TITLE 13. CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE AIRBORNE TOXIC CONTROL MEASURE FOR IN-USE DIESEL-FUELED TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION UNITS (TRU) AND TRU GENERATOR SETS, AND FACILITIES WHERE TRUs OPERATE
The Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) will conduct a' public hearing at the time and place noted belowto consider the adoption ofamendments to the regulation affecting transport refrigeration units (TRU) and TRU generator sets (TRU gen set) (collectively, TRUs and TRU gen sets shall be referred to as TRUs). 1 As explained in greater detail below, the proposed amendments would change the in-use performance standards for model year (MY) 2003 and certain 2004 TRU engines. The Board will also be considering amendments thatwould clarify the requirements for "flexibility" engines used in TRUs by original equipment manufacturers under the Transitional Program for Equipment Manufacturers and would require TRU original equipment manufacturers to report certain TRU production data.
DATE:
TIME:
PLACE: November 18, 2010
9:00a.m.
California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Byron SherAuditorium 1001 I Street Sacramento, California 95814
This item may be considered at a two-day meeting ofthe Board, which will commence at 9:00a.m., on Thursday; November 18, 2010, and may continue at 8:30a.m., Friday, November 19, 2010. This item may not be considered until Friday, November 19, 2010. Pleaseconsultthe agenda forthe meeting, which will be available at leastten days before November 18, 2010, to determine the day on which this item will be considered.
INFORMATIVE DIGEST OF PROPOSED ACTION AND POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW
Sections Affected: Proposed amendments to California Code of Regulations (CCR), title 13, Division 3, Chapter 9, Article 8, section 2477. Background: Over 90 percent of Californians**breath~** unhealthful air at times. To ·improve airqualityand huritahhealth, ARB establishes req4irements toreduce·

1 Tiile 13, CCR section 2477 is known as the Transport Refrigeration UnitAirborne Toxic Control Measure and establishes in-use performance standards, recordkeeping, anGI facility reporting requirements for TRUs andTRU generator sets.emissionsfrom newand in-use

### on~road and off-road vehicles, engines, and other**source~.** In 1998, the Board identified particulate matter emissions from diesel-fueled engines as atoxic air contaminant. Two years later, in September 2000, the Board adopted the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissionsfrom Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles (Plan). ·The Plan established a goal of. reducing emissions and··· · the resultant health risk from virtually all diesel-fueled engines and vehicles within the State ofCalifornia bythe year 2020. The Plan included a goal of reducing diesel PM by 85 percent in 2020 from the baseline emissions in 2000. The Plan also identified various control measures for achieving the goals. These measures included new, more stringent st<Jndards for all new diesel-fueled engines and vehicles, thereplacement of older in-use engines with new, cleaner engines, the use ofdiesel emission control strategies on in-use engines, and the use oflow-sulfur and alternative diesel fuels.
TRU diesel engines currently emit approximately 1.6 tons per day ofdiesel PM. Staff believes thatthere are situations where the estimated 70-year potential cancer risk resulting from exposure to diesel PM emissions from TRUs is in excess ofa 100 in a million. This is because ofthe high cancer-causing potential of diesel PM and the potential for large numbers ofTRUs to operate at one location, such as distribution centers located near residential areas.

· On May 16, 2002, the Board approved the Verification Procedure, Warranty andln.-Use

Compliance Requirements for In-Use Strategies to ControlEmissions from Diesel Engines (title 13 CCR, sections 2700-2710). This rule establishes procedures for the verification ofdiesel emission control strategies by ARB that can be applied on various diesel-fueled engines and vehicles to significantly reduce diesel PM emissions. It is important to reduce diesel PM emissionsfrom TRUs. Health and Safety Code sections 39666 and 39667 requires the ARB to adopt regulations to achieve the maximum possible reduction in public exposure to TACs through the application ofbest available control technology (BACT), or a more effective control method, in consideration of cost, risk, environmental impacts, and otherspecified factors.
ARB adopted the TRU AirborneToxic Control Measure (ATCM) in 2004. The TRU ATCM is partofARB's ongoing effortto reduce PM emissionsfrom diesel-fueled engines and vehicles and improve air quality. TheTRU ATCM established in-use performance standardsforTRUs and TRU gen sets thatwere to be phased in ·commencing on December 31, 2008. In March 2005, staff requested the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to grant authorization to ARB to adopt and enforce theTRU ATCM pursuantto Clean AirAct (CAA) section 209(e)(2). U.S. EPA granted California authorization on January 16, 2009. Because U.S. EPA's

.. authorization was granted afterthe first compliance date, ARB delayed the enforcement ofthe TRU ATCM's in-use performance standards until January 2010.



