68448 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by January 7, 2011. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purposes of judicial review nor does 

it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review may be filed, 

and shall not postpone the effectiveness 

of such rule or action. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: October 27, 2010. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart GG—New Mexico 

■ 2. The second table in § 52.1620(e) 

entitled ‘‘EPA Approved Nonregulatory 

Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory 

Measures in the New Mexico SIP’’ is 

amended by adding an entry to the end 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.1620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA Approved Nonregulatory 

Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory 

Measures in the New Mexico SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal/effective date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Interstate transport for the 

1997 ozone and PM2.5

NAAQS.

Bernalillo County ..................... 07/30/07 11/08/10 [insert FR page number where the document begins].11/08/10 Approval for revisions to prohibit significant 

contribution to nonattainment in any other state. 

[FR Doc. 2010–28003 Filed 11–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 86, 1033, 1039, 1042, 

1045, 1054, and 1065 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0142; FRL–9220–6] 

RIN 2060–AO69 

Revisions to In-Use Testing for HeavyDuty Diesel Engines and Vehicles; 

Emissions Measurement and 

Instrumentation; Not-to-Exceed 

Emission Standards; and Technical 

Amendments for Off-Highway Engines 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action on several revisions to EPA’s 

mobile source emission programs 

standards and test procedures. EPA 

believes that each of these is minor and 

non-controversial in nature. Most of the 

changes arise from the results of the 

collaborative test program and related 

technical work we conducted for the 

highway heavy-duty diesel in-use 

testing program. Most noteworthy here 

is the adoption of a particulate matter 

measurement allowance for use with 

portable emission measurement 

systems. Related to this are two 

provisions to align the in-use program 

timing requirements with completion of 

the program as required in current 

regulations and the incorporation of 

revisions to a few technical 

requirements in the testing regulations 

based on information learned in this 

and one other test program. Finally, the 

DFR modifies a few transitional 

flexibilities for locomotive, recreational 

marine, and Tier 4 nonroad engines and 

incorporates a handful of minor 

corrections. 

DATES: This is effective on January 7, 

2011 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse comment by December 

8, 2010 on any amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule. If EPA receives 

adverse comment on this rule or any 

discrete amendment, paragraph, or 

section of this rule, we will publish a 

timely withdrawal of the Direct Final 

Rule, or the amendment, paragraph, or 

section of the direct final rule that 

received adverse comment, in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule, or that amendment, 

paragraph, or section of the rule, will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68449 

OA–2010–0142, by one of the following 

methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. Please include two copies. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Headquarters 

Library, EPA West Building, Room: 

3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OA–2010– 

0142. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/oar/dockets.html. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, EPA West 

Building, EPA Headquarters Library, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rich 

Wilcox, Assessment and Standards 

Division, Office of Transportation and 

Air Quality, 2000 Traverwood Drive, 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone 

number: (734) 214–4390; fax number: 

(734) 214–4050; e-mail address: 

wilcox.rich@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why is EPA using a Direct Final 

Rule? 

EPA is publishing this rule without a 

prior proposal because we view this 

action as noncontroversial and 

anticipate no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of today’s Federal Register 

publication, we are publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to adopt the provisions in this 

Direct Final Rule if adverse comments 

are received on this rule. We will not 

institute a second comment period on 

this action, however. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. For further information about 

commenting on this rule, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this document. 

If EPA receives adverse comment or a 

request for public hearing regarding this 

rule or any discrete portion of this rule, 

we will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the rule, or that portion of the rule that 

has received adverse comment, in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this direct final rule, or the portion 

of the rule that has received adverse 

comment, will not take effect. We would 

address all public comments in any 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. 

II. Does this action apply to me? 

This action will affect companies that 

manufacture and certify all-terrain 

vehicles for sale in the United States. 

Category NAICS code a Examples of potentially affected entities 

Industry ................................................. 336112, 336120 Engine and Truck Manufacturers. 

Industry ................................................. 333112 Manufacturers of lawn and garden tractors. 

Industry ................................................. 333618 Manufacturers of new engines. 

Industry ................................................. 482110, 482111, 482112 Railroad owners and operators. 

Industry ................................................. 811112, 811198 Independent commercial importers of vehicles and parts.

a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). 

To determine whether particular 

activities may be affected by this action, 

you should carefully examine the 

regulations. You may direct questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

as noted in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

III. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68450 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1See ‘‘Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From 

New Motor Vehicles: In-Use Testing for Heavy-Duty 

Diesel Engines and Vehicles, 70 FR 34594 (June 14, 

2005). 

2See ‘‘Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From 

New Motor Vehicles; Emission Measurement 

Accuracy Margins for Portable Emission 

Measurement Systems and Program Revisions, 73 

FR 13441 (March 13, 2008). 

3The interim additive accuracy margins for the 

pilot programs are: NMHC = 0.17 g/bhp-hr, NOX = 

0.50 g/bhp-hr, CO = 0.60 g/bhp-hr, and PM = 0.10 

g/bhp-hr. 

4The final additive accuracy margins for the 

enforceable gaseous programs are: NMHC = 0.01 

g/bhp-hr, NOX = 0.15 g/bhp-hr, and CO = 0.25 

g/bhp-hr. 

5See ‘‘Memorandum of Agreement, Program to 

Develop Emission Measurement Accuracy Margins 

for Heavy-Duty In-Use Testing,’’ dated May 2005. A 

copy of the memorandum is available in the public 

docket for this rule and at the EPA/OTAQ Web site 

(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/hd-hwy.htm). 

6See ‘‘Memorandum of Agreement, Program to 

Develop Emission Measurement Accuracy Margins 

for Heavy-Duty In-Use Testing,’’ dated May 2005. A 

copy of the memorandum is available in the public 

docket for this rule and at the EPA/OTAQ Web site 

(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/hd-hwy.htm). 

7See ‘‘Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From 

New Motor Vehicles: In-Use Testing for Heavy-Duty 

Diesel Engines and Vehicles, 70 FR 34624 (June 14, 

2005). 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information 

and/or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

IV. Details of the Rule 

A. Revision of 40 CFR Part 86 Subpart 

T To Revise the In-Use Testing Program 

for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines 

1. Background 

The manufacturer-run, in-use testing 

program for heavy-duty diesel vehicles 

that are used on the highway was 

promulgated in June 2005 to monitor 

the emissions performance of the 

engines used in 2007 and later model 

year vehicles when operated under a 

wide range of real world driving 

conditions.1 The program is specifically 

intended to monitor compliance with 

the applicable Not-to-Exceed (NTE) 

exhaust emission standards for nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC), carbon 

monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen 

(NOX), and particulate matter (PM). It 

requires each manufacturer of heavyduty highway diesel engines to assess 

the in-use exhaust emissions from their 

engines using onboard, portable 

emission measurement systems (PEMS) 

during typical operation while on the 

road. The PEMS unit must meet the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 1065 

subpart J. 

The program was amended in March 

2008 to delay some of the 

implementation dates and reporting 

deadlines and to adopt final PEMS 

measurement ‘‘accuracy’’ margins for 

gaseous emissions (i.e., NMHC, CO, and 

NOX).2 The development of PEMS 

accuracy margins are further described 

below. 

The in-use testing program began with 

a mandatory two-year pilot program for 

gaseous emissions in calendar years 

2005 and 2006. The program also 

included a pilot program for PM 

emissions in calendar years 2007 and 

2008. The programs are fully 

enforceable after their respective pilot 

program ends, i.e., the 2007 calendar 

year for gaseous emissions and the 2009 

calendar year for PM emissions. Fully 

enforceable means that engines found 

not compliant after this time frame 

could be subject to a compliance action. 

The in-use testing program is based 

on the NTE emission standards. For the 

purposes of the in-use testing program, 

EPA established a vehicle pass/fail 

criterion for each pollutant that 

compares a vehicle’s measured in-use 

emissions to a corresponding numerical 

compliance limit, i.e., NTE threshold. 

The NTE threshold for each pollutant is 

the sum of the NTE standard, any in-use 

compliance testing margin that is 

already allowed by the regulations, and 

a new emission measurement accuracy 

margin associated with the use of PEMS. 

The PEMS accuracy margin is the 

difference between the emission 

measurement ‘‘error’’ for the portable 

instrument and the measurement ‘‘error’’ 

for ‘‘laboratory grade’’ instruments that 

are used to test vehicles or engines on 

a dynamometer in a laboratory setting. 

This accuracy margin is expressed in 

the same numerical terms as the 

applicable NTE emission standards, i.e., 

grams of pollutant per brake 

horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr). 

When the in-use testing program was 

first established in June of 2005, there 

was uncertainty regarding what specific 

accuracy margins should be used in the 

in-use testing program, since the 

portable measurement devices that were 

expected to be used in the program had 

not been rigorously tested at that time. 

As a result, we originally promulgated 

interim accuracy margins for use in the 

pilot programs.3 These interim values 

were believed to represent an upper 

bound of the possible instrumentation 

variability based on our experience with 

portable and laboratory instruments and 

test methods. Subsequently, we adopted 

final values for gaseous pollutants based 

on the cooperative research program 

described below.4

In May of 2005, shortly before the inuse test program was promulgated, EPA 

entered into a memorandum of 

agreement (MOA) with the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB) and the 

manufacturers of heavy-duty highway 

diesel engines (through the Engine 

Manufacturers Association (EMA)) to 

develop ‘‘data driven’’ emission 

measurement allowances through a 

comprehensive research, development, 

and demonstration program for the fully 

enforceable programs.5 The overall test 

program was designed to be completed 

in two phases. The first phase addressed 

gaseous emission accuracy margins and 

the second phase addressed the PM 

emission accuracy margin. The 

remainder of this discussion focuses on 

the final PEMS accuracy measurement 

for PM, since the final margins for 

gaseous emissions have already been 

adopted. 

The MOA and the June 2005 final 

rulemaking addressed the consequences 

of failing to complete the accuracy 

margin development work in time for 

the scheduled start of the PM 

enforceable program.6 7 Two provisions 

in these documents are most relevant to 

today’s rule. The first provision 

addresses short term delays in receiving 

the final accuracy margins. Specifically, 

for each month the accuracy margins are 

delayed beyond the agreed upon dates, 

then the affected enforceable program 

would be delayed by the same number 

of months up to three months. The 

second provision, which is most 

relevant to today’s action, addresses 

delays in excess of three months. In 

particular, if the final accuracy margin 

and documentation were delayed more 

than three months from November 1, 

2008, then the affected PM enforceable 

program would be placed in abeyance 

for a year and the respective pilot 

program would be continued for 

calendar year 2009 using the interim 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68451 

8See ‘‘Test Plan to Determine PEMS Measurement 

Allowance for the PM Emissions Regulated under 

the Manufacturer-Run Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine InUse Testing Program, for the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board, 

and Engine Manufacturers Association’’, dated 

November 11, 2008 (published by EPA August 

2010), EPA report number: EPA–420–B–10–901. A 

copy of the report is available in the public docket 

for this rule and at the EPA/OTAQ Web site (http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/hd-hwy.htm). 

9See ‘‘PM PEMS Measurement Allowance 

Determination: Final Report,’’ U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, June 2010 (published by EPA 

August 2010), EPA report number: EPA–420–R–10– 

902. A copy of the report is available in the public 

docket for this rule and at the EPA/OTAQ Web site 

(http://www.epa.gov/otaq.hd-hwy.htm). 

10See ‘‘Control of Emissions of Air Pollution 

From New Motor Vehicles: In-Use Testing for 

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles, 70 FR 

34614 (June 14, 2005). 

allowance. If necessary, this 

programmatic adjustment would be 

repeated in subsequent years until the 

final PM accuracy margin was 

identified. 

