catalysts require a minimum temperature (lig ht-off temperature) before the catalytic reactions needed to reduce NOx occur. Th e light-off temperature for NOx catalysts is generally above 200 ° C (MECA, 2000), while exhaust temperatures during extended idling are typically b elow 150 ° C (Hallstrom, 2005). Thus, for purposes of estimating NOx catalyst effec tiveness during extended idling, engine-out NOx emissions are assumed to be unaffected by NOx catalysts, unless the engine is idling immediately following over-the-road operation (explained below).

The U.S. EPA, in laboratory testing to demonstrate the technical feasibility of the 2007 heavy-duty engine standards, observed NOx emis sion control for more than 10 minutes of idle operation following loaded (or high temperature)

conditions due to the thermal inertia of the NOx ca talyst (U.S. EPA, 2000). However, the size of the NOx catalyst system relati ve to the engine size tested was significantly larger than what is currently bei ng developed for diesel engines. A smaller catalyst system would have less thermal i nertia, which would correspondingly result in controlling NOx emissions for a shorter period of time

than the 10 minutes observed in the U.S. EPA testin g. Thus, due to limited data on NOx catalysts currently being developed, staff a ssumes that NOx control during idling resulting from the thermal inertia ma ss of the NOx catalysts will be44

less than five minutes following over-the-road oper ation. Thus, NOx emission reduction estimates from the proposed requirements will remain unaffected, as the first five minutes of idling operation have not been included in staff’s emission benefit estimates for this proposal.

Idle emission rates incorporated in California’s em issions inventory model, EMFAC2002 ver 2.2 (ARB 2003), are based on test data from a l imited number of trucks. In addition,

the emission test data were obtained at “curb” idle speeds and did not include accessory loading. However, studies have shown tha t idling emissions are greatly dependent on ambient conditions, accessory loading, and engine speed (Lambert et al., 2001; Storey et al., 2003). As a result, staff mod ified the EMFAC2002 idle emission factors using emissions test data obtained from pha se 1 of the Coordinating Research Council (CRC) project E-55/E-59 (Gautam et al., 200 3) and emissions test data from a multi-agency study which included the U.S. EPA and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) (Storey et al., 2003). The idle emission ra tes used in quantifying the air quality benefits from the proposed regulation are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Fleet Average Idle Emission Factors

Weighted Average Idle Emission factors

Calendar

Year Model

Year NOx

(grams/hour) ROG

(grams/hour) PM

(grams/hour) CO 2

(grams/hour)

Pre-1991 39.8 20.2 5.3 6228

1991-2006 115.3 9.4 1.9 6228 2010

2007-10 115.3 8.3 0.16 6228

Pre-1991 39.8 20.1 5.2 6228

1991-2006 115.3 8.9 1.8 6228 2020

2007-20 115.3 8.3 0.16 6228

As shown, the PM emission rates for pre-2007 and 20 07-10 model years differ greatly, as one would expect with the use of PM traps beginn ing in 2007. The NOx and ROG emission rates are assumed not to be impacted by a NOx catalyst at idle and thus are somewhat comparable for 1991-2006 and 2007-10 model years. The increase in the NOx emission rates for 1991 and later versus pre-19 91 model years may be attributed to the high idling NOx emission rates associated wi th the post-1990 electronically managed engines which are likely to have advanced t iming at low loads (or low temperatures) to avoid white smoke conditions (Clar k et al., 2005).

Because of the engine shutdown requirements, the pr oposed regulation affects both sleeper and non-sleeper trucks. However, the emiss ion benefits of staff’s proposal consider only sleeper trucks. This is because the existing in-use ATCM already requires the operator of a non-sleeper truck to shu t down his/her engine after five45

minutes of continuous idling, and thus the emission benefits from non-sleeper trucks have already been accounted for. Staff’s emission benefit analysis includes both California and out-of-state registered sleeper truc ks, and assumes that all pre-2007 sleeper trucks will employ as an alternative to idl ing, diesel-fueled APSs certified to the

California off-road or federal non-road standards. 2007 and subsequent model year sleeper trucks were assumed to employ diesel-fueled APSs verified to a level 3 or 85%

PM reduction from the Tier 4 off-road standards sho wn in Table 4. Furthermore, the average power demand for an APS operating under ext reme climate conditions is estimated to be approximately 2.3 kW for winter con ditions and 3.1 kW for summer conditions (Wallace, 2003; Lutsey, 2003). Staff as sumed that the diesel-fueled APS would provide an average of 2.7 kW power to provide sleeper berth comfort and electrical power for accessories. Also, 25 percent of all trucks on the road on a typical day in California are estimated to be out-of-state registered trucks (ARB, 2003). Staff estimates that 90 percent of those out-of-state reg istered trucks are sleeper trucks that idle an average of six hours per day in California.

Table 4: Off-Road Diesel Emission Standards (g/kW-h r)

Model Year Horsepower

Category NOx+NMHC CO PM

hp < 11 (kW < 8) 7.5 8.0 0.8 2005 – 2008 (Tier 2) 11 ≤ hp < 25

(8 ≤ kW < 19) 7.5 6.6 0.8

hp < 11 (kW < 8) 7.5 8.0 0.4 2008+ (Tier 4) 11 ≤ hp < 25

(8 ≤ kW < 19) 7.5 6.6 0.4

In estimating the emission rates of diesel-fueled A PSs, staff analyzed the 2005

emission certification test data of off-road diesel engines used in APSs (engines with power ratings between 5 to 19 kW). The gram per ho ur emission rates were estimated from the average of the certification test data (in grams per kW-hour) assuming that the APS provides an average power of 2.7 kW. The avera ge of the certification data and the gram per hour emission rates are shown in Table 5. The certification test data does

not include CO 2 emissions. Therefore, in calculating the CO 2 emission reductions, staff

used CO 2 emission rates from an APS test data report publis hed by U.S. EPA. (Lim, 2002).46 Table 5: Diesel Fueled APS Emission Rates

Number of Engines NMHC+NOx CO PM CO 2
Average of Certification

Test Data (grams/kW-hour) 5.6 2.3 0.32 ---

APS Emission Rate (grams/hour) 68

15.1 20 6.2 0.87 2228

In addition to reducing emissions of criteria pollu tants, the proposed regulation also reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as CO 2 , methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions. CO 2 is by far the most prevalent GHG, and as such the major contributor to global warming. A major source of C O 2 emissions is human activity and in particular fossil fuel burning in the electric g eneration, industrial, and transportation sectors (see Figures 7 and 8) (Bemis, 2005). As di scussed in Chapter II, truck idling consumes diesel fuel from 0.4 to 1.6 gallons per ho ur depending on engine speed and load. Therefore, reduced idling will result in red uced amount of fuel burned. Since CO 2 is the direct product of fuel burning, reducing fue l consumption also reduces CO 2 emissions.

Concerned about the impact on climate change, the s tate of California has set a target to reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The proposed regulation is estimated to reduce CO 2 emissions by nearly 1930 tpd (0.7 million tons per year) and 2280 tpd (0.8 million tons per year) statewide in 2010 and 2020, respectively. The resulting emission reductions for NOx, ROG, PM, and CO 2 for calendar years 2010 and 2020 for both statewid e and the South Coast Air Basin are shown in Tables 6, 7, 8, and 9. The emission reductions assume full compliance with the proposed requiremen ts.

20 As discussed in Chapter IV, the proposed 30 gram p er hour optional NOx idling emission standard was b ased on the average NOx emission level of 2005 certificatio n test data of off-road diesel engines used in APSs (engine with power ratings between 5 to 19 kW). The difference between the 15.1 grams per hour NOx+NMHC emission r ate of the APS (Table 5) and the 30 gram per hour optional NOx emission standard, discussed in Chapter IV, is a result of calculating the optional NOx emission standard base d on the assumption that the APS provides the peak power of 5
kW, while the APS NOx+NMHC emission rate in Table 5 assumes that the APS provides an average power of 2.7

kW.47 Nitrous Oxide

6.4%

Fossil Fuel

Combustion

CO2

81.0% High GWP

Gases

3.4% Methane

6.2%

Non-Fossil

Fuel CO2

2.8%

Figure 7. California GHG emissions by Type of Gas in 2003 (Bemis, 2005).