### 2ARB staff has prepared an Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR) for the proposed amendments to the Airborne Toxic Control Measure forIn-Use Diesel-Fueled TRUs and TRU Gen Sets, andFacilities where TRUs Operate. Description ofthe Proposed Regulatory Action: ARB staff is proposing to amendthe TRU ATCM thatthe Board approved for adoption onFebruary 26, 2004, and became effective December10, 2004. The primary purpose

.. oftheproposed amendments is to chahge1he in-Lise performance standard for

MY 2003 TRU engines in the 25 hp and greater category and MY 2003 and MY 2004 engines in the less than 25 hp category from the ultra-low-emission TRU (ULETRU) in-use performance standard to allow TRU owners to comply by either meeting the ULETRU standard or, as an option. the less stringent low-emission TRU (LETRU) in-use standard. The initial compliance deadlines for MYs 2003 and 2004 TRU engines are December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The proposed amendments would also require that all MY 2003 and MY 2004 engines meet the ULETRU standard seven years afterthe initial compliance date (in 2017 or 2018). Requirements for "flexibility" engines used in TRUs by original equipment manufacturers underthe federal Transitional Program for Equipment Manufacturers and California's equipment manufacturerflexibility program (title 13 CCR, section 2423(d)) would also be clarified to provide seven years ofoperational life toflexibility engines installed before the effective date ofthese amendments. Flexibility engines installed afterthat would have a shorter operational life underthe amendments. In addition, the amendments would impose new reporting requirements on TRU original equipment manufacturers. A rnore detailed description ofthe proposed amendments is presented below. Applicability The proposed amendments would affect owners. ofTRUs and TRU gen sets that operate in California that are equipped with MY2003 engines, regardless of horsepower category, and MY2004 engines in the less than 25 hp category. This would inClude all TRU and TRU gen set owners, whether based in California or out-of-state, that transport perishable goods using refrigerated trucks, trailers, shipping containers, and railcars within the State. MostTRUs are owned oroperated by corporations, businesses, and individuals. There are afew local municipalities, school districts, and correctional institutions thatoperateTRUs that may be affected. These amendments would affectthe owners ofTRUs and TRU gen sets equipped with "flexibility engines" and would also extend the applicabilityfor new reporting requirements to TRU and TRU gen set original equipment manufacturers that directly or indirectly sell or offerfor sale TRUs and TRU gen sets to the California market. There are currently onlythree affected TRU**.<:~nd** TRU gen set manufacturers. · In-Use Emission StandardAmendment The amendments would change the in-use standards for MY 2003 TRU and TRU gen set engines in the 25 hp and greaterpower categqry frorn the ULETRU in-use standard to allow eitherthe ULETRU standard or, as an option, the less stringent LETRU in-use



### 3

### standard. This change would provide owners with more complianceflexibility and is needed because ULETRU compliance options presently are .limited and relatively costly compared to LETRU compliance costs. The compliance date for meeting one ofthese standards would remain December 31, 2010. Seven years later, bythe end of2011; the MY2003 engines thatare still remaining in service would be required to meet ULETRU ifthe owner chosetorneettheLETRU standard in 2010.
The amendmentswould also change the in-use standard for MY2003 and MY2004 engines in the less than 25 hp category from the ULETRU in-use standard to allow either the ULETRU standard or, as an option, the LETRU in-use standard. The compliance dates would remain December 31,2010, for MY 2003 engines and December 31, 2011, for MY2004 engines, when the owner must choose to meet one of these standards. Seven years later, by the end of2017, the MY 2003 engines that still remain in service would be required to meetthe ULETRU standard ifthe owner chose to meet the LETRU standard in 2010. By the end of2018, the MY 2004 engines that still remain in service would also be required to meetthe ULETRU standard ifthe owner chose to meetthe LETRU standard in 2011. Flexibility Engines- "Effective,Model Year" 

### The staff is also proposing to amend the requirements for "flexibility" engines that are used in TRUs by original equipment manufacturers underthe federal Transitional Program for Equipment Manufacturers and California's equipment manufacturer flexibility program2

. 