2. Particulate Matter Emission 

Measurement Margin for Portable 

Emission Measurement Systems 

The MOA described above called for 

development of a comprehensive test 

plan for determining the final emission 

measurement accuracy margins for the 

manufacturer-run, in-use testing 

program.8 Generally, the detailed plan 

included a methodology that called for: 

(1) Comprehensive engine testing in the 

laboratory to assess the agreed upon 

sources of possible error and the 

resultant measurement variability 

between the PEMS and laboratory 

instrumentation and measurement 

methods; (2) the effects of 

environmental conditions on PEMS 

error and the variability in key engine 

parameters supplied by the engine’s 

electronic controls to the PEMS; (3) the 

development of a statistically-based 

computer model to simulate effects of 

all sources of error on the final 

measurement accuracy margin; and 

(4) validation of the simulation model 

results and resulting accuracy margin 

against data generated through actual inuse field testing using simultaneous onvehicle measurements from a mobile 

emissions laboratory (i.e., laboratorygrade instruments mounted inside a 

trailer) and a PEMS unit. This validation 

step is important because it provides 

confidence that the simulation model 

results reflect reasonable accuracy 

margin. If the two methods do not 

statistically agree, then there may be 

possible errors in the simulation model, 

the in-use mobile emissions testing 

results, or both. The test plan also 

contained the statistically-based 

algorithms for calculating the datadriven margin for PM from in-use data. 

After the simulation modeling results 

were completed, the test plan called for 

the final accuracy margin to be 

determined by the following generalized 

process. First, select the PEMS with the 

lowest or minimum positive value. 

Second, select the calculation method 

that has the lowest or minimum positive 

value. Third, and finally, use the results 

from that method to determine the final 

measurement accuracy margin. 

The cooperative test program for PM 

as described in the MOA is complete 

and a final report has been issued.9 Two 

PEMS units from different 

manufacturers were evaluated in the 

validation phase. When the predicted 

results from the model simulations for 

one of the PEMS units were compared 

to the mobile emissions laboratory 

results, the model did not validate for 

PM. It was determined from analyzing 

the results, that the PEMS exhibited a 

negative bias that was more pronounced 

during the validation tests when 

compared to the model development 

tests. The model did validate for the 

PEMS from the other manufacturer. 

Based on these results for that 

instrument, EPA, ARB, and EMA 

selected the final measurement 

allowance value and agreed to conclude 

the test program. The resultant final 

emission measurement accuracy margin 

is 0.006 g/bhp-hr for PM. The derivation 

of this value is documented in the final 

report referenced above. 

3. Delaying the Enforceable PM Program 

From 2009 to 2011 

As described above, the PM accuracy 

margin test program has been 

completed. However due to unexpected 

delays in beginning the test program, 

issues in the development of PM PEMS 

technology, and other challenges in 

conducting the work, the program took 

two years longer than originally 

anticipated. Accordingly, in-use test 

program regulations require that the first 

two years of the previously adopted 

enforceable program, which was 

originally scheduled for the calendar 

year 2009, be placed into abeyance for 

two years. Hence, the enforceable PM 

program will now begin in 2011 

calendar year. 

As already noted, the current in-use 

test program regulations require that the 

PM pilot program, which began in the 

2007 calendar year, be continued for an 

additional two years through calendar 

year 2010. This would result in four 

years of pilot testing for PM. However, 

our current assessment shows that such 

extended pilot program testing is 

unnecessary as described below. 

The intent of the original two-year 

pilot program for PM was to make 

certain that engine manufacturers had 

adequate real-world operational 

experience, i.e., from recruiting vehicles 

to submitting test reports to EPA, to 

ensure a successful start of the 

subsequent fully enforceable program.10

Manufacturers have reached the May 31, 

2010 reporting deadline for the 2007 

calendar year PM pilot program. Also, 

engine manufacturers have completed a 

substantial amount of in-use testing for 

gaseous pollutants, i.e., NMHC, CO, and 

NOX. More specifically, two years of 

gaseous emissions pilot testing (2005 

and 2006 calendar years) and two years 

of the fully enforceable program (2007 

and 2008 calendar years) for these 

pollutants have been completed. 

Gaseous pollutant in-use testing is in 

many ways complementary to PM inuse testing because nearly all aspects of 

the test regime are the same. Even 

certain parts of the portable emission 

measurement system instrumentation 

are used to measure both types of 

pollutants. Engine manufacturers, 

therefore, have already had a substantial 

amount of experience conducting all 

aspects of in-use testing. As a result, we 

have concluded that the original intent 

for conducting the PM pilot program 

will be achieved by retaining the 

requirement for two years of pilot 

testing rather than expanding it to four 

years. Therefore, we are not extending 

the PM pilot testing program beyond its 

initial requirement of two years of 

testing. 

As a result of the decision to delay the 

enforceable program for PM until the 

2011 calendar year and the decision not 

to extend the two-year pilot program, 

we needed to reassess the schedule for 

conducting the required tests for the 

pilot program. Two considerations are 

especially important here. First, there is 

no apparent advantage to require that 

engine manufacturers conduct testing 

over a single, consecutive two-year 

period, e.g., calendar years 2007 and 

2008. Second, there may be a benefit to 

allowing each manufacturer to decide 

which two years out of the four possible 

years to conduct its PM pilot testing. 

This is because the PM PEMS 

technology has continued to improve 

and mature as a result of the ongoing 

cooperative test program for developing 

the final PM accuracy margin. As a 

result, a manufacturer may benefit from 

an additional flexibility in selecting 

when to complete the PM pilot program 

in order to gain experience with PEMS 

that will be more like the 

instrumentation they may use for the 

2011 enforceable program. Therefore, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68452 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

11See ‘‘List of Part 1065 Changes Resulting from 

HDIUT PM MA Program’’, dated June 2010. A copy 

of this list is available in the public docket for this 

rule. 

12See ‘‘Proposed Rule: Control of Emissions of 

Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine 

Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters 

per Cylinder’’, 72 FR 34594 (April 3, 2007). 

13See ‘‘Final Rule: Control of Emissions of Air 

Pollution from Locomotives and Marine 

Compression-Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters 

per Cylinder’’, 73 FR (May 6, 2008). 

we are allowing each manufacturer to 

report test results in any two out of the 

potentially four calendar years for 

completing its testing obligations under 

the PM pilot program. 

Finally, we previously designated the 

engine families for the 2007, 2008, and 

2009 calendar years that each engine 

manufacturer must test, and we have 

recently designated engine families for 

the 2010 calendar year program. Given 

the new flexibility in choosing which 

two of the four years to fulfill their 

testing obligations for the PM pilot 

program, each engine manufacturer 

must notify EPA by letter to the 

Agency’s designated compliance officer 

to explicitly identify both: (1) The 

designated calendar year(s) where inuse PM pilot program testing will be 

forgone, and (2) the designated calendar 

year(s) when their obligations for PM 

pilot testing will be completed. This 

notification must be provided to the 

Agency by January 7, 2011 and must be 

quickly updated if planned testing 

changes for any calendar year. 

4. Removing the PM Accuracy Test 

Program From the Regulations 

We are taking this opportunity to 

delete the references in § 86.1935 that 

pertain to the final report for PM 

emission accuracy margin and the 

consequences that would ensue if the 

report was delayed beyond certain 

dates. These provisions are no longer 

needed because accuracy margin for PM 

pollutants are being promulgated in this 

Direct Final Rule. This will result in 

removal of § 86.1935 from the 

regulations in its entirety and any 

references made to § 86.1935 throughout 

40 CFR part 86. 

B. Revisions to 40 CFR 1033.150 To 

Allow the Use of Earlier Model Year 

Switch Engines With Equivalent 

Emission Controls 

Section 1033.150(e) allows the use of 

certified 2008 and later nonroad engines 

in switch locomotives. We are extending 

the allowance to include nonroad 

engines produced in model years before 

2008 as long as they were certified to 

the same standards as 2008 engines. 

This extension will not have any 

emissions impact since the engines will 

be required to have the same emission 

controls with or without the revisions. 

C. Revision of 40 CFR Part 1065 To 

Clarify the Requirements for PM PEMS 

Testing 

We are taking this opportunity to 

make minor technical amendments to 

40 CFR part 1065 that are mostly related 

to the requirements for in-use PM 

instrumentation and that arose from 

knowledge gained during the accuracy 

margin laboratory and field work 

mentioned in Section A. above. The 

changes are specified in the following 

paragraph. The reasons for these 

changes are detailed in a separate 

document.11 These amendments have 

no effect on the stringency of the 

regulations, but simply improve 

increase testing efficiency, allow new 

measurement techniques, or otherwise 

clarify the regulatory requirements. 

The amendments are as follows: 

1. The requirement to control dilution 

air temperature has been removed for 

in-use testing; 

2. An in-use filter face velocity 

specification has been added; 

3. An in-use filter face temperature 

specification has been added; 

4. We are specifying that there is no 

requirement for control of humidity 

control for in-situ PM analyzers; 

5. We are allowing the use of a fixed 

molar mass for the dilute exhaust 

mixture for field testing; 

6. We are deleting the frequency and 

rise/fall time specs for inertial batch PM 

analyzers; 

7. We are adding a statement that field 

testing applies at any ambient 

temperature, pressure and humidity, 

unless otherwise specified in the 

standard setting part (e.g., 40 CFR part 

86 for heavy-duty highway engines); 

8. We are adding language to state that 

EPA approves of electrostatic deposition 

technique for PM collection and that the 

technique must meet 95% collection 

efficiency, as validated by the 

manufacturer; 

9. We are excluding PM PEMS from 

the system-response and updatingrecording verification requirements; 

10. We are clarifying when an HC 

contamination check of the sampling 

system should take place; 

11. We are allowing the use of a PM 

loss correction to account for PM loss in 

the inertial balance, including the 

sample handling system for in-use 

testing only; 

12. We are making a clarification on 

how to handle positive displacement 

pump (PDP) pressure calibrations at 

maximum pressure; 

13. We are allowing a restart of the 

hot portion of the transient test if the 

hot start was void; 

14. We are making some language 

changes to make the language used more 

consistent throughout the document; 

and 

15. We are correcting typographical 

errors. 

D. Revision of 40 CFR 1065.140 To 

Allow the Use of Partial Flow Dilution 

Systems for Laboratory Transient Test 

Cycle PM Measurement 

We are taking this opportunity to 

make changes to 40 CFR 1065.140(d) to 

allow the use of partial flow sampling 

systems for measurement of PM during 

transient test cycles for laboratory 

testing. 

PM measurement has been 

traditionally performed using a full flow 

dilution tunnel where the entire amount 

of engine exhaust gas is collected and 

made available for sampling. With this 

sampling method, commonly referred to 

as a constant volume sampler (CVS), the 

size of the dilution tunnel depends on 

the exhaust gas volume, thus the greater 

the volume of exhaust gas emitted from 

the engine, the larger the dilution tunnel 

must be. As an alternative, a partial-flow 

dilution tunnel allows sampling of part 

of the total exhaust flow, which reduces 

the size of the sampling system. One of 

the drawbacks to partial flow sampling 

systems in the past was that the flow 

controllers did not have a fast enough 

response time to accurately respond to 

the changing exhaust flow rates during 

a transient cycle. Thus partial flow 

sampling systems were only allowed for 

use during steady-state cycle testing. 

Recent advancements in the 

development of fast response flow 

control systems, along with the 

advancement in the understanding of 

PM formation characteristics have made 

partial flow sampling systems a viable 

technology for use in transient 

applications when compared to the CVS 

reference method. 