Agriculture &
Forestry

8.2% Industrial

21.4% Others

8.5%

Transportation

42.8% Electric Power

19.0%

Figure 8. Sources of California’s 2003 GHG Emissio ns (by End-Use Sector) (Bemis, 2005).48 Table 6: 2010 Estimated Statewide Idling Emission B enefits

Sleeper Trucks Only

Vehicles NOx ROG PM CO2

Baseline Emissions (tpd) Calendar Year 2010

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 30,161 20 2.1 0.39 1200

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 45,241 33 2.5 0.34 1800

Total Baseline 75,402 53 4.6 0.73 3000

Emission Reductions (tpd) Calendar Year 2010

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 30,161 17 1.9 0.26 770

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 45,241 29 2.2 0.16 1160

Total Reductions 75,402 46 4.2 0.42 1930

Table 7: 2020 Estimated Statewide Idling Emission B enefits

Sleeper Trucks Only

Vehicles NOx ROG PM CO2

Baseline Emissions (tpd) Calendar Year 2020

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 35,652 26 2.0 0.16 1420

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 53,478 39 2.8 0.08 2130

Total Baseline 89,130 65 4.8 0.24 3550

Emission Reductions (tpd) Calendar Year 2020

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 35,652 22 1.8 0.08 910

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 53,478 34 2.6 0.02 1370

Total Reductions 89,130 56 4.4 0.10 228049

Table 8: 2010 Estimated South Coast Air Basin Idlin g Emission Benefits Sleeper Trucks Only

Vehicles NOx ROG PM CO2

Baseline Emissions (tpd) Calendar Year 2010

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 11,631 8 0.8 0.14 460

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 17,447 13 0.9 0.12 690

Total Baseline 29,078 21 1.7 0.26 1150

Emission Reductions (tpd) Calendar Year 2010

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 11,631 7 0.7 0.09 300

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 17,447 11 0.9 0.06 440

Total Reductions 29,078 18 1.6 0.15 740

Table 9: 2020 Estimated South Coast Air Basin Idlin g Emission Benefits Sleeper Trucks Only

Vehicles NOx ROG PM CO2

Baseline Emissions (tpd) Calendar Year 2020

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 13,988 10 0.8 0.06 560

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 20,981 15 1.1 0.03 830

Total Baseline 34,969 26 1.9 0.08 1390

Emission Reductions (tpd) Calendar Year 2020

CA Registered Sleeper Trucks 13,988 9 0.7 0.03 360

Out-of-State Sleeper Trucks 20,981 13 1.0 0.01 520

Total Reductions 34,969 22 1.7 0.04 88050

B. COST-EFFECTIVENESS

Staff’s proposal is expected to provide a cost savi ngs to truck owners over the useful life of the truck by reducing fuel consumption and truck ’s maintenance requirements. For example, as previously shown in Table 2, a truck th at idles an average of approximately six hours per day and uses a diesel-fueled APS as a n alternative to main engine idling would save approximately $4,300 per year. With suc h savings, the cost of the APS would be recovered within 1 to 2.5 years. Therefor e, the cost-effectiveness of the proposed rule is in reality zero because it is a co st savings. However, staff estimated the cost-effectiveness of the proposal without cons idering the associated savings in order to see how it compares with cost-effectivenes s estimates of other regulations adopted by the ARB.

The proposed rule would require new 2008 and subseq uent model year California certified diesel engines to be equipped with a non- programmable engine shutdown system. Pre-2008 trucks would be required to compl y with the proposed rule by manually turning the engine off. The staff's propo sal does not include any retrofit requirement for these engines. Therefore, the cost of compliance with the proposed requirements should only be the cost incurred to co mply with the engine shutdown requirements applicable to only 2008 and later dies el engines. However, although it is not required by the proposed regulation, staff expe cts that in practice, operators and owners of sleeper trucks of any model year will lik ely need an alternative cab comfort technology as a substitute to main engine idling. Thus, for new 2008 and subsequent model year sleeper trucks, the costs of complying w ith the proposed requirements would include costs associated with the engine shut down system and costs associated with the alternative cab comfort technology/strateg y used to replace main engine idling. For existing pre-2008 model year sleeper trucks and out-of-state trucks that frequently operate in California, the costs of complying with the proposed requirements would

include costs associated with the retrofit of an al ternative cab comfort technology/strategy used to replace main engine idl ing.

It is difficult at this time to assess to what exte nt each alternative cab comfort technology will be used when the proposed regulatio n takes effect. Staff has therefore estimated the cost-effectiveness of the proposed re gulation based on the highest cost that a truck operator may incur to comply with the proposed regulation. Thus, our costeffectiveness calculation for the proposed regulati on assumes that a 2008 and subsequent model year California truck would have a n engine shutdown system and uses, as an alternative to idling, a diesel-fueled APS equipped with a level 3 verified PM control strategy. A 2007 model year California tru ck or a 2007 and later model year outof-state truck is also assumed to use, as an altern ative to idling, a diesel fueled APS with a level 3 verified PM control strategy. A pre -2007 California or pre-2007 out-ofstate truck is assumed to use a diesel-fueled APS w ith no aftertreatment. The

calculation furthermore assumes the cost of a diese l-fueled APS with aftertreatment to be $10,000, and that of an engine shutdown system t o be $100. The cost of a commercially available diesel-fueled APS with no af tertreatment varies from $5,000 to51

$8,000. Thus, staff assumed an average cost of $6, 500 for an APS with no

aftertreatment. The lifetime of the APS is assumed to be 10 years.

As shown in Table 10, the cost-effectiveness of the proposed regulations is $2.00 per pound of NOx plus ROG reduced, for a new 2008 model year California truck; $1.98 per pound of NOx plus ROG reduced, for a 2007 model yea r California truck or a 2007 model year or newer out-of-state truck; and $1.44 f or a pre 2007 California or out-ofstate truck.

Table 10: Cost-Effectiveness in Dollars per Pound o f NOx+ROG Reduced

Sleeper Trucks

2008 CA Only 2007

CA and Non-CA Pre 2007

CA and Non-CA

NOx 115.3 115.3 99.6 Fleet Average

Idle Emission Factor (g rams /hour) ROG 8.3 8.3 12.2

Lifetime Truck Emissions (10 years) (pounds per truck) NOx+ROG 5758 5758 5210

APS Emission Rates (grams/hour) NOx+ROG 15.1 15.1 15.1

Lifetime APS Emissions (pounds) NOx+ROG 702 702 702

Lifetime Emission

Reduction NOx+ROG 5056 5056 4507

Cost Of Technology

APS $10,000 $10,000 $6,500 a

Engine Shutdown 100 0 0 APS + Engine Shutdown $10,100 $10,000 $6,500

Cost-Effectiveness ($ per pound of NOx+ROG) $2.00 $1.98 $1.44

Fleet Distribution CY 2008 4% 7% 89%

Fleet Average

Cost-effectiveness ($ per pound of NOx+ROG) 1.51

The fleet average cost-effectiveness is difficult t o estimate as it is difficult to predict the

fraction of the fleet that will install cab comfort devices to substitute for main engine idling. In particular, it is more difficult to ass ess or predict the fraction of out-of-state trucks that will install a cab comfort device. Dep ending on how often out-of-state sleeper trucks frequent California and require an e xtended stay, a business decision on52

the part of the truck fleet or owner/operator would be made whether to have cab comfort devices installed. However, for the purposes of th is analysis, staff assumed the “worst”, that all out-of-state sleepers entering California would have cab comfort devices installed. Therefore, staff estimated the fleet av erage cost-effectiveness assuming that all California sleeper trucks and all out-of-state sleeper trucks entering California will be

retrofitted with a diesel-fueled APS. Based on the se assumptions, the fleet average cost-effectiveness is estimated to be $1.51 per pou nd of NOx plus ROG reduced, which compares favorably with recently adopted ARB emissi on reduction regulations.53

X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

The proposed idle reduction requirements are necess ary to achieve emission reductions needed to meet clean air goals as specif ied in the 2003 SIP. The proposed requirements can be met using existing, commerciall y available technologies. Such technologies would significantly reduce the idling time of sleeper trucks and result in a substantial reduction in emissions of NOx, ROG, PM, and CO2. The proposed requirements will result in a cost savings to the t rucking industry and are therefore clearly cost-effective. But for comparative purpos es (i.e., without accounting for the savings associated with reduced fuel consumption an d maintenance costs), the costeffectiveness of the proposed regulation compares f avorably with other mobile source and fuels regulations adopted by the Board. In add ition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it will also help reduce the state’s dep endency on foreign oil and is also consistent with the Board’s policy regarding Enviro nmental Justice. The staff therefore recommends that the Board adopt the proposed truck idling emission reduction requirements for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines/ trucks.54

XI. REFERENCES

Antares (2005). Summary of Operations: Truck Stop E lectrification Facilities of the New York State Thruway. Antares Group Inc. Final Report prepared for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. J anuary 2005.

ARB. (1998a). Proposed Amendments to Heavy-Duty Veh icle Regulations: 2004 Emission Standards; Averaging, Banking and Trading; Optional Reduced Emission Standards; Certification Test Fuel; Labeli ng; Maintenance Requirements

and Warranties . Staff Report. Sacramento: March 6, 1998

ARB. (1998b). Proposed Identification of Particulat e Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines as a Toxic Air Contaminant . Staff Report. Sacramento: June 1998. ( http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/diesltac/diesltac.htm )

ARB. (2001a). Public Hearing to Consider Amendments Adopting More Stringent Emission Standards for 2007 and Subsequent Model Ye ar New Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines . Staff Report. Sacramento: September 7, 2001.