### The amendments would clarify thatflexibility engines installed before the effective date ofthe amendments would be provided a full seven years of operational life from the yearofthe engine's manufacture before having to meet the more stringent ULETRU in-use performance standard. Flexibility engines installed after that date would have a reduced operational life given that compliance would be based on the lastyearthat the flexibility engine's tierstandard was in effect. As permitted underfederal and State regulations, TRU and TRU gen set original equipment manufacturers (TRU OEMs) have installed "flexibility engines" that meet an emissions standard tierthat is no longer in effectfor new engines atthe timethatthe equipment is manufactured.3


### To date, TRU OEMs and engine manufacturers have notfollowed a consistent practice in identifying the model yearofflexibility engines. While some manufacturers have. identified the model yearofthese enginesto be the year ofmanufacturerofthe engine, others have identified the model year as being the lastyearthatthe emission standard tier ofthe flexibility engine was in effectfor newengine certification (underthe proposed amendments, this second designation is referred to as "effective model year"). The use

..;•·,··.'---' 2 Flexibility engines are newengines that are allowed underthese programsto be certified to a lower emission standard than is"otherwise in effectfor new engines at'tliti time of manufacture.

3 This is affowe(j for a limited numberofengines underthe federal Transitional Program for Equipment Manufacturers and California's equipment manufacturerflexibility program (13 CCR, section 2423{d)) for several years afteran emissions standard changes to a more stringenttier.



### 4ofthe effective model-year designation has adversely impacted the operational life of TRUs under the TRU ATCM in thatTRU owners must meet in-use performance standards seven years afterthe engine model year. The last yearthat a priortier was in effectfor new engine certification istypically one to two years beforethe manufacture date oftheflexibility engine, resulting in the loss of up to several years ofoperational life. In most cases, owners have not been aware ofthis loss ofoperational life ofthe TRU engines thatthey have purchased

.. To address this issue, staff is proposing that flexibility engines meeting a priortier new engine standard would be allowed to use the actual engine manufacture yearto determine in-use compliance requirements. For example, a Tier i engine installed in a TRU afterthe Tier 2 new engine emission standards became effective for new engines would be allowed to use the engine manufacture year to determine in-use compliance requirements. This would ensure that all TRUs with flexibility engines that are purchased before the effective date ofthese amendments receive a full seven years of operational life.
The amendments would further provide thatflexibility engines installed in TRUs after the· effective date ofthe amendments would be required to use the "effective model year" of the flexibility engine to determinefuture ULETRU compliance dates. As stated, the effective model year ofthe flexibility engine would be the last yearthat the flexibility engine's tier standard was in effectfor new engine compliance. Compliance with the in-use standards would then be required by the end ofthe seventh year after the effective model yearofthe flexibility engine. Using the effective. model yearforfuture flexibility engine use would discourage their use since operational life is affected. It would also result in dirtier, earliertierflexibility engines being phased out sooner thereby ensuring thatthe emission reductions intended underthe original TRU ATCM will be achieved as intended. · TRU OEMs would also be required to disclose to the end user at point ofsale that the unit has aflexibility engine and that there is a loss of operational life associated with the use offlexibility engines. They must also providethe end userwith the datethatthe engine must meetthe ULETRU in-use standard.
TRU ManufacturerReporting Staff is proposing to amend the TRU ATCM to require thatTRU OEMS report production information, including information on flexibility engines installed in TRUs. This reporting will ensure that manufacturers provide the data necessaryforthe proposed flexibility engine amendments, allow ARB to consider improvements to the TRU registration process, and more accurately estimate emissions inventories. TRU OEMswould be required to periodically report data on each TRU and installed engine produced in future modelyears. TRU OEMs would also be required to submit reports on TRU sales from previous years.