We currently allow the use of partial 

flow sampling systems for measurement 

of PM for steady-state and ramped 

modal cycle (RMC) testing and have put 

specifications in place in 40 CFR 

1065.140(e) with respect to dilution air 

temperature, minimum dilution ratio, 

filter face temperature, and residence 

time to control PM formation. These 

specifications have further worked to 

improve the accuracy of partial flow 

systems when compared to the CVS. 

We initially proposed this allowance 

in the locomotive and compressionignition marine engines less than 30 

liters per cylinder NPRM, but did not 

finalize it due to concerns over the 

viability of partial flow systems in 

transient applications.12 13 Since 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68453 

14See ‘‘Sierra Instruments Model BG–3 vs. CVS 

Multiple Engine Correlation Study’’, dated 

November 2009. A copy of this list is available in 

the public docket for this rule. 

15Compliance evaluation when conducted by the 

Administrator, independent of the method for 

dilution, become the official results. Manufacturers 

should be prepared to demonstrate compliance with 

the full flow CVS even if initial certification was 

conducted using a partial flow dilution system. EPA 

will continue to use the CVS-based PM 

measurement method for our own compliance 

testing regardless of what method the manufacturer 

used to certify the engine. 

16See, Letter from EMA to EPA, ‘‘Treatment of 

Overlapping NTE and Regeneration Events, (July 

29, 2009). A copy of the report is available in the 

public docket for this rule. 

17See ‘‘Determination of PEMS Measurement 

Allowances for Gaseous Emissions Regulated under 

the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine In-Use Testing 

Program, dated April 2007. A copy of the report is 

available in the public docket for this rule and at 

the EPA/OTAQ Web site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

hd-hwy.htm). 

promulgating that rule, EPA has worked 

with industry to gain a better 

understanding of partial flow systems 

and the improvements that have been 

made over the past decade. We have 

also reviewed additional data supplied 

by engine and partial flow system 

equipment manufacturers showing 

comparisons between the traditional 

CVS and partial flow systems for PM 

measurement.14 These data have shown 

that partial flow measurement of PM is 

a viable tool for measurement in 

transient applications and these systems 

can meet the dilution parameter control 

requirements in 40 CFR 1065.140 as 

well as the flow rate linearity 

requirements in 40 CFR 1065.307, Table 

1, and the validation of proportional 

flow control requirement in 40 CFR 

1065.545. Further, correlation testing 

involving partial flow systems and CVS 

based systems has shown that the 

partial flow method is equivalent to the 

CVS method via t- and f-test analysis. In 

light of these recent disclosures, EPA 

will allow the use of this measurement 

technique.15

E. Revision of 40 CFR 86.1370 To Clarify 

How To Handle NTE Events During 

Regeneration 

We are taking this opportunity to 

further define how to handle 

regeneration events that occur during 

real world in-use NTE tests. The current 

text as it exists in 40 CFR 86.1370– 

2007(d)(2) has caused confusion with 

respect to determination of the NTE 

minimum averaging period. 

This revision establishes a new 

method to calculate the minimum 

averaging period. The intent here is to 

minimize the number of voided NTE 

events due to regeneration for systems 

that undergo frequent and/or infrequent 

regeneration, while ensuring that the 

NTE averaging time is appropriate based 

on the regeneration time. 

The regeneration duty cycle fraction 

over the course of the entire test day can 

be determined by dividing the mean 

time of the complete regeneration events 

(state 2) by the sum of the mean time of 

the non-regeneration events (state 0) and 

the mean time of the complete 

regeneration segments including time in 

those segments where regeneration is 

pending (states 1 and 2). 

To determine whether an NTE that 

includes a regeneration event is valid, 

the minimum average time is 

determined by summing the portion of 

the NTE event that occurs during 

regeneration and dividing by the 

fraction of time over the entire sampling 

period, i.e., shift-day, that regeneration 

occurred for complete regeneration 

events. This latter term is referred to as 

the regeneration fraction. If the duration 

of the NTE is greater than or equal to 

this minimum average time, then the 

NTE event is valid.16 For example, if an 

NTE event was 125 seconds long and 

contained 25 seconds of regeneration, 

and regeneration fraction was 0.24, the 

minimum averaging time for this NTE 

event is 104 seconds (25/0.24=104). In 

this example, the NTE event would be 

valid. 

F. Revision of 40 CFR 1065.915 To 

Allow the Use of ECM Fuel Rate To 

Determine NTE Mass Emission Rate 

We are taking this opportunity to 

allow the use of fuel rate data that is 

available from the engine’s electronic 

control module (ECM) along with other 

information, including the CO2, CO, and 

hydrocarbon emissions to calculate the 

requisite exhaust flow rate for mass 

emission rate determination. We believe 

that all large horsepower nonroad diesel 

engines will be equipped with ECMs 

that report fuel flow within the time 

frame proposed for implementation of 

the in-use testing program. The ECM 

fuel flow rate-based methodology 

currently requires prior EPA approval 

under 40 CFR 1065.915(d)(5)(iv). This 

pre-approval requirement is based on 

past concerns with respect to the 

accuracy of the ECM broadcast fuel flow 

rate when calculating brake-specific 

emission results in the absence of an 

exhaust flow measurement. However, 

more recent information from the 

cooperative in-use emission 

measurement allowance program for 

PEMS showed that emission 

calculations incorporating the ECM fuel 

rate yielded results comparable to those 

using approved calculation 

methodology.17 Based on that study and 

the inclusion of ECM derived BSFC in 

the determination of the accuracy 

margin, we are proposing to eliminate 

the requirement that a manufacturer 

must have EPA approval to use this 

method to determine exhaust flow rates 

via an amendment to 40 CFR 1065.915. 

G. Revision of 40 CFR 1045.145 To 

Extend the Notification Deadline for 

Small-Volume Manufacturers of Marine 

SI Engines 

Our current regulations for sterndrive/ 

inboard marine SI engines allow for 

delayed implementation of emission 

standards for small-volume 

manufacturers making sterndrive/ 

inboard marine SI engines (see 

§ 1045.145(a)). One requirement related 

to this delay is for the manufacturer to 

notify EPA before the standards take 

effect. However, we have learned that 

there are some small-volume engine 

manufacturers that have not yet learned 

about the new emission standards. We 

believe it is appropriate to extend the 

notification deadline for these 

manufacturers by one year to allow for 

further communications related to the 

new requirements. With the later 

deadline we also need to add language 

in the regulation to clarify that 

manufacturers need to notify EPA before 

introducing such engines into U.S. 

commerce for them to have a valid 

temporary exemption. These revisions 

address the logistical challenges related 

to implementing the new standards 

without changing the effective 

implementation schedule of the original 

rule. 

H. Revision of 40 CFR 1039.102 To 

Enable Phase Out of Tier 3 Diesel 

Engines 

When creating 40 CFR 1039.102 (69 

FR 39213, June 29, 2004), we included 

provisions intended to allow engine 

manufacturers to use emission credits to 

continue producing a small number of 

Tier 3 nonroad diesel engines after the 

Tier 4 standards began to apply. 

However, we now realize that the 

provisions may not work as intended 

because the Tier 4 averaging programs 

inadvertently do not allow 

manufacturers to show compliance with 

the applicable 0.19 g/kW-hr NMHC 

standard using credits. In today’s 

rulemaking, we are amending this 

section to allow manufacturers to use 

credits to show compliance with 

alternate NOX + HC standards. The 

alternate NOX + NMHC standards for 

each power category would be equal to 

the numerical value of the applicable 

alternate NOX standard of 

§ 1039.102(e)(1) or (2) plus 0.10 g/kWhr. Engines certified to these NOX

+NMHC standards may not generate 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68454 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

18E-mail from Jean-Claude Perreault, Prinoth Ltd, 

to Byron Bunker, U.S. EPA, ‘‘Prinoth technical 

information’’, June 8, 2010. 

emission credits. Since additional 0.10 

g/kW-hr for the combined standard is 

less than the otherwise applicable 

NMHC standard, there would be a small 

environmental benefit when 

manufacturers choose to certify to the 

alternate standards. 

I. Revision of 40 CFR 1039.625 To 

Revise TPEM Provisions for Special 

High-Altitude Equipment 

We have been made aware of a 

number of unique challenges involved 

in implementing Tier 4 requirements for 

certain specialized high-altitude 

equipment. In setting the Tier 4 

standards in 2004, we anticipated that 

typical engineering challenges would 

arise in redesigning machines to use the 

new engines, and we restructured our 

transition program for equipment 

manufacturers, first established in the 

Tier 2/Tier 3 rule, to help manufacturers 

deal with these challenges. This 

important flexibility program has been 

highly successful. We do feel that a 

minor adjustment is warranted for the 

specialized high-altitude equipment 

identified. 

This equipment is designed for use on 

snow and, for at least some of its 

operating life, at elevations more than 

9,000 feet above sea level. The 

applications are ski area snow groomers, 

both alpine and cross-county, and 

personnel transporters used in search 

and rescue operations, and maintenance 

of utility lines and towers. 

One manufacturer of this equipment, 

has identified a number of technical 

issues specific to the equipment, 

including: 18

1. Reliability: The performance of the 

new engine and aftertreatment 

components is untested at high altitudes 

in winter conditions. Engine operating 

temperatures may be elevated at higher 

altitudes with potential impacts on 

engine performance and reliability; 

2. Cold Starting: Diesel cold starting is 

aggravated at high altitudes due to lower 

oxygen availability. No-start situations 

for high-altitude equipment may be life 

threatening; 

3. Engine power: The degree to which 

a Tier 4 engine’s power is reduced, i.e., 

derated, with increasing altitude is 

unproven. Excessive derate would 

hinder the vehicles’ snow grooming 

function and performance; 

4. Particulate filter regeneration: 

These machines operate for long periods 

traveling downhill with little engine 

load. Regeneration must be validated; 

5. Functioning in extreme conditions: 

Snow groomers must reliably push and 

grind snow and ice in extreme 

conditions, including while moving up 

and down steep grades; and 

6. Weight: The added weight of Tier 

4 aftertreatment and cooling 

components will directly affect ground 

pressure, which can hamper a snow 

groomer’s essential function. 

In identifying these issues, the 

manufacturer stated that it expects two, 

possibly three, winters of prototype 

testing are needed to work through these 

issues and believes that flexibility in the 

use of exemptions provided by the Tier 

4 transition program is key to enabling 

this. We have evaluated the technical 

issues, and have concluded there are 

likely to be some unique challenges in 

implementing Tier 4 for high-altitude 

equipment of this type. 

In response, to provide modest but 

meaningful additional flexibility, we are 

removing the single engine family 

restriction for the use of the small 

volume provision allowing 700 

exempted units over seven years. This 

additional flexibility would only apply 

for manufacturers of specialized highaltitude equipment (designed to 

commonly operate above 9,000 feet), 

and only in the first two model years of 

Tier 4 standards. Afterward, the single 

engine family restriction would apply. 

In no case would the 700 unit maximum 

over seven years be exceeded. 

We do not expect that this change will 

result in a significant negative impact 

on any engine or equipment 

manufacturers. Engine manufacturers 

are already expecting to produce some 

Tier 4 engines for the transition 

program, and the number of additional 

exempted engines will be relatively 

small. Equipment manufacturers can 

either take advantage of this change, or 

are already able to exempt the same 

number of affected machines for several 

years under the existing transition 

program provisions. 

We also believe the impact of this 

modification on Tier 4 environmental 

benefits will be negligible, given that: 

(1) It only applies to the small volume 

portion of the transition program, (2) the 

total U.S. annual sales of specialized 

high-altitude equipment is, at most, a 

few hundred, (3) much of this 

equipment operates for only a part of 

the year, (4) the modification only 

applies in the first two Tier 4 model 

years, and does not increase the overall 

exemption limit of 700 over seven years. 