ARB. (2001b). ARB Fact Sheet: Air Pollution and Hea lth . Accessed July 14, 2005. ( http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/fs/fs1/fs1.ht m )

ARB. (2001c). Policies and Actions for Environmenta l Justice

. Sacramento: December 2001. ( http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/programs/ej/ej.htm )

ARB. (2002b). Global Warming and Greenhouse Gas Emi ssions from Motor Vehicles

. Staff Presentation to the Board (AB 1493). Sacrame nto: September 2002. ( http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/background/ )

ARB. (2003). On-Road Emissions Inventory Model: EMF AC2002, ver 2.2

. Release Date: April, 2003. ( http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/on-road/latest_version.h tm )

Bemis (2005). E-mail communication. Gerry Bemis. California Energy Commission (CEC). Re: Climate Change Pollutants. Pie Charts . August 15, 2005.

Brodrick, Christie-Joy, Nicholas P. Lutsey, Quentin A. Keen, Daniel I. Rubins, John P. Wallace and Harry A. Dwyer, S. William Gouse, III. Truck Idling Trends: Results of a Pilot Survey in Northern California . Society of Automotive Engineers, 2001-

01-2828

Clark, Nigel N., ABM S. Khan, Gregory J. Thompson, W. Scott Wayne, Mridul Gautam, and Donald W. Lyons. Idle Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles

. 2005 Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction (DEER) Confe rence. Chicago, Illinois. August 21-25, 2005.55

Gautam, Mridul, Nigel N. Clark, W. Scott Wayne, Gre gory Thompson, Donald W. Lyons, Wesley C. Riddle, Ralph D. Nine, Benjie Staggs, V. Andy Williams, Timothy Hall and Sairam Thiagarajan. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Chassis Dynamometer Testing for Emissions Inventory, Air Quality Modeling, Source A pportionment and Air Toxics Emissions Inventory: Phase 1 Report: CRC Project No . E-55/E-59 . West Virginia University, Morgantown: April 2003.

Hallstrom. (2005). E-mail communication . Kevin Hallstrom. Engelhard Corporation June 30, 2005

Jay.(2005). Telephone Communication . Benny Jay. Idling Solutions, LLC. June 30, 2005.

Lambe. (2005). Personal Communication . Peter Lambe. Dinex Exhausts, Inc. June 30, 2005

Lambert, D.C., M. Vojtisek-Lom, and P. J. Wilson. Extended Idling Emissions Study - Analysis and Final Report . Knoxville, February 2002.

Lim, Han. Study of Exhaust Emissions from Idling H eavy-Duty Diesel Trucks and Commercially Available Idle-Reducing Devices . U.S. EPA Report: EPA420-R-02- 025, October 2002.

Lutsey, Nicholas. Fuel cells For Auxiliary Power i n Trucks: Requirements, Benefits, and Marketability. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. UCD-ITS-RR-03-04. July 2003.

MECA. (2000). Catalyst-Based Diesel Particulate Fil ters and NOx Adsorbers: A Summary of the Technologies and the Effects of Fuel Sulfur. Manufacturers of Emission Controls Association. August 14, 2000. http://www.meca.org/jahia/Jahia/pid/229

Perrot, Thomas L., Jeffrey C. Kim, Joseph D. Tario, and Colleen Hagan. Installation and Economics of a Shorepower Facility for Long-Hau l Trucks. Antares Group Inc. September 2004

RVIA. (2003). Letter from the Recreational Vehicle Industry Association to the ARB. July 18, 2003.

Stodolsky, F., L. Gaines, and A. Vyas. Analysis of Technology Options to Reduce the Fuel Consumption of Idling Trucks. Argonne National Laboratory. ANL/ESD-43.

June 2000.56

Storey, John M. E., John F. Thomas, Samuel A. Lewis , Sr., Thang Q. Dam, K. Dean Edwards, Gerald L. DeVault and Dominic J. Retrossa. Particulate Matter and Aldehyde Emissions from Idling Heavy-Duty Diesel Tr ucks. Society of Automotive Engineers, 2003-01-0289

U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey Database U.S. Department of Commerce. April 13, 2005

U.S. EPA. (2000). Regulatory Impact Analysis: Heavy -Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Re quirements

. December 2000. (EPA420-R-00-026).

U.S. EPA. (2004). A Glance at Clean Freight Strateg ies: Idle Reduction

. February 2004. (EPA 420-F-04-009).

U.S. EPA. (2005). Currently Available Idle Reductio n Technologies . Accessed: July 7, 2005. ( http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/idlingtechnologies .htm )

Wallace, John Paul. Modeling of Line-Haul Truck Au xiliary Power Units in ADVISOR

2002 . Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. UCD-ITS-RR-03-07. August 2003.A- 1 APPENDIX A

PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Amend the following sections of Title 13, Cali fornia Code of Regulat ions, to read as set forth in the following pages:

§ 1956.8 Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Year Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles
§ 2404 Emission Control Labels and Consumer Information – 1995 and Later Small Off-Road Engines
§ 2424 Emission Control Labels – 1996 and Later Off-Road Compression-Ignition Engines
§ 2425 Defects Warranty Requirements for 1996 and Later Off-Road Compression-Ignition Engines
§ 2485 Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling

Notes: a) Paragraphs within the section that are not proposed for amendment in this rulemaking are indicated by "[No Change.]”.

b) The proposed regulatory amendments are shown in

underline to indicate additions to the text and strikeout to

indicate deletions.A- 2 Amend Title 13, California Code of Regulations, § 1956.8, to read:

§ 1956.8. Exhaust Emissions Standards and Test Procedures - 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Du ty Engines and Vehicles.

(a)(1) [No Change.]

(a)(2)(A) The exhaust emissions from new 2004 and subsequent model heavyduty diesel engines, heavy-duty natural gas-fueled and liquefied-petroleum-gasfueled engines derived from diesel-cycle engines, and heavy-duty methanolfueled diesel engines, and the optional, reduced-emission standards for 2002 and subsequent model engines produced b eginning October 1, 2002, except in all cases engines used in medium -duty vehicles, shall not exceed:

Exhaust Emission Standards for 2004 and S ubsequent Model Heavy-Duty Engines,and Optional, Reduced Emission Standards for 2002 and Subsequent Model HeavyDuty Engines Produced Beginning October 1, 2002, Other than Urban Bus Engines (grams per brake horsepower-hour [g/bhp-hr])

Model Year Oxides of Nitrogen Plus

Non-methane Hydrocarbons Optional Oxides of Nitrogen Plus

Non-methane Hydrocarbons Oxides

of Nitrogen Non-methane Hydrocarbons Carbon

Monoxid

e Particulates

2004-2006 H, 2.4 A,C,E,J 2.5 B,C,E,J n/a n/a 15.5 0.10 C

October 1, 2002 – 2006 n/a 1.8 to 0.3 A,D,F n/a n/a 15.5 0.03 to 0.01 G

2007 and subsequent n/a n/a 0.2 I 0.14 15.5 0.01 K

A This is the standard for the arithmetic sum of the oxides of nitrogen exhaust component certification value and the non-methane hydrocarbon exhaust component certification value, without individual restriction on the individual component values.

B This is the standard for the arithmetic sum of the oxides of nitrogen exhaust component certification value and the non-methane hydrocarbon exhaust component certification value, with the non-methane hydrocarbon individual component value not to exceed 0.5 g/bhp-hr.

C For 2004 through 2006 model years, emissions averaging may be used to meet this standard. Averaging must be based on the requirements of the averaging, banking a nd trading programs described in “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” incorporated by reference in section 1956.8 (b), below.

D A manufacturer may elect to certify to an optional reduced-emission NOx+NMHC standard between the values, inclusive, by 0.3 grams per brake horsepower-hour increments. Engines certified to any of these optional reduced-emission NOx standards are not eligible for participation in any averaging, banking or trading programs described in “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” incorporated by reference in section 1956.8 (b), below.

E May be used as the certification standard for the higher emitting fueling mode of an engine certified under the dual fueling mode certification process of section 1956.8 (a)(4), below.A- 3 F May be used as the certification standard for the lower emitting fueling mode of an engine certified under the dual fueling mode certification process of section 1956.8 (a)(4), below.

G A manufacturer may elect to certify to an optional reduced-emission PM standard between the specified values, inclusive, by 0.01 grams per brake horsepower-hour in crements. Engines certified to any of these optional reduced-emission PM standards are not eligible for partic ipation in any averaging, banking or trading programs described in “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” incorporated by reference in section 1956.8 (b), below.

H Engine manufacturers subject to the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Settlement Agreements (Settlement Agreements) 1 must produce engines in compliance with the requirements contained in their respective Settlement Agreement. Most engine manufacturers subject to the Settlement Agreements are required to manufacture engines meeting the exhaust emission standards for 2004 and subsequent model years engines beginning October 1, 2002.