### 5. ,_. COMPARABLE FEDERAL REGULATIONS There are nofederal regulations comparable to theTRU ATCM for in-use TRUs. Under federal Clean AirAct (CAA) section 213, U.S. EPA is withoutauthorityto adopt in-use standards for off-road (non-road) engines.4
·

•.Section2Q9(e)(1) otthe CAA conclusivelypreempts.states, including California, from·.

·adopting requirements for newoffcroad engines less than 175 hp that are used in farm

or construction equipment. Undersection 209(e)(2), California may adoptand enforce emission standards and other requirements for off-road engines and equipment not conclusively preempted by section 209(e)(1), so long as California applies for and receives authorization from the Administrator of U.S. EPA TRU engines are not used in farm and construction equipment and are thus not preempted. California requested and received authorization from U.S. EPAforthe initially adopted TRU ATCM in January 2009s
AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS AND AGENCY CONTACT PERSONS ARB staff has prepared a Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR) for the proposed regulatory action, which includes a summary ofthe potential environmental and economic impacts ofthe proposal. The report is entitled, ProposedAmendmentof the Airborne Toxic Control Measure forIn-Use Diesel-Fueled Transport Refrigeration Units and TRU GeneratorSets, andFacilities Where TRUs Operate. Copies ofthe ISOR and thefull text ofthe proposed regulatory language, in underline and strike-out format to allowcomparison with the existing TRU ATCM, may be accessed on ARB's website listed below, or may be obtained fromthePublic Information Office, Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, Visitors and Environmental Services Center; First Floor, Sacramento, California, 95814, (916) 322-2990, on September29, 2010. Upon its completion, the Final Statementof Reasons (FSOR) will be available and copies may be requested from the agencycontact persons in this notice, ormay be accessed on ARB's websiteforthis rulemaking at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/tru2010/tru2010.htm. Inquiries concerning the substance ofthe proposed regulations may be directed tothe designated agency contact persons, Richard Boyd, Manager ofthe Process Evaluation Section, Emission Assessment Branch, Stationary Source Division, at (916) 322-8285, or Rod Hill, StaffAir Pollution Specialist, Stationary Source Division, at (916) 327-5636. Furtller, theagency representativeand designated backcup contact persons to whom nonsubstaiitive inquiries d'O'iicerning the proposed administrative action may be directed, are Ms. LoriAndreoni, Manager, Board Administration & Regulatory

4 The California term ·:off-road" and the federal term "nonroad" referto the same sources and are·used interchan!;leably. 5 74 Fed Reg 3030 (January 16, 2009).



### 6Coordination Unit, (916) 322--4011, or Ms. AmyWhiting, Regulations Coordinator, (916) 322-6533. The Board has compiled a record forthis rulemaking action, which includes all the information upon which the proposal is based. This material is available for inspection upon request to the contact persons.
This notice, the ISOR ahd all subsequent regulatory documents, including the FSOR, wheJl completed, are available on.ARB's website for.this.rulemaking at 