J. Revision of 40 CFR 1054.101 To 

Clarify Prohibitions Related to 

Handheld Small SI Engines Installed in 

Nonhandheld Equipment 

The existing regulations related to 

emission standards for nonroad sparkignition engines below 19 kW 

specifically prohibit the sale of 

nonhandheld equipment equipped with 

handheld engines. The regulations in 

§ 1054.101 state that handheld engines 

may not be installed in nonhandheld 

equipment, but the regulatory text does 

not state that this is prohibited under 

§ 1068.101 or identify which penalty 

provisions apply. In this rule we are 

adding a statement to § 1054.101(e) to 

describe how this action violates the 

prohibited acts identified in § 1068.101, 

consistent with the regulations under 40 

CFR part 90. 

K. Revision of 40 CFR 1042 Appendix II 

To Correct Time Weighting at Mode for 

Engines Certifying to the E2 RMC Cycle 

The existing regulations contain an 

error in the time at mode for each 

steady-state point when certifying an 

engine to the E2 ramped modal cycle 

(RMC). When the E2 RMC cycle was 

generated, the times at mode were not 

correct based on the weighting of the 

discrete-mode cycle. In this rule we are 

correcting the time at mode for all four 

steady-state portions of the E2 RMC 

cycle to correspond with the mode 

weighting for the discrete-mode test. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under the EO. EPA 

is taking direct final action on several 

revisions to EPA’s mobile source 

emission programs standards and test 

procedures. This direct final rule merely 

contains several minor and 

noncontroversial amendments to EPA’s 

mobile source emission programs as 

described in the Summary and Section 

IV. Details of the Rule. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose a new 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). It merely 

contains several minor and 

noncontroversial technical amendments 

to EPA’s mobile source emission 

programs as described in the Summary 

and Section IV. Details of the Rule. 

Therefore, there are no new paperwork 

requirements associated with this rule. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this final rule on small entities, a 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68455 

business that meet the definition for 

business based on SBA size standards at 

13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and 

(3) a small organization that is any notfor-profit enterprise which is 

independently owned and operated and 

is not dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s final rule on small 

entities, EPA has concluded that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This final rule 

will not impose any new requirements 

on small entities. 

EPA has determined that it is not 

necessary to prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis in connection with 

this direct final rule. It merely contains 

several minor and noncontroversial 

technical amendments to EPA’s mobile 

source emission programs as described 

in the Summary and Section IV. Details 

of the Rule. We have, therefore, 

concluded that today’s final rule will 

not affect the regulatory burden for 

small entities and will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on state, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘federal mandates’’ that may result 

in expenditures to state, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or to the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. Before promulgating an 

EPA rule for which a written statement 

is needed, Section 205 of the UMRA 

generally requires EPA to identify and 

consider a reasonable number of 

regulatory alternatives and adopt the 

least costly, most cost-effective, or least 

burdensome alternative that achieves 

the objectives of the rule. The 

provisions of Section 205 do not apply 

when they are inconsistent with 

applicable law. Moreover, Section 205 

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other 

than the least costly, most cost-effective, 

or least burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation of why such an 

alternative was adopted. 

Before EPA establishes any regulatory 

requirements that may significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, 

including tribal governments, it must 

have developed under Section 203 of 

the UMRA a small government agency 

plan. The plan must provide for 

notifying potentially affected small 

governments, enabling officials of 

affected small governments to have 

meaningful and timely input in the 

development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

This rule contains no federal 

mandates for state, local, or tribal 

governments as defined by the 

provisions of Title II of the UMRA. The 

rule imposes no enforceable duties on 

any of these governmental entities. 

Nothing in the rule would significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

EPA has determined that this rule 

contains no federal mandates that may 

result in expenditures of more than 

$100 million to the private sector in any 

single year. It merely contains several 

minor and noncontroversial technical 

amendments to EPA’s mobile source 

emission programs as described in the 

Summary and Section IV. Details of the 

Rule. The requirements of UMRA, 

therefore, do not apply to this action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ are defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

Under Section 6 of Executive Order 

13132, EPA may not issue a regulation 

that has federalism implications, that 

imposes substantial direct compliance 

costs, and that is not required by statute, 

unless the Federal government provides 

the funds necessary to pay the direct 

compliance costs incurred by State and 

local governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the regulation. 

EPA also may not issue a regulation that 

has federalism implications and that 

preempts State law, unless the Agency 

consults with State and local officials 

early in the process of developing the 

regulation. 

Section 4 of the Executive Order 

contains additional requirements for 

rules that preempt State or local law, 

even if those rules do not have 

federalism implications (i.e., the rules 

will not have substantial direct effects 

on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the states, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government). Those 

requirements include providing all 

affected State and local officials notice 

and an opportunity for appropriate 

participation in the development of the 

regulation. If the preemption is not 

based on express or implied statutory 

authority, EPA also must consult, to the 

extent practicable, with appropriate 

State and local officials regarding the 

conflict between State law and 

Federally protected interests within the 

agency’s area of regulatory 

responsibility. 

This rule does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This direct final 

rule merely contains several minor and 

noncontroversial technical amendments 

to EPA’s mobile source emission 

programs as described in the Summary 

and Section IV. Details of the Rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 

22951, November 6, 2000), requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal 

implications’’ is defined in the 

Executive Order to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes.’’ 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68456 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

This rule does not uniquely affect the 

communities of Indian Tribal 

Governments. Further, no circumstances 

specific to such communities exist that 

would cause an impact on these 

communities beyond those discussed in 

the other sections of this rule. This 

direct final rule merely contains several 

minor and noncontroversial technical 

amendments to EPA’s mobile source 

emission programs as described in the 

Summary and Section IV. Details of the 

Rule. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 

not apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that 

(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

Section 5–501 of the Order directs the 

Agency to evaluate the environmental 

health or safety effects of the planned 

rule on children, and explain why the 

planned regulation is preferable to other 

potentially effective and reasonably 

feasible alternatives considered by the 

Agency. 

This rule is not subject to the 

Executive Order because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

EO 12866, and because the Agency does 

not have reason to believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. This 

direct final rule merely contains several 

minor and noncontroversial technical 

amendments to EPA’s mobile source 

emission programs as described in the 

Summary and Section IV. Details of the 

Rule. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution or use of energy. 

This direct final rule merely contains 

several and noncontroversial minor 

technical amendments to EPA’s mobile 

source emission programs as described 

in the Summary and Section IV. Details 

of the Rule. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless doing so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (such as materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies. NTTAA 

directs EPA to provide Congress, 

through OMB, explanations when the 

Agency decides not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus 

standards. 

This direct final rule does not involve 

technical standards. It merely contains 

several minor and noncontroversial 

technical amendments to EPA’s mobile 

source emission programs as described 

in the Summary and Section IV. Details 

of the Rule. Thus, we have determined 

that the requirements of the NTTAA do 

not apply. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this rule will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations because it does not affect 

the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment. This 

direct final rule merely contains several 

minor and noncontroversial technical 

amendments to EPA’s mobile source 

emission programs as described in the 

Summary and Section IV. Details of the 

Rule. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 

5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to Congress and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. We will submit a report 

containing this rule and other required 

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States before publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This direct 

final rule is effective on January 7, 2011. 

L. Statutory Authority 

The statutory authority for this action 

comes from 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q and 

33 U.S.C. 1901–1915. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 86 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

40 CFR Part 1033 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Incorporation by reference, Labeling, 

Penalties, Railroads, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

40 CFR Part 1039 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Confidential 

business information, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Labeling, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Warranties. 

40 CFR Part 1042 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Confidential 

business information, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Labeling, 

Penalties, Vessels, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Warranties. 

40 CFR Part 1045 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Confidential 

business information, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Labeling, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Warranties. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68457 

40 CFR Part 1054 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Confidential 

business information, Imports, Labeling, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Warranties. 

40 CFR Part 1065 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Research. 

Dated: October 29, 2010. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 86—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY 

VEHICLES AND ENGINES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 86 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart N—[Amended] 

■ 2. Section 86.1370–2007 is amended 

revising paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 86.1370–2007 Not-To-Exceed test 

procedures. 

* * * * * 

(d) Not-to-exceed control area limits. 

(1) When operated within the Not-ToExceed Control Area defined in 

paragraph (b) of this section, diesel 

engine emissions shall not exceed the 

applicable Not-To-Exceed Limits 

specified in § 86.007–11(a)(4) when 

averaged over any time period greater 

than or equal to 30 seconds, except 

where a longer minimum averaging 

period is required by paragraph (d)(2) of 

this section. 

(2) For engines equipped with 

emission controls that include discrete 

regeneration events and that send a 

recordable electronic signal indicating 

the start and end of the regeneration 

event, determine the minimum 

averaging period for each NTE event 

that includes regeneration active 

operation as described in paragraph 

(d)(2)(i) of this section. This minimum 

averaging period is used to determine 

whether the individual NTE event is a 

valid NTE event. For engines equipped 

with emission controls that include 

multiple discrete regeneration events 

(e.g., de-soot, de-NOX, de-SOX, etc.) and 

associated electronic signals, if an NTE 

event includes regeneration active 

operation on multiple regeneration 

signals, determine the minimum 

averaging period for each regeneration 

signal according to paragraph (d)(2)(i) of 

this section and use the longest period. 

This minimum averaging period applies 

if it is longer than 30 seconds. The 

electronic signal from the engine’s ECU 

must indicate non-regeneration and 

regeneration operation. Regeneration 

operation may be further divided into 

regeneration pending and regeneration 

active operation. These are referred to as 

states 0, 1, and 2 for non-regeneration, 

regeneration pending, and regeneration 

active operation, respectively. No 

further subdivision of these states are 

allowed for use in this paragraph (d)(2). 

Where the electronic signal does not 

differentiate between regeneration 

pending and active operation, take the 

regeneration signal to mean regeneration 

active operation (state 2). A complete 

non-regeneration event is a time period 

that occurs during the course of the 

shift-day that is bracketed by 

regeneration operation, which is either 

regeneration active operation (state 2) or 

regeneration pending operation (state 1). 

A complete regeneration event is a time 

period that occurs during the course of 

the shift-day that is bracketed before 

and after by non-regeneration operation 

(state 0); a complete regeneration event 

includes any time in the event where 

regeneration is pending (state 1). The 

following figure provides an example of 

regeneration events during a shift-day: 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68458 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULESER08NO10.021</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68459 

(i) Calculate the minimum averaging 

period, tNTE,min, for each candidate NTE 

event as follows: 

t

t

RF

N

NTE,min

2,NTE,i

= =

∑

i 1

Where: 

i = an indexing variable that represents 

periods of time within the candidate 

NTE event where the electronic signal 

indicates regeneration active operation 

(state 2). 

N = the number of periods of time within the 

candidate NTE event where the 

electronic signal indicates regeneration 

active operation (state 2). 

t2,NTE,i = the duration of the i-th time period 

within the candidate NTE event where 

the electronic signal indicates 

regeneration active operation (state 2), in 

seconds. 

RF = regeneration fraction over the course of 

the shift-day, as determined in paragraph 

(d)(2)(ii) of this section. 

(ii) Calculate the regeneration 

fraction, RF, over the course of a shiftday as follows: 

RF

t

N

t

N

t

N

N N

N N =

+

∑∑

∑ ∑

=

2,i,j

j=1

0,k

k=1

0

12,i

i=1

12

2,i

0 12

i 1

12

12

Where: 

i = an indexing variable that represents 

complete regeneration events within the 

shift-day. 

j = an indexing variable that represents 

periods of time within the i-th complete 

regeneration event where the electronic 

signal indicates regeneration active 

operation (state 2). 

k = an indexing variable that represents 

complete non-regeneration events within 

the shift-day. 