I A manufacturer may elect to include any or all of its heav y-duty diesel engine families in any or all of the NOx emissions averaging, banking, or trading programs fo r heavy-duty diesel engines, within the restrictions described in "California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles" incorporated in section 1956.8 (b), below. If the manufacturer elects to include engine families in any of these programs, the NOx family emission limit (FEL) may not exceed the following FEL caps: 2.00 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.75 grams per megajoule) for model years before 2010; 0.50 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.19 grams per megajoule) for model years 2010 and later. The FEL cap applies whether credits for the engine family are derived from averaging, banking, or trading programs.

J For 2007 through 2009 model years, a manufacturer may use these emission standards in accordance with section 1956.8 (a)(2)(B). A manufacturer may elect to incl ude any or all of its heavy-duty diesel engine families in any or all of the NOx plus NMHC emissions averaging, banking, or trading programs for heavy-duty diesel engines, within the restrictions described in "Califor nia Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles" incorporated in section 1956.8 (b), below. If the manufacturer elects to include engine families in any of these programs, the NOx family emission limit (FEL) may not exceed the following FEL caps: 2. 00 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.75 grams per megajoule) for model years. The FEL cap applies whether credits for the engine family are derived from averaging, banking, or trading programs.

K A manufacturer may elect to include any or all of its h eavy-duty diesel engine families in any or all of the

particulate averaging, banking, or trading programs for heavy-duty diesel engines, within the restrictions described in “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1985 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” incorporated by reference in section 1956.8 (b), below. The particulate FEL for each engine family a manufacturer elects to include in any of these programs may not exceed an FEL cap of 0.02 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.0075 grams per megajoule). The FEL cap applies whether credits for the engine family are derived from averaging, banking, or trading programs.

(a)(2)(B) through (5) [No Change.]

1 Seven of the largest heavy-duty diesel engine manufacturers will be implementing measures to reduce emissions beginning October 1, 2002, to meet the requirements of the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Settlement Agreements reached with the ARB. The Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Settlements were agreements reached in response to lawsuits brought by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and violations alleged by the ARB pertaining to excess in-use emissions caused by the use of defeat devices and unacceptable algorithms. Navistar signed its Settlement Agreement on October 22, 1998. Cummins, Detroit Diesel Corporation, Caterpillar, Volvo, Mack and Renault signed their Settlement Agreements on December 15, 1998.A- 4 (a)(6) Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Idling Requirements. (A) Engine Shutdown System. The r equirements in this subsection apply to engine manufacturers and original equi pment manufacturers, as applicable, that are responsible for the design and control of engine and/or vehicle idle

controls. (i) Requirements: Except as pr ovided in subsections (a)(6)(B) and (a)(6)(C), all new 2008 and subsequent model-year heavy-duty diesel engines shall be equipped with an engine shutdown sy stem that automat ically shuts down the engine after 300 seconds of continuous idling operation once the vehicle is stopped, the transmission is set to “neutra l” or “park”, and the parking brake is engaged. If the parking brake is not engaged, then the engine shutdown system shall shut down the engine after 900 seconds of continuous idling operation once the vehicle is stopped and the transmission is set to “neutral” or “park.” The engine shutdown system must be tam per-resistant and non-programmable. A warning signal, such as a light or sound indicator inside the vehicle cabin, may be used to alert the driver 30 seconds prior to engine shutdown. The engine shutdown system must be capable of allowing the driver to reset the engine shutdown system timer by momentarily c hanging the position of the accelerator, brake, or clutch pedal, or other mec hanism within 30 seconds prior to engine shutdown. Once reset, the engine s hutdown system shall restart the engine shutdown sequence described in this paragr aph above, and shall continue to do so until the engine shuts down or the vehicle is driven. (ii) Engine Shutdown System Override: The engine shutdown system may be overridden, to allow the engi ne to run continuously at idle, only under the following conditions: (I) If the engine is operating in power take-off (PTO) mode. The PTO system shall have a switch or a setting that can be switched “on” to override the engine shutdown system and w ill reset to the “off” position when the vehicle’s engine is turned off or when the PTO equipment is turned off. In addition, the PTO switch or setting shall be designed so that if it fails it will fail in the “off” position. Subject to advance Executive Officer approval, other methods for detecting or activating PTO operation may be allowed; or, (II) if the vehicle’s engine coolant temperature is below 60 ° F. The engine shutdown system shall autom atically be activated once the coolant temperature reaches 60 ° F or above. The engine coolant temperature shall be measured with the engine’s existing engine coolant temperature sensor used for engine protection, if so equipped. Other methods of measuring engine coolant temperature may be allowed, subject to advance Executive Officer approval. (B) Exempt Vehicles. Heavy-duty diesel engines to be used in buses as defined in California Vehicle Code §§ 233, 612 and 642, school buses as defined in California Vehicle Code § 545, and recreational vehicles as defined in Health and Safety Code 18010 are exempted from these requirements. (C) Optional NOx idling emission standar d. In lieu of the engine shutdown system requirements specified in s ubsection (a)(6)(A) above, an engine manufacturer may elect to certify its new 2008 and subsequent model-yearA- 5 heavy-duty diesel engines to an optional NOx idling emission standard of 30 grams per hour, without increasing emissi ons of CO, PM, or ROG. Compliance with this optional standard will be determined based on testing conducted pursuant to the supplemental steady-state test cycle and procedures specified in

section 86.1360-2007.B.4 of the “Calif ornia Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles”, adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment

date ), which is incorporated by referenc e herein. The manufacturer may request an alternative test procedure if the technology used cannot be demonstrated using the procedures in section 86.1360- 2007.B.4, subject to advance approval

of the Executive Officer. An engine manufacturer certifying its engine to the optional NOx idling emission standard must also produce a vehicle label, as defined in subsection

35.B.4 of the “California Exhaust Emis sion Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment date ), which is incorporated by (D) Optional Alternatives to Main Engine Idling. All new 2008 and subsequent model year heavy duty diesel engines may also be equipped with idling emission reduction devices that co mply with the compliance requirements specified in title 13, CCR section 2485(c)(3).

(b) through (h) [No Change.]

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43102, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code; Sect ions 27156, 38390, 38391 and 38395, Vehicle Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39003, 39500, 43000, 43013, 43017, 43018, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43106, 43150- 43154, 43202, 43204, 43205.5, 43206, 43210, 43211, 43212 and 43213, Health and Safety Code.A- 6 Amend Title 13, California Code of Regulations, § 2404, to read:

§ 2404. Emission Control Labels and Consumer Information – 1995 and Later

Small Off-Road Engines.

(a) Purpose. The Air Resources Board recognizes that certain emissions-critical or emissions-related parts must be properly ident ified and maintained in order for engines to meet the applicable emission standards. In addition, the Board recognizes that information regarding engines’ emissions leve ls may influence consumer choice. These specifications require engine or equipment m anufacturers to affix a label (or labels) on each production engine (or equipment, as applicable) to provide the engine or equipment owner and service mechanic with information necessary for the proper maintenance of these parts in customer us e. These specifications further require engine or equipment manufacturers to make information regarding relative emissions levels available to potential ultimate purchas ers. For engines used in auxiliary power systems which, in turn, are used to comply with the diesel-fueled commercial vehicle idling requirements of title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A), additional labeling requirements for the engine or equipment manu facturers apply, as set forth in section

35.B.4 of the “California Exhaust Emi ssion Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment date ), which is incorporated by reference

herein

.

(b) through (k) [No Change.]

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43102 and 43104, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 43013, 43017, 43018, 43101, 43102, 43104, 43150-43154, 43205.5 and 43210-43212, Health and Safety Code. Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 12
pt

Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 12
pt

Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 12
pt

Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 12
pt

Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 12
pt Deleted: ¶A- 7 Amend Title 13, California Code of Regulations, § 2424, to read:

§ 2424. Emission Control Labels — 1996 and Later Off-Road CompressionIgnition Engines.

(a) Purpose. The Air Resources Board recognizes that certain emissions-critical or emissions-related parts must be properly ident ified and maintained in order for engines to meet the applicable emission standards. T he purpose of these spec ifications is to require engine manufacturers to affix a label (or labels) on each production engine (or equipment) to provide the engine or equipment owner and service mechanic with information necessary for the proper maintenanc e of these parts in customer use. For engines used in auxiliary power systems which, in turn, are used to comply with the diesel-fueled commercial vehicle idling requirements of title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A), additional labeling requirements for the engine or equipment manufacturers apply, as set forth in secti on 35.B.4 of the “California Exhaust Emission

Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment

date ), which is incorporated by reference herein

.

(b) through (k) [No Change.]

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43102 and 43104, Health and Safety Code. Refer ence: Sections 43013, 43017, 43018, 43101, 43102, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code.A- 8 Amend Title 13, California Code of Regulations, § 2425, to read:

§ 2425. Defects Warranty Requirements for 1996 and Later Off-Road Compression-Ignition Engines.

(a) through (d) [No Change.]