# www.arb.ca.gov/regact!201O/tru2010/truZOlO.htm. · COSTS TO PUBLIC AGENCIES AND TO BUSINESSES AND PERSONS AFFECTED The determinations ofthe Board's Executive Officer concerning the costs or savings necessarily incurred by public agencies and private persons and businesses in reasonable compliance with the proposed regulations are presented below. A detailed assessment ofthe economic impacts ofthe proposed regulatory action can be found in the Staff Report.
Costs orSavings to Businesses andPrivate Individuals In developing this regulatory proposal, ARB staff evaluated the potential economic impacts on representative private persons or businesses. The amendments would result in compliance cost savings due to changing the in-use standard from ULETRU to either ULETRU or LETRU because the Level 2 Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategies (VDECS) required to meet LETRU costs about $2,000 less than the Level 3 VDECS required to meet ULETRU. Thetotal compliance cost savings related to the in-use standard option would be about $2.1 million in 2010 and 2011' assuming about 30 percent ofthe affected units will comply by retrofitting (30 percent ofthe MY 2002 engines complied by retrofitting, so staffassumed this trend would continue for MY2003 and 2004 engines). However, to the extentthat MY2003 and MY2004 engines comply by meeting the LETRU standard in 2010 and are still operating in 2017 and 2018, respectively, theywould need to meet ULETRU standard in thatyear. This would potentially reduce compliance cost savings to a net savings ofabout $300,000 in 2010 dollars. The proposed amendments do not affectthe cost of repowering a unit with a cleaner engine to maintain compliance, which was the compliance option chosen for 65 percent ofthe 2002 units, northe cbst ofusing Alternative Technologies (such as hybrid electric), which was chosen as the compliance optipn by five percent ofthe TRU owners. There are no end-usercompliance costs related to the amendment addressing the past use offlexibility engines. TheTRU OEMs, however, would incur costs related to flexibility engine reporting in 2010. Staffestimates these one-time costs would be about $19,000, total in 2010 dollars.
The cost ofcompliance with theTRU OEM reporting amendmentfor currentyear and prioryear production would be about $25,000 forthe initial one-time reports due soon afterthe amendmentstake effect and about $8,000 peryearfor periodic update reports. Staffanticipates that the cost Of preparing and submitting thesewill be reduced significantly as opportunitiesto automatethiswork are phased in.



### 7The Executive Officer has made an initial determination thl:lt the proposed regulatory action would nothave a significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting · businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in otherstates, oron representative private persons.
In accordance with Government

## Cod~ sectiori 11346.3, the Executive Officer has determined thatthe proposed regulatory action would not affectthe creation or elimination ofjobs within the State ofCalifornia, the creation of new businesses or elimination ofexisting businesses within the State of California, orthe expansion of businesses currently doing business within the State of California. A detailed assessment ofthe economic impacts ofthe proposed regulatory action can be found in the ISOR
The Executive Officer has also determined, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 1, section 4, that the proposed regulatory action would affect small businesses because staffanticipates there will be cost savings ifTRU and TRU gen set owners choose the retrofit compliance option. Compliance costwould·not be affected ifowners choose the repower option.
In accordance with Government Codesections 11346.3(c) and 11346.5(a)(11), the Executive Officer has found that the reporting requirements ofthe regulation which apply to businesses are necessary for the health, safety, and welfare ofthe people of the State of California.
Before taking final action on the proposed regulatory amendments, the Board must determine that no reasonable alternative considered bythe Board, orthat has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention ofthe Board, would be more effective in carrying out the purpose forwhich the action is proposed, orwould be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.
Costs orSavings to LocalandState GovernmentAgencies Pursuant to Government Code sections 11346.5(a)(5), the Executive Officer has determined thatthe proposed regulatory action would not create any costs to or mandates on any local agency orschool districtthat is reimbursable bythe State pursuant to Government Code, title 2, division 4, part7 (commencing with section 17500).
Pursuant to Government Code sections 11346.5(a)(6), the Executive Officer hasfurther determined, based on estirril:ltes prepared in accordancewith instruction adopted bythe Department of Finance, thatthe proposed regulatory action would notcreate additioriid costs to any State agency orto any local agency orschool district, whether or not reimbursable bythe State pursuantto Government Code, title 2, division 4, part 7 (commencing with section 17500), create other nondiscretionary costs on local agencies, and affect costs orsavings in federal funding to the State.