N0 = the number of complete nonregeneration events within the shift-day. 

N12 = the number of complete regeneration 

events within the shift-day. 

N2,i = the number of periods of within the i-th 

complete regeneration event where the 

electronic signal indicates regeneration 

active operation (state 2). 

t0,k = the duration of the k-th complete nonregeneration event within the shift-day, 

in seconds. 

t12,i = the duration of the i-th complete 

regeneration event within the shift-day, 

in seconds, including time in those 

events where regeneration is pending 

(state 1). 

t2,i,j = the duration of the j-th time period 

within the i-th complete regeneration 

event where the electronic signal 

indicates regeneration active operation 

(state 2), in seconds. Note that this 

excludes time in each complete 

regeneration event where regeneration is 

pending (state 1). 

(iii) If either N0 or N12 are zero, then RF 

cannot be calculated and all candidate NTE 

events that include regeneration active 

operation are void. 

(iv) Compare the minimum averaging 

period for the candidate NTE event, tNTE,min, 

to the actual NTE duration, tNTE. If tNTE < 

tNTE,min the candidate NTE event is void. If 

tNTE ≥ tNTE,min the candidate NTE event is 

valid. It can also therefore be included in the 

overall determination of vehicle-pass ratio 

according to § 86.1912. 

(v) You may choose to not void emission 

results for a candidate NTE event even 

though we allow you to void the NTE event 

under paragraph (d)(2)(iii) or (iv) of this 

section. If you choose this option, you must 

include the results for all regulated 

pollutants that were measured and validated 

during the NTE event for a given NTE 

monitoring system. 

(vi)(A) The following is an example of 

calculating the minimum averaging period, 

tNTE,min, for a candidate NTE event. See 

Figure 1 of this section for an illustration of 

the terms to calculate the regeneration 

fraction, RF. For this example there are three 

complete non-regeneration events and two 

complete regeneration events in the shift-day. 

N0 = 3 

N12 = 2 

(B) The duration of the three complete nonregeneration events within the shift-day are: 

t0,1 = 5424 s 

t0,2 = 6676 s 

t0,3 = 3079 s 

(C) The sums of all the regeneration active 

periods in the two complete regeneration 

events are: 

t t

t t

j

j

N

j

j

N

2,1,

=1

2,1

2,2,

=1

2,2

2,1

2,2

 s

 s

∑

∑

= =

= =

2769

2639

(D) The duration of each of the two 

complete regeneration events within the 

shift-day are: 

t12,1 = 8440 s 

t12,2 = 3920 s 

(E) The RF for this shift-day is: 

RF =

+

+ +

+

+ =

2769 2639

2

5424 6676 3079

3

8440 3920

2

0 2406.

(F) For this example, consider a candidate 

NTE event where there are two periods of 

regeneration active operation (state 2). 

t2,NTE,1 = 37 s 

t2,NTE,2 = 40 s 

(G) The minimum averaging period for this 

candidate NTE event is: 

tNTE,min = 37 40 +

0 2406.

tNTE,min = 320.0 s 

* * * * * 

Subpart T—[Amended] 

■ 3. Section 86.1901 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 86.1901 What testing requirements apply 

to my engines that have gone into service? 

(a) If you manufacture diesel heavyduty engines above 8,500 lbs. GVWR 

that are subject to engine-based exhaust 

emission standards under this part, you 

must test them as described in this 

subpart. You must measure all 

emissions listed in § 86.1910(d) other 

than PM beginning in calendar year 

2005 and you must measure PM 

emissions beginning in calendar year 

2007. See § 86.1930 for special 

provisions that may apply to 

manufacturers in the early years of this 

program. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 86.1905 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 86.1905 How does this program work? 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) 2011 for PM testing. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 86.1910 is amended by 

revising paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 86.1910 How must I prepare and test my 

in-use engines? 

* * * * * 

(g) Once an engine is set up for 

testing, test the engine for at least one 

shift-day. To complete a shift-day’s 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULESER08NO10.023</MATH> ER08NO10.024</MATH> ER08NO10.025</MATH> ER08NO10.026</MATH> ER08NO10.027</MATH>
68460 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

worth of testing, start sampling at the 

beginning of a shift and continue 

sampling for the whole shift, subject to 

the calibration requirements of the 

portable emissions measurement 

systems. A shift-day is the period of a 

normal workday for an individual 

employee. If the first shift-day of testing 

does not involve at least 3 hours of 

accumulated non-idle operation, repeat 

the testing for a second shift-day and 

report the results from both days of 

testing. If the second shift-day of testing 

also does not result in at least 3 hours 

of accumulated non-idle operation, you 

may choose whether or not to continue 

testing with that vehicle. If after two 

shift-days you discontinue testing before 

accumulating 3 hours of non-idle 

operation on either day, evaluate the 

valid NTE samples from both days of 

testing as described in § 86.1912 and 

include the data in the reporting and 

record keeping requirements specified 

in §§ 86.1920 and 1925. Count the 

engine toward meeting your testing 

requirements under this subpart and use 

the data for deciding whether additional 

engines must be tested under the 

applicable Phase 1 or Phase 2 test plan. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Section 86.1912 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a)(4)(xiii) and 

(a)(5)(iv) to read as follows: 

§ 86.1912 How do I determine whether an 

engine meets the vehicle-pass criteria? 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(xiii) PM: 0.006 grams per brake 

horsepower-hour. 

(5) * * * 

(iv) PM: 0.006 grams per brake 

horsepower-hour. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 86.1920 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(4)(xii)(E) to read 

as follows: 

§ 86.1920 What in-use testing information 

must I report to EPA? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(xii) * * * 

(E) Emissions of THC, NMHC, CO, 

CO2 or O2, and NOX (as appropriate). 

Report results for PM if it was measured 

in a manner that provides one-hertz test 

data. Report results for CH4 if it was 

measured and used to determine 

NMHC. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Section 86.1930 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By revising the section heading. 

■ b. By redesignating paragraph (b) as 

paragraph (c). 

■ c. By revising paragraph (a). 

■ d. By adding a new paragraph (b). 

■ e. By revising the newly redesignated 

paragraph (c)(1)(iii). 

§ 86.1930 What special provisions apply 

from 2005 through 2010? 

(a) We may direct you to test engines 

under this subpart for emissions other 

than PM in 2005 and 2006, and for PM 

emissions in 2007 through 2010. In 

those interim periods, all the provisions 

of this subpart apply, except as 

specified in this paragraph (a). You may 

apply the exceptions identified in this 

section for both years of the applicable 

years for emissions other than PM. You 

may omit testing and reporting in two 

of the four applicable years for PM 

emissions. 

(1) We will select engine families for 

testing of emissions other than PM only 

when the manufacturer’s Statement of 

Compliance specifically describes the 

family as being designed to comply with 

NTE requirements. 

(2) We will not direct you to do the 

Phase 2 testing in § 86.1915(c), 

regardless of measured emission levels. 

(3) For purposes of calculating the 

NTE thresholds under § 86.1912(a) for 

any 2006 and earlier model year engine 

that is not subject to the emission 

standards in § 86.007–11, determine the 

applicable NTE standards as follows: 

(i) If any numerical NTE requirements 

specified in the terms of any consent 

decree apply to the engine family, use 

those values as the NTE standards for 

testing under this subpart. 

(ii) If a numerical NTE requirement is 

not specified in a consent decree for the 

engine family, the NTE standards are 

1.25 times the applicable FELs or the 

applicable emission standards specified 

in § 86.004–11(a)(1) or § 86.098–11(a)(1). 

(4) In the report required in 

§ 86.1920(b), you must submit the 

deficiencies and limited testing region 

reports (see §§ 86.007–11(a)(4)(iv) and 

86.1370–2007(b)(6) and (7)) for 2006 

and earlier model year engines tested 

under this section. 

(5) You must notify the Designated 

Compliance Officer by September 30, 

2010 whether or not you will submit 

test reports for PM emissions for each of 

the four years from 2007 through 2010. 

See 40 CFR 1068.30 for the contact 

information for the Designated 

Compliance Officer. 

(6) You must submit reports by the 

deadlines specified in paragraph (b) of 

this section. 

(b) The following deadlines apply for 

reporting test results under this subpart: 

(1) You must complete all the 

required testing and reporting under 

this subpart related to emissions other 

than PM by the following dates: 

(i) November 30, 2007 for engine 

families that we designate for testing in 

2005. 

(ii) November 30, 2008 for engine 

families that we designate for testing in 

2006. 

(iii) November 30, 2009 for engine 

families that we designate for testing in 

2007. 

(iv) March 31, 2010 for engine 

families we designate for testing in 

2008. 

(v) April 30, 2011 for engine families 

we designate for testing in 2009. 

(2) You must complete all the 

required testing and reporting under 

this subpart related to PM emissions by 

the following dates: 

(i) May 31, 2010 for engine families 

that we designate for testing in 2007. 

(ii) September 30, 2010 for engine 

families we designate for testing in 

2008. 

(iii) April 30, 2011 for engine families 

we designate for testing in 2009. 

(iv) November 30, 2011 for engine 

families we designate for testing in 

2009. 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) April 30, 2011 for engine families 

that we designate for non-PM testing in 

2009. 

* * * * * 

§ 86.1935—[Removed] 

■ 9. Section 86.1935 is removed. 

PART 1033—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM LOCOMOTIVES 

■ 10. The authority citation for part 

1033 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 11. Section 1033.150 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1033.150 Interim provisions. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) All of the engines on the switch 

locomotive must be covered by a 

certificate of conformity issued under 40 

CFR part 89 or 1039 for model year 2008 

or later (or earlier model years if the 

same standards applied as in 2008). 

Engines over 750 hp certified to the Tier 

4 standards for non-generator set 

engines are not eligible for this 

allowance after 2014. 

* * * * * 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68461 

PART 1039—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM NEW AND IN-USE NONROAD 

COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES 

■ 12. The authority citation for part 

1039 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 13. Section 1039.102 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 1039.102 What exhaust emission 

standards and phase-in allowances apply 

for my engines in model year 2014 and 

earlier? 

* * * * * 

(e) Alternate NOX standards. For 

engines in 56–560 kW power categories 

during the phase-in of Tier 4 standards, 

you may certify engine families to the 

alternate NOX or NOX + NMHC 

standards in this paragraph (e) instead 

of the phase-in and phase-out NOX and 

NOX + NMHC standards described in 

Tables 4 through 6 of this section. 

Engines certified to an alternate NOX

standard under this section must be 

certified to an NMHC standard of 0.19 

g/kW-hr. Do not include engine families 

certified under this paragraph (e) in 

determining whether you comply with 

the percentage phase-in requirements of 

paragraphs (c) and (d)(2) of this section. 

Except for the provisions for alternate 

FEL caps in § 1039.104(g), the NOX and 

NOX + NMHC standards and FEL caps 

under this paragraph (e) are as follows: 

(1) For engines in the 56–130 kW 

power category, apply the following 

alternate NOX standards and FEL caps: 

(i) If you use the provisions of 

paragraph (d)(1) of this section, your 

alternate NOX standard for any engine 

family in the 56–130 kW power category 

is 2.3 g/kW-hr for model years 2012 and 

2013. Engines certified to this standard 

may not exceed a NOX FEL cap of 3.0 

g/kW-hr. 

