From: Ghanta, Venu

Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 5:29 PM

To: 'Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov'

Cc: Cullen, Angela; Stout, Alan; Spears, Matthew; Charmley, William; Simon, Karl; 

Nickerson, William; 'lily.smith@dot.gov'; 'james.tamm@dot.gov'; 

'Timothy.Mullins@dot.gov'; Horowitz, Michael; Blubaugh, Jim; Johnson, 

Dennis; Stewart, Lori

Subject: 5/2 EPA/NHTSA Response pertaining to Heavy-Duty Technical Amendments 

[RIN 2060-AR48] 

Attachments: EO12866_EPA-NHTSA joint HD_ NR Technical_Amendment 2060-AR48 DFR 

and Final Rule FRN_ 20130502.docx

Hi ChadPlease find our attached passback which addresses all of OMB’s remaining comments. I know you had 

additional questions on a few elements of the package that we address below.

First, all of the EPA elements of this regulatory action exist both in the Direct Final Rule portion of the 

package and in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking portion of the package. As explained in the 

Preamble, we are doing this because, while we do not expect any adverse comment to these technical 

amendments, we are providing a full opportunity for the public to receive notice and submit comments 

to this action.

Second, regarding the need to revise or create an ICR for this package, NHTSA and EPA have reviewed 

the amendments package in detail, and both agencies confirmed that we are making no changes that 

would call for a new or revised Information Collection Request. There are no amendments in this 

package that change the content of submitted information and the burden reflected in the approved 

ICRs continues to represent our best estimate of the impact of these collections on the industry.

Third, here is some additional background on the replacement engine amendments.

The original replacement engine provisions were implemented in 1996. At that time engine 

manufacturers requested this exemption to accommodate the nonroad market where expensive 

equipment, such as farm combines, may experience an urgent need to replace a failed engine. Absent 

an exemption, the emission standards would apply based on the model year of the new engine used to 

replace the older engine. This facilitated the continued use of older equipment in cases where a new 

engine, certified to the latest emissions standards, could not meet the physical dimensions or 

performance requirements to power the equipment. Replacement engine exemption provisions were 

eventually adopted for all nonroad sectors (except locomotives, which have unique provisions tailored 

to that industry’s practices). The replacement engine exemption provisions have been successful and 

effective at meeting industry and customer needs without sacrificing the significant environmental 

benefits of our Clean Diesel Programs.

However, in 2008 we expanded the replacement engine exemption flexibility to better manage the 

practice of selling partial engines as replacement “components.” To avoid creating a significant 

opportunity to circumvent emissions standards by selling partial engines instead of fully compliant 

complete engines, we added anti-circumvention language to limit the scenarios in which one would 

qualify for the replacement engine exemption (e.g., only for replacing engines that fail prematurely).
This change to the regulation had the unintended consequence of prohibiting some of the replacement 

engine practices that were intended by the original provisions. In particular, many nonroad Tier 4 

engines have exhaust aftertreatment systems that do not generally fit within the size constraints that 

most non-Tier 4 engines can meet. For example, a Tier 3 nonroad diesel engine oftentimes may be 

installed to replace a Tier 1 engine, which will provide a significant net reduction in emissions, even 

though the Tier 3 engine is not certified to the nonroad Tier 4 standards.

Therefore, it has been within the past year or so of the nonroad Tier 4 standards’ implementation that 

EPA has received a significant number of comments from manufacturers, distributors, and dealers, as 

well as comments from administrators of state and regional environmental grant programs, that the 

clean diesel emissions reduction programs that replace old dirty engines with clean newer engines have 

had to stop. This has been due to the 2008 expansion in flexibilities, along with its needed anticircumvention provisions, combined with the implementation of the aftertreatment forcing nonroad 

Tier 4 standards.

The amendments in this package address this issue by replacing the current anti-circumvention 

provisions with revisions to the criteria that spell out how one qualifies for the replacement engine 

exemption. We are removing some of the restrictions of the anti-circumvention language to allow for 

replacing an engine even if there is no indication it may fail prematurely. To prevent this new flexibility 

from being abused by indefinitely circumventing the Tier 4 standards, we are adding a new provision to 

reasonably limit the use of the exemption by disallowing an exemption for cases where the original 

equipment is more than 25 years old. This is intended to represent a point at which equipment 

operators should be looking to retire the old equipment and purchase new equipment (with engines 

certified to current standards). Based upon these details and the change that was made, it should be 

clearer now that the amendments would not increase the stringency of the replacement engine 

provisions. In fact, they would increase flexibility and restore the exemption to be effective in 

accommodating industry’s desire to meet the needs of customers who wish to participate in the 

incentive programs that are geared toward strategic engine replacements to decrease emissions.

Let us know if you have any additional questions.

Thanks,

Venu Ghanta

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

202-564-1374 (phone)