(e) Each manufacturer shall furnish with each new engine written instructions for the maintenance and use of the engine by the owner. The instructions shall be consistent with this article and applicable re gulations contained herein. In addition, for engines less than 19 kilowatts, each manufactu rer shall furnish with each new engine a written statement as follows: “In order to op erate in California, a diesel-fueled engine in an auxiliary power system used to comply wi th the Airborne Toxic Control Measure to

Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicl e Idling requirements of the California Code of Regulations, must have one of the following apply: (1) be equipped with a verified Level 3 in-use strategy for particula te matter control, (2) have its exhaust routed directly into the vehicle’s exhaust pipe, upstream of the diesel particulate matter aftertreatment device, or (3) use an alternat e particulate matter control strategy with prior Executive Officer approval. (For more details, please see the California Code of Regulations, title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A).)”

(f) through (g) [No Change.]

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43102, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Re ference: Sections 43013, 43017, 43018, 43101, 43102 and 43205.5, Health and Safety Code.A- 9 Amend Title 13, California Code of Regulations, § 2485, to read:

§ 2485. Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.

(a) Purpose. The purpose of this airborne toxic control measure is to reduce public exposure to diesel particulate matter and other air contaminants by limiting the idling of diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles.

(b) Applicability. This section applies to diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles that operate in the State of California wi th gross vehicular weight ratings of greater than 10,000 pounds that are or must be licensed for operation on highways. This specifically includes:

(1) California-based vehicles; and

(2) Non-California-based vehicles.

(c) Requirements.

(1) Idling Restriction

On or after February 1, 2005, the driver of any vehicle subject to this section shall comply with the following require ments, except as noted in subsection (d) below :

(1 A ) the driver shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location. , e xcept as noted in subsection (d); and

(2 B) the driver shall not operate a diesel -fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resti ng in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when with in 100 feet of a restricted area.

, except as noted in Subsection (d)

.

(2) Use of Alternative Technologies

(A) On or after January 1, 2008, the driver shall not operate an internal combustion APS on any vehicle equipped with a 2007 and subsequent model year primary diesel engine unless the vehicle is:

(1) equipped with an APS meeting the emissions performance requirements found in subsection (c)(3)(A), below; andA- 10 (2) the vehicle is equipped with a label meeting the requirements pursuant to section 35.B.4 of the “California Exhaust Emission

Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment date ) which is incorporate by

reference herein

.

(B) On or after January 1, 2008, the driver shall not operate a fuel-fired heater on any vehicle equipped with a 2007 and subsequent model year primary diesel engine unle ss the fuel-fired heater meets the emissions performance requirements found in subsection (c)(3)(B), below;

(C) On or after January 1, 2008, the driver of a vehicle equipped with a 2006 or older model year primary di esel engine may use and operate in California any certified internal combustion APS with or without the additional PM control specified in s ubsection (c)(3)(A)(1) or any other certified alternative idling reduction technology.

(3) Compliance Requirements. As an al ternative to idling the primary engine, diesel engines/vehicles may, as an option, be equipped with alternative technologies, as listed and defined bel ow in (A), (B), and (C) of this subsection. If so equipped, these tec hnologies are subject to the following requirements:

(A) Internal Combustion APS.

(1) In order to operate in California, an APS utilizing an internal combustion engine must comply with applicable California off-road

and/or federal non-road emission standards and test procedures for its fuel type and power category. In addition, diesel-fueled APSs installed on vehicles equipped with primary engines certified to the 2007 and subsequent model year heavy-duty diesel engine standards, pursuant to section 1956.8( a)(2)(A) of title 13, CCR, shall either,

(i) be equipped with a verified Level 3 in-use strategy for particulate matter control (see ti tle 13, CCR, sections 2700 to 2710), or

(ii) have its exhaust routed directly into the vehicle’s exhaust pipe, upstream of the diesel particulate matter aftertreatment device.

(2) With advance Executive Office r approval, a certifying/verifying APS manufacturer may petition for an alternate compliance strategyA- 11 other than described in (A)(1)(i) or (ii) in this subsection above. However, this provision is lim ited to manufacturers that can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer, that their alternative strategy is equivalent (or “cleaner”), from an emissions standpoint, compared to the requirement described in (A)(1)(i) or (ii)

in this subsection above. As an ex ample, strategies that can use the available electric power infrastructure, instead of solely operating a diesel-fueled APS for engine and/or cab heating and cooling, may be able to use such a strategy to demonstrate compliance with these requirements.

(B) Fuel-Fired Heaters. Fuel-fired heat ers must comply with the applicable California emission standards and test procedures as specified in the Low Emission Vehicle program requirements found in title 13, CCR, subsections 1961(a)(15) and (d), or in Part I.E.1.13 of the “California

Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 andSubsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks and MediumDuty Vehicles” adopted August 5, 1999, as last amended May 28, 2004. However, the specified requirement t hat limits fuel-fired heaters from being operated above 40 ° F does not apply.

(C) Other Idle Reduction Technologies. Other technologies that will reduce idling emissions may also be used, including the use of batteries, fuel cells, power inverter/chargers for on-shore electrical power, and other technologies that produce minimal or no emissions. The use of other technologies are subject to advance Executive Officer approval and must be at least as effective in reducing idling emissions as the technologies described in subsections (c)(3)(A), above, or the NOx idling emission standard specified in title 13, CCR, section 1956.8(a)(6)(C). The Executive Officer shall use good engineering judgment and test data to determine if an idle reduction technology provides idling emission controls equivalent to the standards specified in subsection (c)(3)(A) above, or in title 13, CCR, subsection 1956.8(a)(6)(C).

(D) Labeling Requirements. 2007 and subs equent model year commercial diesel vehicles equipped with an internal combustion APS meeting the requirements specified in subsection (c)(3)(A) shall have a label affixed to the hood of the vehicle to allow operation of the APS in California. The labels shall meet the requirement s specified in section 35.B.4 of

the “California Exhaust Emission St andards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment date ), which is incorporated by reference herein.A- 12 (d) Exceptions.

(1) Except when a vehicle is located within 100 feet of a restricted area, subsection (c)(1)(A) does not apply, if the vehicle is equipped with

(A) a primary diesel engine meet ing the optional NOx idling emission standard pursuant to title 13, CCR, section 1956.8(a)(6)(C); and

(B) a label meeting the requirements pursuant to section 35.B.4 of the

“California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles” adopted December 12, 2002, as last amended ( amendment date ), which is incorporated by reference herein.

(2) Subsection (c)(1) does not apply for the period or periods during which

(1 A ) a bus is idling for (A 1) up to 10.0 minutes prior to passenger boarding, or (B 2) when passengers are onboard;

(2 B ) prior to January 1, 2008, idling of the primary diesel engine is necessary to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth. This provision does not apply when operating within 100 feet of a restricted area;

(3 C ) idling when the vehicle must remain motionless due to traffic conditions, an official traffic cont rol device, or an official traffic control signal over which the driv er has no control, or at the direction of a peace officer, or operating a diesel-fueled APS or

other device at the direction of a peace officer;

(4 D ) idling when the vehicle is queuing that at all times is beyond 100 feet from any restricted area;

(5 E ) idling of the primary diesel engine, or operating a diesel-fueled APS, or operating other devices when forced to remain motionless

due to immediate adverse weather conditions affecting the safe operation of the vehicle or due to mechanical difficulties over which the driver has no control;

(6 F ) idling to verify that the vehicle is in safe operating condition as required by law and that all equipment is in good working order, either as part of a daily vehicle inspection or as otherwise needed, provided that such engine idling is mandatory for such verification;A- 13 (7 G ) idling of the primary diesel engine, or operating a diesel-fueled APS, or operating other devices is mandatory for testing, servicing, repairing, or diagnostic purposes;

(8 H ) idling when positioning or providing a power source for equipment or operations, other than transporting passengers or propulsion, which involve a power take off or equivalent mechanism and is powered by the primary engine for:

(A 1 ) controlling cargo temperature, operating a lift, crane, pump, drill, hoist, mixer (such as a r eady mix concrete truck), or other auxiliary equipment; (B 2 ) providing mechanical extension to perform work functions for which the vehicle was designed and where substitute alternate means to idling are not reasonably available; or (C 3 ) collection of solid waste or recyclable material by an entity authorized by contract, license, or permit by a school or local government;

(9 I ) idling of the primary diesel engine, or operating a diesel-fueled APS, or operating other devices when operating defrosters, heaters, air conditioners, or othe r equipment solely to prevent a safety or health emergency;

(10 J ) idling of the primary diesel engine, or operating a diesel-fueled APS, or operating other devices by authorized emergency vehicles while in the course of providing services for which the vehicle is designed;

(11 K ) idling of military tactical vehicl es during periods of training; and

(12 L ) idling when operating equipment such as a wheelchair or people assist lift as prescribed by the Americans with Disabilities Act;

(e) Relationship to Other Law

.

Nothing in this section allows idling in viol ation of other applicable law, including,

but not limited to:

(1) California Vehicle Code Section 22515;

(2) Title 13, Section 2480, California Code of Regulations;

(3) California Health and Safety Code Section 40720; orA- 14 (4) any applicable ordinance, rule, or requirement as stringent as, or more stringent than, this section.