(ii) If you use the provisions of 

paragraph (d)(2) of this section, your 

alternate NOX standard for any engine 

family in the 56–130 kW power category 

is 3.4 g/kW-hr for model years 2012 

through 2014. Engines below 75 kW 

certified to this standard may not 

exceed a NOX FEL cap of 4.4 g/kW-hr; 

engines at or above 75 kW certified to 

this standard may not exceed a NOX

FEL cap of 3.8 g/kW-hr. 

(iii) If you do not use the provisions 

of paragraph (d) of this section, you may 

apply the alternate NOX standard and 

the appropriate FEL cap from either 

paragraph (e)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. 

(2) For engines in the 130–560 kW 

power category, the alternate NOX

standard is 2.0 g/kW-hr for model years 

2011 through 2013. Engines certified to 

this standard may not exceed a NOX

FEL cap of 2.7 g/kW-hr. 

(3) You use NOX + NMHC emission 

credits to certify an engine family to the 

alternate NOX + NMHC standards in this 

paragraph (e)(3) instead of the otherwise 

applicable alternate NOX and NMHC 

standards. Calculate the alternate NOX + 

NMHC standard by adding 0.1 g/kW-hr 

to the numerical value of the applicable 

alternate NOX standard of paragraph 

(e)(1) or (2) of this section. Engines 

certified to the NOX + NMHC standards 

of this paragraph (e)(3) may not generate 

emission credits. The FEL caps for 

engine families certified under this 

paragraph (e)(3) are the previously 

applicable NOX + NMHC standards of 

40 CFR 89.112 (generally the Tier 3 

standards). 

* * * * * 

■ 14. Section 1039.104 is amended by 

adding paragraph (g)(5) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1039.104 Are there interim provisions 

that apply only for a limited time? 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(5) You may certify engines under this 

paragraph (g) without regard to whether 

or not the engine family’s FEL is at or 

below the otherwise applicable FEL cap. 

For example, a 200 kW engine certified 

to the NOX + NMHC standard of 

§ 1039.102(e)(3) with an FEL equal to 

the FEL cap of 2.8 g/kW-hr may be 

certified under this paragraph (g) and 

count toward the sales limit specified in 

paragraph (g)(1) of this section. 

* * * * * 

Subpart G—[Amended] 

■ 15. Section 1039.625 is amended by 

adding paragraph (b)(2)(iii) read as 

follows: 

§ 1039.625 What requirements apply under 

the program for equipment-manufacturer 

flexibility? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iii) In each power category at or 

above 56 kW, you may apply the 

provisions of paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section in the first two model years for 

which Tier 4 standards apply, regardless 

of the number of engine families you 

use in your equipment, provided you 

exceed the single engine family 

restriction of that paragraph primarily 

due to production of equipment 

intended specifically to travel on snow 

and to commonly operate at more than 

9,000 feet above sea level. After the first 

two Tier 4 model years in a power 

category, you may continue to apply the 

provisions of paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section, subject to the single engine 

family restriction. 

* * * * * 

PART 1042—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM NEW AND IN-USE MARINE 

COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES 

AND VESSELS 

■ 16. The authority citation for part 

1042 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart J—[Amended] 

■ 17. Appendix II to part 1042 is 

amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) to 

read as follows: 

Appendix II to Part 1042—Steady-State 

Duty Cycles 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) The following duty cycle applies for 

ramped-modal testing: 

RMC mode Time in mode 

(seconds) Engine speed Torque (percent)1 2

1a Steady-state ......................................................... 229 Engine Governed ..................................................... 100. 

1b Transition ............................................................. 20 Engine Governed ..................................................... Linear transition. 

2a Steady-state ......................................................... 166 Engine Governed ..................................................... 25. 

2b Transition ............................................................. 20 Engine Governed ..................................................... Linear transition. 

3a Steady-state ......................................................... 570 Engine Governed ..................................................... 75. 

3b Transition ............................................................. 20 Engine Governed ..................................................... Linear transition. 

4a Steady-state ......................................................... 175 Engine Governed ..................................................... 50. 

1The percent torque is relative to the maximum test torque as defined in 40 CFR part 1065. 

2Advance from one mode to the next within a 20-second transition phase. During the transition phase, command a linear progression from the 

torque setting of the current mode to the torque setting of the next mode. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68462 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 1045—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM SPARK-IGNITION PROPULSION 

MARINE ENGINES AND VESSELS 

■ 18. The authority citation for part 

1045 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 19. Section 1045.145 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) introductory text 

to read as follows: 

§ 1045.145 Are there interim provisions 

that apply only for a limited time? 

* * * * * 

(a) Small-volume engine 

manufacturers. Special provisions apply 

to you for sterndrive/inboard engines if 

you are a small-volume engine 

manufacturer subject to the 

requirements of this part. You may 

delay complying with emission 

standards and other requirements that 

would otherwise apply until the 2011 

model year for conventional sterndrive/ 

inboard engines and until the 2013 

model year for high-performance 

engines. For an engine to be exempt 

under this paragraph (a), you must 

contact us before January 1, 2011 or 

before you introduce such engines into 

U.S. commerce, whichever comes first. 

Add a permanent label to a readily 

visible part of each engine exempted 

under this paragraph (a). This label 

must include at least the following 

items: 

* * * * * 

PART 1054—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM NEW, SMALL NONROAD 

SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES AND 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 20. The authority citation for part 

1054 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 21. Section 1054.101 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 1054.101 What emission standards and 

requirements must my engines meet? 

* * * * * 

(e) Relationship between handheld 

and nonhandheld engines. Any engines 

certified to the nonhandheld emission 

standards in § 1054.105 may be used in 

either handheld or nonhandheld 

equipment. Engines above 80 cc 

certified to the handheld emission 

standards in § 1054.103 may not be used 

in nonhandheld equipment. 40 CFR 

1068.101 prohibits the introduction into 

commerce or importation of such 

nonhandheld equipment except as 

specified in this paragraph (e). For 

purposes of the requirements of this 

part, engines at or below 80 cc are 

considered handheld engines, but may 

be installed in either handheld or 

nonhandheld equipment. These engines 

are subject to handheld exhaust 

emission standards; the equipment in 

which they are installed are subject to 

handheld evaporative emission 

standards starting with the model years 

specified in this part 1054. See 

§ 1054.701(c) for special provisions 

related to emission credits for engine 

families with displacement at or below 

80 cc where those engines are installed 

in nonhandheld equipment. 

* * * * * 

PART 1065—ENGINE-TESTING 

PROCEDURES 

■ 22. The authority citation for part 

1065 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 23. Section 1065.140 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (d) introductory text 

and (d)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.140 Dilution for gaseous and PM 

constituents. 

* * * * * 

(d) Partial-flow dilution (PFD). You 

may dilute a partial flow of raw or 

previously diluted exhaust before 

measuring emissions. Section 1065.240 

describes PFD-related flow 

measurement instruments. PFD may 

consist of constant or varying dilution 

ratios as described in paragraphs (d)(2) 

and (3) of this section. An example of 

a constant dilution ratio PFD is a 

‘‘secondary dilution PM’’ measurement 

system. 

(1) Applicability. (i) You may use PFD 

to extract a proportional raw exhaust 

sample for any batch or continuous PM 

emission sampling over any transient 

duty cycle, any steady-state duty cycle, 

or any ramped-modal cycle. 

(ii) You may use PFD to extract a 

proportional raw exhaust sample for any 

batch or continuous gaseous emission 

sampling over any transient duty cycle, 

any steady-state duty cycle, or any 

ramped-modal cycle. 

(iii) You may use PFD to extract a 

proportional raw exhaust sample for any 

batch or continuous field-testing. 

(iv) You may use PFD to extract a 

proportional diluted exhaust sample 

from a CVS for any batch or continuous 

emission sampling. 

(v) You may use PFD to extract a 

constant raw or diluted exhaust sample 

for any continuous emission sampling. 

(vi) You may use PFD to extract a 

constant raw or diluted exhaust sample 

for any steady-state emission sampling. 

* * * * * 

■ 24. Section 1065.260 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.260 Flame-ionization detector. 

* * * * * 

(e) Methane. FID analyzers measure 

total hydrocarbons (THC). To determine 

nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC), 

quantify methane, CH4, either with a 

nonmethane cutter and a FID analyzer 

as described in § 1065.265, or with a gas 

chromatograph as described in 

§ 1065.267. Instead of measuring 

methane, you may assume that 2% of 

measured total hydrocarbon is methane, 

as described in § 1065.650(c)(1)(vi). For 

a FID analyzer used to determine 

NMHC, determine its response factor to 

methane, RFCH4, as described in 

§ 1065.360. Note that NMHC-related 

calculations are described in § 1065.660. 

■ 25. Section 1065.290 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.290 PM gravimetric balance. 

* * * * * 

(b) Component requirements. We 

recommend that you use a balance that 

meets the specifications in Table 1 of 

§ 1065.205. Note that your balancebased system must meet the linearity 

verification in § 1065.307. If the balance 

uses internal calibration weights for 

routine spanning and the weights do not 

meet the specifications in § 1065.790, 

the weights must be verified 

independently with external calibration 

weights meeting the requirements of 

§ 1065.790. While you may also use an 

inertial balance to measure PM, as 

described in § 1065.295, use a reference 

procedure based on a gravimetric 

balance for comparison with any 

proposed alternate measurement 

procedure under § 1065.10. 

* * * * * 

■ 26. Section 1065.295 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1065.295 PM inertial balance for fieldtesting analysis. 

* * * * * 

(c) Loss correction. You may use PM 

loss corrections to account for PM loss 

in the inertial balance, including the 

sample handling system. 

(d) Deposition. You may use 

electrostatic deposition to collect PM as 

long as its collection efficiency is at 

least 95%. 

■ 27. Section 1065.307 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d)(9) to read as 

follows: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68463 

§ 1065.307 Linearity verification. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(9) Mass. For linearity verification for 

gravimetric PM balances, use external 

calibration weights that that meet the 

requirements in § 1065.790. 

* * * * * 

■ 28. Section 1065.340 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e)(8) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1065.340 Diluted exhaust flow (CVS) 

calibration. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(8) Repeat the steps in paragraphs 

(e)(6) and (7) of this section to record 

data at a minimum of six restrictor 

positions ranging from the wide open 

restrictor position to the minimum 

expected pressure at the PDP inlet. 

* * * * * 

■ 29. Section 1065.390 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1065.390 PM balance verifications and 

weighing process verification. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) You may use an automated 

procedure to verify balance 

performance. For example many 

balances have internal calibration 

weights that are used automatically to 

verify balance performance. 

* * * * * 

■ 30. Section 1065.525 is amended by 

revising the section heading and 

paragraphs (c)(3) and (d) and removing 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.525 Engine starting, restarting, and 

shutdown. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) Void the entire test if the engine 

stalls at any time after emission 

sampling begins, except as described in 

§ 1065.526. If you do not void the entire 

test, you must void the individual test 

mode or test interval in which the 

engine stalls. 

* * * * * 

(d) Shut down the engine according to 

the manufacturer’s specifications. 

■ 31. A new § 1065.526 is added to read 

as follows: 

§ 1065.526 Repeating void modes or test 

intervals. 

(a) Test modes and test intervals can 

be voided because of instrument 

malfunctions, engine stalling, or 

emissions exceeding instrument ranges. 

This section specifies circumstances for 

which a test mode or test interval can 

be repeated without repeating the entire 

test. 

(b) This section is intended to result 

in replicate test modes and test intervals 

that are identical to what would have 

occurred if the cause of the voiding had 

not occurred. It does not allow you to 

repeat test modes or test intervals in any 

circumstances that would be 

inconsistent with good engineering 

judgment. For example, the procedures 

specified here for repeating a mode or 

interval may not apply for certain 

engines that include hybrid energy 

storage features or emission controls 

that involve physical or chemical 

storage of pollutants. This section 

applies for circumstances in which 

emission concentrations exceed the 

analyzer range only if it is due to 

operator error or analyzer malfunction. 