### 8Several local agencies, school districts, and State agencies own TRUs, so the compliance cost savings discussed above may applyto these agencies ifthey own MY 2003 TRU engines in the 25 hp and greater power category or MY 2004 TRU engines in the less then 25 hp category.
SUBMITTALOF COMMENTS Interested members ofthe·public may also present comments orally or inwriting atthe·· meeting, and comments may be submitted by postal mail or by electronic submittal before the meeting. The public comment period forthis regulatory action will begin on October 4, 2010. To be considered by the Board, written comments, not physically .submitted at the meeting, must be submitted on or after October 4, 2010, and received no later than 12:00 noon on November 17, 2010, and must be addressed to the following:
Postal mail: Clerk ofthe Board, Air Resources Board 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814
Electronic submittal: http://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bclistphp
Please note that underthe California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, 

### § 6250 et seq.), written and oralcomments, attachments, and .associated contact information (e.g., your mailing address, phone number, email address, etc.) become part ofthe public record and can be released tothe public upon request Additionally, this information may become available via Google, Yahoo, and any other search engines.
The Board requests, but does not require, that 20 copies of any written statement be submitted and that all written statements be filed at least 10 days priortothe hearing so thatARB staff and Board members have time to fully consider each comment The Board encourages members ofthe publicto bring to the attention ofstaff in advance of the hearing any suggestionsfor modification ofthe proposed regulatory action.
STATUTORYAUTHORITY AND REFERENCES This regulatory action is proposed underthe authority granted in Health and Safety Code, sections 39600,39601,39618,39658,39659,39666,39667,39674,39675, 42400, 42400.14,42400.2, 42400.3.5, 42402.42402.2, 42410, 43013, 43018. This action is proposed to implement, interpret, and make specific sections 39618, 39650, 39658, 39659,39666,39667, 39674,39675,42400,42400.1,42400.2,42400.3.5, 42402, 42402.2, 42410, 40717.9, 43013, and 43018.
HEARING PROCEDURES The public hearing will be conducted in accordance with the California Administrative Procedure Act, Government Code, title 2, division 3, part 1, chapter 3.5 (commencing with section 11340).



### 9Following the public hearing, the Board may adoptthe**r~gulatory** language as originally proposed, orwith non-substantial orgrammatical modifications. The Board mayalso adoptthe proposed regulatory language with other modifications ifthe text as modified is sufficiently related tothe originally proposed textthatthe publicwas adequately placed on notice and thatthe regulatory language as modified could result from the**propo~!'!Q** regul1:1tory ac;tion; in such.event,.the

..full regulatory text, withthe.modifications clearly indicated, will be made availableto the public, forwritten comment, at least · 15 days before it is adopted.
The public may request a copy ofthe modified regulatory text from ARB's Public Information Office, Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, Visitors and Environmental Services Center, First Floor, Sacramento, California, 95814, (916) 322-2990.
SPECIALACCOMMODATION REQUEST Special accommodation or language needs can be provided for any ofthe following:

.

• An interpreterto be available at the hearing; • Documents made available in an alternate format (i.e., Braille, large print, etc.) or another language; • A disability-related reasonable accommodation.
To request these special accommodations or language needs, please contactthe Clerk ofthe Board at (916) 322-5594 or by facsimile at 916) 322-3928 as soon as possible, but no laterthan 10 business days beforethe scheduled Board hearing. TTY!TOO/Speech to Speech users maydial 711 forthe California Relay Service.
Comodidad especial o necesidad de otro idioma puede ser proveido para alguna de las siguientes:

• Un interprete que este disponible en Ia audiencia.
• Documentos disponibles en un formato alterno (pordecir, sistema Braille, o en impresi6n grande) 

### uotro idioma. · 

### • Una acomodaci6n razonable relacionados con una incapacidad.



### 10Para solicitar estas comodidades especiales o necesidades de otro idioma, porfavor llame a Ia oficina del Consejo al 

### (916) 322-5594 o envie un fax a 

### (916) 322-3928 lomas pronto posible, pero no menos de 10 dias detrabajo antes del dia programado para Ia audiencia del Consejo. TTY!TDD/Personas que necesiten este servicio pueden marcar el 

### 711 para el Servicio de Retransmisi6n de Mensajes de California.

CALIFORNIAAIR RESOURCES BOARD



# .

/'_JLf

# a/1?.:7\**~.~** James N.

### Gold~lme 1 Executive Officr · Date: September 21, 2010

The energychallenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energyconsumption. Fora list ofsimple ways you can reduce demandand cutyourenergy costs, see ourwebsite at www.arb.ca.qov.

11