(f) Enforcement. This section may be enforced by the Air Resources Board; peace

officers as defined in California Penal C ode, title 3, chapter 4.5, Sections 830 et seq. and their respective law enforcem ent agencies’ authorized representatives; and air pollution control or ai r quality management districts.

(g) Penalties. For violations of subsection (c)(1), (c)(2) or (c)(2 3 ), the driver of a subject vehicle is subject to a minimum civil penalty of 100 dollars and to criminal penalties as specified in the Health and Safety Code and the Vehicle Code.

(h) Definitions.

The following definitions apply to this section:

(1) “Authorized emergency vehicle” is as defined in Vehicle Code Section

165.

(2) “Auxiliary power system” or “A PS” means any device that provides electrical, mechanical, or thermal energy to the primary diesel engine, truck cab, or sleeper berth as an alternative to idling the primary diesel engine.

(3) “Bus” means any vehicle defined in Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Section 2480, subsections (h) (13)-(16), inclusive or as

defined in the Vehicle Code Section 233.

(4) “Commercial Motor Vehicle” means any vehicle or combination of vehicles defined in Vehicle Code Section 15210(b) and any other motor truck or bus with a gross vehicle weight ra ting of 10,001 pounds or more, except the following: (A) a zero emission vehicle; or (B) a pickup truck as defined in Vehicle Code Section 471.

(5) “Driver” is as defined in Vehicle Code Section 305.

(6) “Fuel-fired heater” means a fuel burni ng device that creates heat for the purpose of (1) warming the cab or sleeper berth compartment of a vehicle or (2) warming the engine oil and/or coolant for easy start-up of the vehicle’s engine but does not contribute to the propulsion of the vehicle

.

(6 7 ) "Gross vehicle weight rating" is as defined in Vehicle Code Section 350.

(7 8 ) “Highway” is as defined in Vehicle Code Section 360.A- 15 (8 9 ) “Idling" means the vehicle engine is running at any location while the vehicle is stationary.

(9 10 ) "Motor truck" or "motortruck" m eans a motor vehicle designed, used, or maintained primarily for the transportation of property.

(10 11 ) "Official traffic control device" is as defined in Vehicle Code Section 440.

(11 12 ) “Official traffic control signal" is as defined in Vehicle Code Section 445.

(12 13 ) “Owner” is as defined in Vehicle Code Section 460.

(13 14 ) “Primary diesel engine” means the diesel-fueled engine used for vehicle propulsion.

(14 15 ) “Queuing” means (A) through (C) (A) the intermittent starti ng and stopping of a vehicle; (B) while the driver, in the normal course of doing business, is waiting to perform work or a service; and (C) when shutting the vehicle engine off would impede the progress of the queue and is not practicable. (D) Queuing does not include the time a driver may wait motionless in line in anticipation of the start of a workday or opening of a location where work or a service will be performed.

(15 16 ) “Restricted area” means any real property zoned for individual or multifamily housing units that has one or more of such units on it.

(16 17 ) "Safety or health emergency" means: (A) a sudden, urgent, or usually unforeseen, occurrence; or (B) a foreseeable occurrence relative to a medical or physiological

condition.

(17 18 ) “Sleeper berth” is as defined in Titl e 13, California Code of Regulations,

Section 1265.

(18 19 ) “Vehicle” is as defined in the Vehicle Code Section 670.

Authority: Sections 39600, 39601, 39614(b)(6)(A), 39658, 39667, 43000.5(d), 43013(b), 43013(h), 43018(b), and 43018(c), Health and Safety Code; and Western Oil & Gas Assn. v. Orange County Air Pollution Control Dist. (1975) [14 Cal.3d.411].

Reference: Sections 39002, 39003, 39027, 39500, 39600, 39650, 39655, 39656, 39657, 39658, 39659, 39662, 39665, 39674, 39675, 42400, 42400.1, 42400.2, 42400.3, 42402, 42402.1, 42402.2, 42402. 3, 42403.5, 42410, 43013, 43018, Formatted: Font: 12 ptA- 16 Health and Safety Code; Sections 305, 336, 350, 440, 445, 545, 546, 642, 680, 21400, 22452, 22515, 27153, 40001, 40001(b)(5 ), Vehicle Code; and Sections 1201,1900, 1962, 2480, Title13, California Code of Regulations.B-1 APPENDIX B

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TH E CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION
STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR 2004 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL

HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL ENGINES AND VEHICLESB-2 State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES
FOR 2004 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL

HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL ENGINES AND VEHICLES

Adopted: December 12, 2002 Amended: [Insert date of amendment]

NOTE: The proposed amendments ar e indicated by underline for additions and

strikeou t for deletions compared to the adopted test procedures. Only those portions of the existing language contai ning the proposed modifications are included. All other portions remain unchanged and are indicated by the symbol “* * * * *” for refer ence. A complete set of the adopted test procedures (without the proposed amendments) is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/r egact/levhdg02/levhdg02.htm

.B-3 CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES
FOR 2004 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL

HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL ENGINES AND VEHICLES

The following provisions of Subparts A, I, and N, Part 86, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, as adopted or amended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the date set forth next to the 40 CFR Part 86 section listed below, and only to the extent they pertain to the test ing and compliance of exhaust emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines and vehicles, are adopted and incorporated herein by this

reference as the “California Exhaust Em ission Standards and Test Procedures for 2004 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles,” except as altered or replaced by the provisions set forth below.

Part I. GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR CE RTIFICATION AND IN-USE VERIFICATION

OF EMISSIONS.

Subpart A - General Provisions for Emission Regulations for 1977 and Later Model Year New Light-Duty Vehicles, Ligh t-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Engines, and for 1985 and Later Model Year New Gasoline-Fueled, Natural Gas-Fueled, Liquefied Petroleum Gas-Fueled and Me thanol-Fueled Heavy-Duty Vehicles.

1. General Applicability. [86.xxx-1]

* * * * *

11. Emission standards for diesel heavy-duty engines and vehicles. [§86.xxx-11] A. Federal provisions.

* * * * *

B. California provisions.

1. Urban Bus Standards

.

* * * * *

6. Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Idling Requirements.

6.1 Engine Shutdown System . The requirements in this subsection apply to engine manufacturers and original equipment manufacturers, as applicable, that are responsible for the design and control of engine and/or

vehicle idle controls.

6.1.1 Requirements . Except as provided in subsections 11.B.6.2 and 3, all new 2008 and subsequent model-year heavy-duty dieselB-4 engines shall be equipped with an engine shutdown system that automatically shuts down the engine after 300 seconds of continuous idling operation once the vehicle is stopped, the transmission is set to “neutral” or “park”, and the parking br ake is engaged. If the parking brake is not engaged, then the engine shutdow n system shall shut down the engine after 900 seconds of continuous idling operation once the vehicle is stopped and the transmission is set to “ neutral” or “park.” The engine shutdown system must be tamper-resi stant and non-programmable. A warning signal, such as a light or s ound indicator inside the vehicle cabin, may be used to alert the driver 30 seconds prior to engine shutdown. The engine shutdown system must be capable of allowing the driver to reset the engine shutdown system timer by momentarily changing the position of the accelerator, brake, or clut ch pedal, or other mechanism within 30 seconds prior to engine shutdown. Once reset, the engine shutdown system shall restart the engine s hutdown sequence described in this paragraph above, and shall continue to do so until the engine shuts down

or the vehicle is driven.

6.1.2 Engine Shutdown System Override . The engine shutdown system may be overridden, to allow the engine to run continuously at idle, only under the following conditions: (1) If the engine is operating in power take-off (PTO) mode. The PTO system shall have a switch or a setting that can be

switched “on” to override the engine shutdown system and will reset to the “off” position when the vehicle’s engine is turned off or when the PTO equipment is turned off. In addition, the PTO switch or setting shall be designed so that if it fails it will fail in the “off” position. Subject to advance Executive Officer approval, other methods for detecting or activating PTO operation may be allowed;

or, (2) if the vehicle’s engine coolant temperature is below 60 ° F. The engine shutdown system shall automatically be activated once the coolant temperature reaches 60 ° F or above. The engine coolant temperature shall be m easured with the engine’s existing engine coolant temperature sensor us ed for engine protection, if so equipped. Other methods of measuring engine coolant temperature may be allowed, subject to advance Executive Officer approval.

6.2 Exempt Vehicles . Heavy-duty diesel engines to be used in buses as defined in California Vehicle Code §§ 233, 612 and 642, school buses as defined in California Vehicle Code § 545, and recreational vehicles as defined in Health and Safety Code 18010 are exempted from these requirements.

6.3 Optional NOx Idling Emission Standard . In lieu of the engine shutdown system requirements specifi ed in subsection 11.B.6.1 above, anengine manufacturer may elect to certify its new 2008 and subsequent modelyear heavy-duty diesel engines to an opti onal NOx idling emission standard ofB-5 30 grams per hour, without increasing emissions of CO, PM, or ROG. Compliance with this optional standard will be determined based on testing conducted pursuant to the supplemental steady-state test cycle and procedures specified in section 86.1360-2007.B.4, below . The manufacturer may request an alternative test proc edure if the technology used cannot be demonstrated using the procedures in section 86.1360-2007.B.4, subject to advance approval of the Executive Officer. An engine manufacturer certifying it s engine to the optional NOx idling emission standard must also produce a vehicle label, as defined in subsection 35.B.4, below. (D) Optional Alternatives to Main Engine Idling. All new 2008 and subsequent model year heavy duty diesel engines may also be equipped with idling emission reduction devices that comply with the compliance requirements specified in titl e 13, CCR section 2485(c)(3).

* * * * *

12. Alternative certification procedures. [ §86.080-12] April 17, 1980. [No change.]

* * * * *

21. Application for certification. [§86.xxx-21] A. Federal provisions.

* * * * *

B. California provisions 1. For 2004 and subsequent model-year medi um-duty ultra-low emission and super-ultra-low emission vehicles and engi nes not powered exclusively by diesel fuel, the manufacturer shall submit proj ected California sales and fuel economy data two years prior to certification.

2. Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Idling Requirements

. 2.1 For 2008 and subsequent model-year heavy-duty diesel engines, the manufacturer must provide a statement in the application for certification that the heavy-duty diesel engine for whic h certification is being requested will comply with the automatic engine shut down requirements to control idle emissions as specified in subsecti on 11.B.6.1. If the heavy-duty diesel engine for which certification is being requested is explicitly designed for exempt vehicles, per the provisions in 11.B.6.2, then the manufacturer must also provide a statement in its applicat ion for certification so stating.

2.2 A manufacturer that elects to certify engines to the optional NOx idling emission standard, specified in subs ection 11.B.6.3, must provide in the application for certification information pertaining to the NOx idling emission

certification test conducted under 86.1360-2007.B.4, below, including emissions data for total particulate ma tter, non-methane hydrocarbons or totalB-6 hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, car bon monoxide, and carbon dioxide in grams per hour, the test load in brake- horsepower, and engine test speeds in revolutions per minute for both mode 1 and mode 2 testing. With advance Executive Officer approval, a manufacturer may use an alternative procedure to show compliance with the opti onal NOx idling emission standard. Regardless of the procedure used, the manufacturer shall also provide the appropriate labels to be affixed to the vehicle on which the engine is going to be installed as required in subsection 35. B.4, below. The manufacturer must

maintain records at the manufacturer’s facility that contain all test data, engineering analyses, and other information which provide the basis for the compliance statement, where such in formation exists. The manufacturer must provide such information to the Executive Officer within 30 days upon request. 2.3 If the heavy-duty diesel engine for which certification is being requested incorporates any of the alter native idle emission control strategies contained in title 13, CCR, section 2485( c)(3), then the manufacturer must provide in its application for certificat ion a description of the alternative strategy or technology including the type, brand name, model identification number, and where applicable emissions data and power rating. In addition, the manufacturer must also provide the appropriate labels to be affixed to the outside of the vehicle as required in s ubsections 35.B.4. If the alternative technology is a fuel-fired heater, then t he manufacturer must provide with the application for certification the informa tion required under subsection H.4.4,

Part I of the “California Exhaust Emi ssion Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks and Medium-Duty Vehicles”, adopted August 5, 1999, as last amended May 28,

2004.

22. Approval of application for certification; test fleet selections; determinations of parameters subject to adjustment for cert ification and Selective Enforcement Audit, adequacy of limits, and physically adjustable ranges. [§86.001-22] April 6, 1994. [No change.]

* * * * *

35. Labeling. [ §86.xxx-35]

, A. Federal Provisions.

1. §86.001-35 January 18, 2001. 1.1 Add the following sentence to the introductory paragraph: The labeling requirements of this section shall apply to all new motor vehicle engines certified according to the provis ions of California Health and Safety

Code Section 43100. 1.2 Subparagraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3)(iii)(G). [No change.]

1.3 Amend Add the following language to subparagraph (a)(3)(iii)(H) asB-7 follows:

. 1.3.1 An unconditional statement of compliance with the appropriate model year California regulations; fo r example, “This engine conforms to California regulations applicable to XXXX model year new heavy-duty diesel engines.” It may also state that the engine conforms to any applicable federal or Canadian emission standards for new heavy-duty diesel engines.

1.3.2 1 For 2004 through 2006 model year heavy heavy-duty dieselfueled, dual-fuel, and bi-fuel engines to be used in urban buses that are certified to the optional reduced em ission standards and are sold to any transit agency exempted under paragraphs (c)(8) and (d)(7), title 13, CCR, §1956.2 from the requirements of paragr aphs (c)(5) and (d)(4), title 13, CCR §956.2. “This engine conforms to California regulations applicable to

X XXX model year new urban bus or heavy-duty diesel engines and is certified to a NOx plus NMHC optional reduced-emission standards of XXX g/bhp-hr (for optional reduced-emission standards specify between 0.3 and 1. 8, inclusive, at 0.3 b/bhphr increments, and a particulate matter standards of 0.01 g/bhphr).”

1.3.3 2 For all other 2004 through 2006 model year heavy-duty diesel cycle engines, including those used in ur ban buses, that are certified to the optional reduced-emission standards , the label shall contain the following statement: “This engine conforms to California regulations applicable to

X XXX model year new (specify urban bus or heavy-duty diesel) engines and is certified to a NO x plus NMHC optional reducedemission standards of XXX g/bhp- hr (for optional reducedemission standards specify between 0.3 and 1.8, inclusive, at 0.3 b/bhp-hr increments, and a particulate matter standard of 0.03 g/bhp-hr, 0.02 g/bhp-hr, or 0.01 g/bhp-hr).” 1.4 Subparagraphs (a)(3)(I) through (i). [No change.]

2. §86.007-35 . January 18, 2001. 2.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (i). [No change except that the amendments set forth in §86.001-35 apply.]

B. California provisions

. 1. For 2004 and later model year heavy-duty diesel engines certified under the requirements of title 13, CCR, §1956.8( a)(3), the statement of compliance requirements of this subsection shall be repeated for each of the two fueling modes of operation. Appended to the stat ement for the lower emitting fueling mode of operation shall be the following sentence:

“This certification is valid only while operating on ___ (indicate the fuel or

fuel combination under which this mode of operation was certified) fuel.B-8 Operation using any other fueling mode will result in significant increases in exhaust emissions and significantly reduce engine performance.”

2. Manufacturers may elect to use a supplemental label in addition to the original label if there is not sufficient s pace to include all the required information. The supplemental label must conform to a ll specifications as the original label. In the case that a supplemental label is used, the original label shall be numbered “1 of 2” and the supplemental label shall be numbered “2 of 2.”

3. Statements shall not be used on labels placed on engines that, in fact, do not comply with all applicable California regulations.

4. Vehicle Labels for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Idling Requirements. For each 2008 and subsequent model year heavy-duty diesel engine certified to the optional NOx idling emission standard pursuant to paragraph 11.B.6.3 or equipped with a certified/verified auxiliary power system (APS) pursuant to title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A), a single label shall be produced and affixed, as applicable, on each vehicle equipped with such heavy-duty diesel engine. 4.1 The labeling requirements for engine manufacturers, aftermarket APS manufacturers and installers, and or iginal equipment manufacturers are

as follows: 4.1.1 Engine manufacturers. The engine manufacturer that has certified an engine to the optional NOx idling emission standard pursuant to paragraph 11.B.6.3, or certified/verified an APS pursuant to title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A), shall pr oduce the appropriate label for each new engine or APS pursuant to paragr aph 35.B.4.2, below. The label

shall be affixed on the outside of the vehicle pursuant to paragraph 35.B.4.3 by the original equipment manufacturer.

4.1.2 Aftermarket APS manufacturers and installers. An

aftermarket APS manufacturer that has certified/verified an APS pursuant to title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A), shall produce the appropriate label for each APS system pursuant to paragr aph 35.B.4.2, below. The label

shall be affixed on the outside of t he vehicle pursuant to paragraph 35.B.4.3 by the party that is res ponsible for installing the APS on the

vehicle. 4.1.3 Original equipment manufactu rer. An original equipment

manufacturer that has certified an engine to the optional NOx idling emission standard pursuant to paragraph 11. B.6.3, or certified/verified an APS pursuant to title 13, CCR, secti on 2485(c)(3)(A), shall produce and affix the appropriate label on the out side of the vehicle pursuant to paragraphs 35.B.4.2 or 35.B.4.3, whichever is applicable.

4.2 Label Format. Figure 1 shows a facsimile of the label format for an engine certified to the optional NO x idling emission standard pursuant to paragraph 11.B.6.3. Figure 2 shows a facsimile of the label format for an engine in a certified/verified APS pursuant to title 13, CCR, sectionB-9 2485(c)(3)(A). The engine manufacturer, APS manufacturer or original equipment manufacturer, whichever is applicable, that produces and affixes

the label on the vehicle must ensur e that the label has the following

characteristics:

Figure 1 Figure 2

4.2.1 Oval shape. 4.2.2 Dimensions of no less than 6 inches wide by 4 inches high.

4.2.3 The color of the outer and inner ellipses shall be dark blue and the stars in red. The background of the label shall be light blue in

color. The size of the stars shall be equal to the size of the characters as specified in paragraph 35.B.4.2.4 below. 4.2.4 A vehicle equipped with an engine that is certified pursuant to paragraph 11.B.6.3 shall have a label with the word “CERTIFIED,” and below it the phrase “CLEAN IDLE,” as shown in Figure 1. A vehicle equipped with an APS certified/verified pur suant to title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A) shall have a label with the word “VERIFIED,” and below it the phrase “CLEAN APS,” as shown in Figure 2. The label information shall be written in the English language with sans serif font, black in color, and in upper case letters. The size of the font shall be at least 7/16 inch (or 32 points) and the spacing of the fonts must be such that the longest phrase (for example, “CLEAN IDLE”) extends from the left edge to the right edge of the inner edge of the inner ellipse, without touching the edges. The label information shall be centrally aligned, both vertically and horizontally. 4.2.5 A hologram as shown in Figure 3 shall be embedded within the proposed label. The hologram must cover the entire label. The hologram shall have the phrase “Clean Skies” repeatedly written from edge to edge of the label boundaries and each phrase shall be separated 

# C C E E R R T T I I F

F I I E

E D D

C C L L E E A A N N I I D

D L L E E V V E E R R I I F

F I I E

E D D

C C L L E E A A N N A A P P S SB-10 by a circular bullet. The position of the circular bullet in each line shall be exactly above the space between the wo rds “Clean” and “Skies” of the line

below. The color of the font shall be orange. The font size“ shall be less than or equal to a quarter of the font si ze of the phrase “CLEAN IDLE” or “CLEAN APS” as specified in subs ection 35.B.4.2.4, above. The hologram shall have the map of the Stat e of California, in orange color, overlaid over the text and positioned in the center of the label as shown in Figure 3, below.

Figure 3

4.3 Label Location and Attachment Requirements 4.3.1 The appropriate label shall be permanently affixed to the driver’s side of the hood, in an area wit hin one foot by one foot from the top and front edges of the hood. If such an attachment is not feasible, the label may be attached at a different location subject to advance approval by the Executive Officer.

4.3.2 Each label must be affixed in such a manner that it can not be removed without destroying or defacing the label. The label must not be affixed to any vehicle component that can easily be detached from the

vehicle. 4.3.3 The label and any adhesives used must be designed to withstand, for a period of 10 years, typical environmental conditions. Typical environmental conditions incl ude, but are not limited to, exposure to extreme heat or cold, moisture, engine fuels, lubricants and coolants. 4.4 The party that certifies/ve rifies the engine pursuant to paragraph 11.B.6.3 or the APS pursuant to title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A) shall be the ultimate party responsible for ensuring that the labels are correctly produced. Samples of labels produced pursuant to this subsection must be

submitted to the Executive Officer with the applicable certification or verification application. 4.5 Labels on vehicles may also be applied by distributors or dealers.B-11 However, the party that certifi ed the engine or the APS and produced the labels remains the ultimate party respons ible for ensuring that the labels are correctly administered. If the labels are administered by the dealer or distributor, the producer of the label shall include its name and a serial

number on the label. The location of t he producer’s name and serial number

on the label shall be written in the lo wer part of the label, in the space vertically centered between the label wording and the inner ellipses, and the font must contrast the label background. The serial numbers of the labels administered must be recorded by the di stributor or dealer and reported to the party responsible for producing the labels. This information shall be maintained by the party responsible for producing the labels for a period of 10 years, and shall be made available to the Executive Officer upon request. 4.6 A heavy-duty diesel engine that has been certified pursuant to

subsection 11.B.6.3 shall not be modified or altered unless said modification or alteration has been approved by the Executive Officer pursuant to title 13 CCR sections 2220 through 2225. 4.7 An idling emission reduction device or system that has been certified/verified pursuant to title 13, CCR, section 2485(c)(3)(A) shall not be

modified or altered unless said modifi cation or alteration has been approved by the Executive Officer pursuant to title 13 CCR sections 2470 through 2476.

36. Submission of vehicle identification numbers. [ §86.079-36] [n/a]

* * * * *B-12 PART II TEST PROCEDURES

Subpart I - Emission Regulations for New Diesel-Fueled Heavy-Duty Engines;

Smoke Exhaust Test Procedure

* * * * *

Subpart N - Emission Regulations for New Otto-Cycle and Diesel Heavy-Duty Engines; Gaseous and Particulate Exhaust Test Procedures

* * * * *

86.1360-2007 Supplemental steady-state test; test cycle and procedures. January 18, 2001. A. Federal provisions

* * * * *

B. California provisions

1. Emission testing caps for the 2005 and subsequent model years

.

* * * * *

4. Determination of NOx Idling Emissions . The requirements set forth in this subparagraph apply to 2008 and subsequent model year heavy-duty diesel engines certifying to the optional NOx idling emission standard specified in subsection 11.B.6.3, above. To determi ne whether an engine meets the optional NOx idling emission standard, emissions s hall be measured by testing the engine on an engine dynamometer as described below.

4.1 Test Cycle . The following 2 mode duty cycle shall be performed on a dynamometer on the test engine:

Mode Engine Speed (rpm) Time in mode (seconds) Engine Load

1 Manufacturer

Recommended Curb idle 1800 See subparagraph 4.1.1

below

2 1100 1800 See subparagraph 4.1.2

below

4.1.1 For mode 1, the dynamometer load or torque applied shall be based on the vehicle power requirem ents during curb idle operation.B-13 The engine manufacturer shall determine the curb idle speed and the appropriate test load for the test engine. The load shall include curb idle power requirements needed for operating engine accessories, such as the engine cooling fan, alternator, cool ant pump, air compressor, engine oil and fuel pumps and any other engine accessory operated during curb idle of the engine. The load for mode 1 may not include power requirements for operating the air conditioning compressor or for operating on-board accessories, such as a microwave, refr igerator, television, computer, etc., that the vehicle operator ma y use during rest periods. 4.1.2 For mode 2, the dynamometer load or torque applied shall be based on the vehicle power require ments during idle speed operations of 1100 revolutions per minute (rpm). The engine manufacturer shall determine the appropriate test load for the test engine. The load shall include high engine idle speed power requirements needed for operating engine accessories, such as the engine cooling fan, alternator, coolant pump, air compressor, engine oil and fuel pumps, air conditioning compressor set at maximum capacity, and any other engine accessory operated during the idle operation of t he engine. The total test load shall be equal to the test load so determined plus an additional load of 2 kilowatts to take into account the power needs for operating on-board accessories such as a television, refr igerator, microwave, computer, etc.

4.2 Test Requirements.

4.2.1 Pre-conditioning . Prior to measuring emissions, bring the engine to a warm condition as follows: (a) If the idling test follows directly after testing over the

Federal Test Procedure or the supplemental emission tests, consider the engine warm. Bring down the engine to the manufacturer recommended curb idle speed, apply the appropriate load as determined in subparagraph 4.1.1, and start measuring emissions after 10 minutes and only after achieving temperature stability. Temperatur e stability may be determined as the point at which the engine coolant is within 2% of its mean value for at least 2

minutes. (b) If the engine is cold, warm-up the engine by operating it at any speed above peak-torque speed and between 65 to 85% of maximum mapped power until the engi ne coolant temperature is

within 2% of its mean value for at least 2 minutes or until the thermostat controls engine temperature.

4.2.2 Test Sequence . Following engine warm-up as described in subparagraph 4.2.1, the test shall be per formed first for mode 1. Bring down the engine to the curb idle speed, apply the appropriate load as determined in subparagraph 4.1.1, and st art measuring emissions after 10 minutes and only after achieving tem perature stability. Temperature stability may be determined as the point at which the engine coolant is within 2% of its mean value for at least 2 minutes. Upon completion ofB-14 mode 1 testing, the engine speed shall be ramped up to 1100 rpm. Once the engine starts operating at 1100 rp m, apply the appropriate load as determined in subparagraph 4.1.2, and st art measuring emissions after 10 minutes and only after achieving tem perature stability. Temperature stability may be determined as the point at which the engine coolant is within 2% of its mean value for at least 2 minutes. The engine shall be operated for the prescribed time in eac h mode. The specified test speed

shall be held to within ± 50 rpm and the specified torque shall be held to

within ± 2 percent.

4.2.3 Calculations. For each test mode, calculate the modal average mass emissions level for each regulated pollutant, in grams per hour, the modal average power, in brake horsepower and the modal average speed, in rpm.

86.1370-2007 Not-To-Exceed test procedures. January 18, 2001.

* * * * *