It does not apply for circumstances in 

which the emission concentrations 

exceed the range because they were 

higher than expected. 

(c) If one of the modes of a discretemode test is voided as provided in this 

section, you may void the results for 

that individual mode and continue the 

test as follows: 

(1) If the engine has stalled or been 

shut down, restart the engine. 

(2) Use good engineering judgment to 

restart the test sequence using the 

appropriate steps in § 1065.530(b). 

(3) Precondition the engine by 

operating it at the previous mode for 

approximately the same amount of time 

it operated at that mode for the previous 

emission measurement. 

(4) Advance to the mode at which the 

test was interrupted and continue with 

the duty cycle as specified in the 

standard-setting part. 

(d) If a transient or ramped-modal 

cycle test interval is voided as provided 

in this section, you may repeat the test 

interval as follows: 

(1) Use good engineering judgment to 

restart (as applicable) and precondition 

the engine and emission sampling 

system to the same condition as would 

apply for normal testing. This may 

require you to complete the voided test 

interval. For example, you may 

generally repeat a hot-start test of a 

heavy-duty highway engine after 

completing the voided hot-start test and 

allowing the engine to soak for 20 

minutes. 

(2) Complete the remainder of the test 

according to the provisions in this 

subpart. 

(e) Keep records from the voided test 

mode or test interval in the same 

manner as required for unvoided tests, 

and include a description of the reason 

for voiding the test mode or test 

interval. 

■ 32. Section 1065.550 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii), (b)(2), and 

(b)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.550 Gas analyzer range validation, 

drift validation, and drift correction. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) For the entire duty cycle and for 

each measured exhaust constituent, the 

difference between the uncorrected and 

corrected composite brake-specific 

emission values over the entire duty 

cycle is within ± 4% of the uncorrected 

value or the applicable emission 

standard, whichever is greater. Note that 

for purposes of drift validation using 

composite brake-specific emission 

values over the entire duty cycle, leave 

unaltered any negative emission results 

over a given test interval (i.e., do not set 

them to zero). A third calculation of 

composite brake-specific emission 

values is required for final reporting. 

This calculation uses drift-corrected 

mass (or mass rate) values from each test 

interval and sets any negative mass (or 

mass rate) values to zero before 

calculating the composite brake-specific 

emission values over the entire duty 

cycle. This requirement also applies for 

CO2, whether or not an emission 

standard applies for CO2. Where no 

emission standard applies for CO2, the 

difference must be within ± 4% of the 

uncorrected value. See paragraph (b)(4) 

of this section for exhaust constituents 

other than CO2 for which no emission 

standard applies. 

(2) For standards consisting of 

combined, individual measurements of 

exhaust constituents (such as NOX + 

NMHC or separate NO and NO2

measurements to comply with a NOX

standard), the duty cycle shall be 

validated for drift if you satisfy one of 

the following: 

(i) For each test interval of the duty 

cycle and for each individually 

measured exhaust constituent (e.g. NO, 

NO2, NOX, or NMHC), the difference 

between the uncorrected and the 

corrected brake-specific emission values 

over the test interval is within ± 4% of 

the uncorrected value; or 

(ii) For each test interval of the duty 

cycle or for the entire duty cycle the 

difference between the combined (e.g. 

NOX + NMHC) uncorrected and 

combined (e.g. NOX + NMHC) corrected 

composite brake-specific emissions 

values over each test interval of the duty 

cycle or the entire duty cycle is within 

± 4% of the uncorrected value or the 

applicable emissions standard, 

whichever is greater. 

* * * * * 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
68464 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(4) The provisions of this paragraph 

(b)(4) apply for measurement of 

pollutants other than CO2 for which no 

emission standard applies (for purposes 

of this provision, standards consisting of 

combined, individual measurements are 

considered to be standards for each 

individual pollutant). You may use 

measurements that do not meet the drift 

validation criteria specified in 

paragraph (b)(1). For example, this 

allowance may be appropriate for 

measuring and reporting very low 

concentrations of CH4 and N2O as long 

as no emission standard applies for 

these compounds. 

■ 33. Section 1065.640 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(5) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1065.640 Flow meter calibration 

calculations. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(5) The following example illustrates 

the use of the governing equations to 

calculate the discharge coefficient, Cd, of 

an SSV flow meter at one reference flow 

meter value. Note that calculating Cd for 

a CFV flow meter would be similar, 

except that Cf would be determined 

from Table 2 of this section or 

calculated iteratively using values of b 

and g as described in paragraph (c)(2) of 

this section. 

Example: 

n ̇ ref= 57.625 mol/s 

Z = 1 

Mmix = 28.7805 g/mol = 0.0287805 kg/ 

mol 

R = 8.314472 J/(mol·K) 

Tin = 298.15 K 

At = 0.01824 m2

pin = 99132.0 Pa 

g = 1.399 

b = 0.8 

Dp = 2.312 kPa 

rSSV =− = 1 2 312

99 132

0 977 .

. .

Cf =

⋅⋅ −

⎛

⎝

⎜

⎜

⎞

⎠

⎟

⎟

−⋅ −

−

2 1 399 0 977 1

1 399 1 0 8 0 977

1 399 1

1 399

4

. .

(. ) . .

.

.

− ⎛

⎝

⎜

⎜

⎞

⎠

⎟

⎟

⎡

⎣

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥

⎥

⎥

⎥

⎥

⎥

2

1 399

1

2

.

Cf = 0.274 

Cd = ⋅ ⋅ ⋅⋅

⋅ ⋅ 57 625

1 0 0287805 8 314472 298 15

0 274 0 01824 99132 0 . .. .

.. .

Cd = 0.982 

* * * * * 

■ 34. Section 1065.642 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.642 SSV, CFV, and PDP molar flow 

rate calculations. 

* * * * * 

(c) CFV molar flow rate. Some CFV 

flow meters consist of a single venturi 

and some consist of multiple venturis, 

where different combinations of 

venturis are used to meter different flow 

rates. If you use multiple venturis and 

you calibrated each venturi 

independently to determine a separate 

discharge coefficient, Cd, for each 

venturi, calculate the individual molar 

flow rates through each venturi and sum 

all their flow rates to determine n ̇ . If you 

use multiple venturis and you calibrated 

each combination of venturis, calculate 

n ̇ as using the sum of the active venturi 

throat areas as At, the square root of the 

sum of the squares of the active venturi 

throat diameters as dt, and the ratio of 

the venturi throat to inlet diameters as 

the ratio of the square root of the sum 

of the active venturi throat diameters, dt,

to the diameter of the common entrance 

to all of the venturis, D. To calculate the 

molar flow rate through one venturi or 

one combination of venturis, use its 

respective mean Cd and other constants 

you determined according to § 1065.640 

and calculate its molar flow rate n ̇

during an emission test, as follows: 

nCC A p

Z M RT =⋅⋅ ⋅⋅ ⋅⋅ d f

in

t in

mix

Eq. 1065.642-4

Example: 

Cd = 0.985 

Cf = 0.7219 

At = 0.00456 m2

pin = 98836 Pa 

Z = 1 

Mmix = 28.7805 g/mol = 0.0287805 

kg/mol 

R = 8.314472 J/(mol.

K) 

Tin = 378.15 K 

n=⋅ ⋅ ⋅

⋅ ⋅⋅ 0 985 0 7219 0 00456 98836

1 0 0287805 8 314472 378 15 . . .

.. .

n ̇ = 33.690 mol/s 

■ 35. Section 1065.660 is amended by 

revising the section heading and 

paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.660 THC, NMHC, and CH4

determination. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) For nonmethane cutters, calculate 

xNMHC using the nonmethane cutter’s 

penetration fractions (PF) of CH4 and 

C2H6 from § 1065.365, and using the HC 

contamination and dry-to-wet corrected 

THC concentration xTHC[THC–FID]cor as 

determined in paragraph (a) of this 

section. 

(i) Use the following equation for 

penetration fractions determined using 

an NMC configuration as outlined in 

§ 1065.365(d): 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULESER08NO10.028</MATH> ER08NO10.029</MATH> ER08NO10.030</MATH> ER08NO10.031</MATH> ER08NO10.032</MATH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68465 

x

RF NMHC

THC[THC-FID]cor THC[NMC-FID]cor CH4[THC-FID]

1 = − ⋅

−

x x RF

PFC2H6[NMC-FID] CH4[THC-FID] RF Eq. 1065.660-2 ⋅

Where: 

xNMHC = concentration of NMHC. 

xTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, HC 

contamination and dry-to-wet corrected, 

as measured by the THC FID during 

sampling while bypassing the NMC. 

xTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, HC 

contamination (optional) and dry-to-wet 

corrected, as measured by the NMC FID 

during sampling through the NMC. 

RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID 

to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d). 

RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = nonmethane cutter 

combined ethane response factor and 

penetration fraction, according to 

§ 1065.365(d). 

Example: 

xTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 μmol/mol 

xTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 20.5 μmol/mol 

RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.019 

RFCH4[THC–FID] = 1.05 

xNMHC = − ⋅

− ⋅

150 3 20 5 1 05

1 0 019 1 05

. ..

. .

xNMHC = 131.4 μmol/mol 

(ii) For penetration fractions 

determined using an NMC configuration 

as outlined in section § 1065.365(e), use 

the following equation: 

x

PF NMHC

THC[THC-FID]cor CH4[NMC-FID] THC[NMC-FID]cor

CH

= x PF x ⋅ −

4[NMC-FID] C2H6[NMC-FID]

Eq. 1065.660-3 − PF

Where: 

xNMHC = concentration of NMHC. 

xTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, HC 

contamination and dry-to-wet corrected, 

as measured by the THC FID during 

sampling while bypassing the NMC. 

PFCH4[NMC–FID] = nonmethane cutter CH4

penetration fraction, according to 

§ 1065.365(e). 

xTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, HC 

contamination (optional) and dry-to-wet 

corrected, as measured by the THC FID 

during sampling through the NMC. 

PFC2H6[NMC–FID] = nonmethane cutter ethane 

penetration fraction, according to 

§ 1065.365(e). 

Example: 

xTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 μmol/mol 

PFCH4[NMC–FID] = 0.990 

xTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 20.5 μmol/mol 

PFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.020 

xNMHC = ⋅ −

−

150 3 0 990 20 5

0 990 0 020

.. .

. .

xNMHC = 132.3 μmol/mol 

(iii) For penetration fractions 

determined using an NMC configuration 

as outlined in section § 1065.365(f), use 

the following equation: 

xNMHC

THC[THC-FID]cor CH4[NMC-FID] THC[NMC-FID]cor C = x PF x RF ⋅− ⋅ H4[THC-FID]

PFCH4[NMC-FID] C2H6[NMC-FID] CH4[THC-FID − ⋅ RFPF RF ]

Eq. 1065.660-4

Where: 

xNMHC = concentration of NMHC. 

xTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, HC 

contamination and dry-to-wet corrected, 

as measured by the THC FID during 

sampling while bypassing the NMC. 

PFCH4[NMC–FID] = nonmethane cutter CH4

penetration fraction, according to 

§ 1065.365(f). 

xTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, HC 

contamination (optional) and dry-to-wet 

corrected, as measured by the THC FID 

during sampling through the NMC. 

RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = nonmethane cutter CH4

combined ethane response factor and 

penetration fraction, according to 

§ 1065.365(f). 

RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID 

to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d). 

Example: 

xTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 μmol/mol 

PFCH4[NMC–FID] = 0.990 

xTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 20.5 μmol/mol 

RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.019 

RFCH4[THC–FID] = 0.980 

xNMHC = ⋅ −⋅

− ⋅

150 3 0 990 20 5 0 980

0 990 0 019 0 980

.. ..

. ..

xNMHC = 132.5 μmol/mol 

* * * * * 

■ 36. Section 1065.750 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a)(3)(xi) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1065.750 Analytical gases. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(xi) N2O, balance purified synthetic 

air and/or N2 (as applicable). 

* * * * * 

■ 37. Section 1065.905 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (c)(6), (d)(2), and 

Table 1 to read as follows: 

§ 1065.905 General provisions. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(6) What are the limits on ambient 

conditions for field testing? Note that 

the ambient condition limits in 

§ 1065.520 do not apply for field testing. 

Field testing may occur at any ambient 

temperature, pressure, and humidity 

unless otherwise specified in the 

standard-setting part. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) Use equipment specifications in 

§ 1065.101 and in the sections from 

§ 1065.140 to the end of subpart B of 

this part, with the exception of 

§ 1065.140(e)(1) and (4), 

§ 1065.170(c)(1)(vi), and § 1065.195(c). 

Section 1065.910 identifies additional 

equipment that is specific to field 

testing. 

(i) For PM samples, configure dilution 

systems as follows: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULESER08NO10.033</MATH> ER08NO10.034</MATH> ER08NO10.035</MATH> ER08NO10.036</MATH> ER08NO10.037</MATH> ER08NO10.038</MATH>
68466 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(A) Use good engineering judgment to 

control diluent (i.e., dilution air) 

temperature. If you choose to directly 

and actively control diluent 

temperature, set the temperature to 

25 °C. 

(B) Control sample temperature to a 

(32 to 62) °C tolerance, as measured 

anywhere within 20 cm upstream or 

downstream of the PM storage media 

(such as a filter or oscillating crystal), 

where the tolerance applies only during 

sampling. 

(C) Maintain filter face velocity to a (5 

to 100) cm/s tolerance for flow-through 

media. Compliance with this provision 

can be verified by engineering analysis. 

This provision does not apply for nonflow-through media. 

(ii) For inertial PM balances, there is 

no requirement to control the 

stabilization environment temperature 

or dewpoint. 

* * * * * 

TABLE 1 OF § 1065.905—SUMMARY OF TESTING REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED OUTSIDE OF THIS SUBPART J 

Subpart Applicability for field testing 1

Applicability for laboratory 

or similar testing with 

PEMS without restriction 1

Applicability for laboratory 

or similar testing with 

PEMS with 

estrictions 1

A: Applicability and general 

provisions.

Use all ........................................................................... Use all ............................... Use all. 

B: Equipment for testing ...... Use § 1065.101 and § 1065.140 through the end of 

subpart B, except § 1065.140(e)(1) and (4), 

§ 1065.170(c)(1)(vi), and § 1065.195(c). § 1065.910 

specifies equipment specific to field testing.

Use all ............................... Use all. § 1065.910 specifies equipment specific 

to laboratory testing with 

PEMS. 

C: Measurement instruments.Use all. § 1065.915 allows deviations ........................... Use all except 

§ 1065.295(c).

Use all except 

§ 1065.295(c). 

§ 1065.915 allows deviations. 

D: Calibrations and 

verifications.

Use all except § 1065.308 and § 1065.309. § 1065.920 

allows deviations, but also has additional specifications.

Use all ............................... Use all. § 1065.920 allows 

deviations, but also has 

additional specifications. 

E: Test engine selection, 

maintenance, and durability.

Do not use. Use standard-setting part .......................... Use all ............................... Use all. 

F: Running an emission test 

in the laboratory.

Use §§ 1065.590 and 1065.595 for PM § 1065.930 

and § 1065.935 to start and run a field test.

Use all ............................... Use all. 

G: Calculations and data requirements.Use all. § 1065.940 has additional calculation instructions.Use all ............................... Use all. § 1065.940 has 

additional calculation instructions. 

H: Fuels, engine fluids, analytical gases, and other 

calibration materials.

Use all ........................................................................... Use all ............................... Use all. 

I: Testing with oxygenated 

fuels.

Use all ........................................................................... Use all ............................... Use all. 

K: Definitions and reference 

materials.

Use all ........................................................................... Use all ............................... Use all. 

1 Refer to paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section for complete specifications. 

■ 38. Section 1065.915 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a), (d)(5) 

introductory text, and (d)(5)(iv), and 

adding paragraph (d)(5)(v), to read as 

follows: 

§ 1065.915 PEMS instruments. 

(a) Instrument specifications. We 

recommend that you use PEMS that 

meet the specifications of subpart C of 

this part. For unrestricted use of PEMS 

in a laboratory or similar environment, 

use a PEMS that meets the same 

specifications as each lab instrument it 

replaces. For field testing or for testing 

with PEMS in a laboratory or similar 

environment, under the provisions of 

§ 1065.905(b), the specifications in the 

following table apply instead of the 

specifications in Table 1 of § 1065.205: 

TABLE 1 OF § 1065.915—RECOMMENDED MINIMUM PEMS MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE

Measurement 

Measured 

quantity 

symbol 

Rise time, 

t10–90, and 

Fall time, 

t90–10

Recording 

update 

frequency 

Accuracy 1 Repeatability 1 Noise 1

Engine speed transducer ...... fn .................. 1 s ............... 1 Hz means 5.0% of pt. or 1.0% of max 2.0% of pt. or 

1.0% of 

max.

0.5% of max. 

Engine torque estimator, 

BSFC (This is a signal 

from an engine’s ECM).

T or BSFC ... 1 s ............... 1 Hz means 8.0% of pt. or 5% of max .. 2.0% of pt. or 

1.0% of 

max.

1.0% of max. 

General pressure transducer 

(not a part of another instrument).

p .................. 5 s ............... 1 Hz ............ 5.0% of pt. or 5.0% of max 2.0% of pt. or 

0.5% of 

max.

1.0% of max. 

Atmospheric pressure meter patmos ........... 50 s ............. 0.1 Hz .......... 250 Pa ............................... 200 Pa ......... 100 Pa. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 68467 

TABLE 1 OF § 1065.915—RECOMMENDED MINIMUM PEMS MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE—Continued 

Measurement 

Measured 

quantity symbol 

Rise time, 

t10–90, and 

Fall time, 

t90–10

Recording 

update 

frequency 

Accuracy 1 Repeatability 1 Noise 1

General temperature sensor 

(not a part of another instrument).

T .................. 5 s ............... 1 Hz ............ 1.0% of pt. K or 5 K .......... 0.5% of pt. K 

or 2 K.

0.5% of max 0.5 K. 

General dewpoint sensor ...... Tdew ............. 50 s ............. 0.1 Hz .......... 3 K ..................................... 1 K ............... 1 K. 

Exhaust flow meter ................ n ̇ .................. 1 s ............... 1 Hz means 5.0% of pt. or 3.0% of max 2.0% of pt .... 2.0% of max. 

Dilution air, inlet air, exhaust, 

and sample flow meters.

n ̇ .................. 1 s ............... 1 Hz means 2.5% of pt. or 1.5% of max 1.25% of pt. 

or 0.75% 

of max.

1.0% of max. 

Continuous gas analyzer ....... x .................. 5 s ............... 1 Hz ............ 4.0% of pt. or 4.0% of 

meas.

2.0% of pt. or 

2.0% of 

meas.

1.0% of max. 

Gravimetric PM balance ........ mPM ............. N/A .............. N/A .............. See § 1065.790 ................. 0.5 μg .......... N/A. 

Inertial PM balance ............... mPM ............. N/A .............. N/A .............. 4.0% of pt. or 4.0% of 

meas.

2.0% of pt. or 

2.0% of 

meas.

1.0% of max. 

1Accuracy, repeatability, and noise are all determined with the same collected data, as described in § 1065.305, and based on absolute values. ‘‘pt.’’ refers to the overall flow-weighted mean value expected at the standard; ‘‘max.’’ refers to the peak value expected at the standard over 

any test interval, not the maximum of the instrument’s range; ‘‘meas’’ refers to the actual flow-weighted mean measured over any test interval. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(5) ECM signals for determining 

brake-specific emissions. You may use 

any combination of ECM signals, with 

or without other measurements, to 

estimate engine speed, torque, brakespecific fuel consumption (BSFC, in 

units of mass of fuel per kW-hr), and 

fuel rate for use in brake-specific 

emission calculations. We recommend 

that the overall performance of any 

speed, torque, or BSFC estimator should 

meet the performance specifications in 

Table 1 of this section. We recommend 

using one of the following methods: 

* * * * * 

(iv) ECM fuel rate. Use the fuel rate 

signal directly from the ECM and 

chemical balance to determine the 

molar flow rate of exhaust. Use 

§ 1065.655(d) to determine the carbon 

mass fraction of fuel. You may 

alternatively develop and use your own 

combination of ECM signals to 

determine fuel mass flow rate. 

(v) Other ECM signals. You may ask 

to use other ECM signals for 

determining brake-specific emissions, 

such as ECM air flow. We must approve 

the use of such signals in advance. 

* * * * * 

■ 39. Section 1065.920 is amended by 

revising the section heading and 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 1065.920 PEMS calibrations and 

verifications. 

(a) Subsystem calibrations and 

verifications. Use all the applicable 

calibrations and verifications in subpart 

D of this part, including the linearity 

verifications in § 1065.307, to calibrate 

and verify PEMS. Note that a PEMS 

does not have to meet the systemresponse and updating-recording 

verifications of § 1065.308 and 

§ 1065.309 if it meets the overall 

verification described in paragraph (b) 

of this section. This section does not 

apply to ECM signals. 

* * * * * 

■ 40. Section 1065.925 is amended by 

revising paragraph (h) introductory text 

to read as follows: 

§ 1065.925 PEMS preparation for field 

testing. 

* * * * * 

(h) Verify the amount of 

contamination in the PEMS HC 

sampling system before the start of the 

field test as follows: 

* * * * * 

■ 41. Section 1065.940 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 1065.940 Emission calculations. 

(a) Perform emission calculations as 

described in § 1065.650 to calculate 

brake-specific emissions for each test 

interval using any applicable 

information and instructions in the 

standard-setting part. 

(b) You may use a fixed molar mass 

for the diluted exhaust mixture for field 

testing. Determine this fixed value by 

engineering analysis. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27892 Filed 11–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

49 CFR Part 39 

[Docket OST–2007–26829] 

RIN 2105–AB87 

Transportation for Individuals With 

Disabilities: Passenger Vessels 

AGENCY: Department of Transportation, 

Office of the Secretary. 

ACTION: Response to comments; stay of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: On July 6, 2010, the 

Department of Transportation issued a 

new Americans with Disabilities Act 

(ADA) final rule to ensure 

nondiscrimination on the basis of 

disability by passenger vessel operators 

(PVOs). The final rule requested 

comment on three issues: Service 

animals, mobility devices, and the 

consistency of the rule with recent 

Department of Justice ADA rules. This 

document responds to those comments 

and makes certain adjustments in 

effective dates for the final rule. 

DATES: 49 CFR 39.39 is stayed effective 

from November 8, 2010 through January 

3, 2012; the remainder of 49 CFR part 

39 is stayed effective from November 8, 

2010 through January 3, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant 

General Counsel for Regulation and 

Enforcement, Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W94–302, 

Washington, DC 20590. (202) 366–9310 

(voice); (202) 366–7687 (TDD); 

bob.ashby@dot.gov (e-mail). 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES