Appendix E 

Cargo Handling Equipment 

Yard Truck Off-Road Emission Testing 
E - i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Page

I. Summary ...........................................................................................................E-1 

II. Background .......................................................................................................E-1 

III. Emission Testing ...............................................................................................E-3 

IV. Yard Truck Test Matrix ......................................................................................E-4 

V. Results and Discussion .....................................................................................E-7 

Tables and Figures

Table E-1: ISO 8178 Recommended Continuous Gaseous Sampling Analyzers......E-3 

Table E-2: Weighting Factors for C1 Type ISO 8178 Test Cycles.............................E-4 

Table E-3: Engine Make and Size Breakdown ..........................................................E-5

Table E-4: Dominant Inventory Groupings for Baseline Selection.............................E-6 

Table E-5: Yard Truck Test Matrix.............................................................................E-6 

Table E-6: Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Yard Truck 

 Engine Testing with CARB Diesel and Emulsified Diesel.........................E-9 

Table E-7: Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Current 

 Off-road, On-road and LPG Yard Truck Engines ...................................E-10 

Table E-8: All Yard Truck Modal Data .....................................................................E-12 

Figure E-1: Cummins Model Years Breakdown..........................................................E-5

Figure E-2: Modal Emissions Factors for Baseline Yard Truck Engine Testing 

 with CARB Diesel.....................................................................................E-8 

Figure E-3: Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Yard Truck 

 Engine Testing with CARB Diesel and Emulsified Diesel.........................E-9 

Figure E-4: Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Off-road, 

 On-road and LPG Yard Truck Engines ..................................................E-10 
E - 1 

I. Summary 

The Air Resources Board (ARB), along with the Port of Los Angeles, funded a 

demonstration program to obtain information on the baseline emissions and promising 

control strategies for port and intermodal rail yard trucks. Six yard trucks were tested 

including three in-use yard trucks equipped with mechanically controlled off-road 

engines (1997, 2000, and 2001 MY), a newer (2004 MY) yard truck with an 

electronically controlled off-road engine, a newer (2004 MY) yard truck with an 

electronically controlled on-road engine, and a yard truck with an LPG engine. 

The test fuels included CARB diesel and emulsified diesel for the three mechanically 

controlled off-road engines, low-sulfur (LS) diesel for the newer electronically controlled 

off-road and on-road engines and liquid propane gas (LPG) for the LPG engine. All six 

engines were either Cummins 5.9L or 8.3L, since this make in these two engine sizes 

represent the largest share of the port and intermodal rail yard truck inventory. To 

directly compare the engine emission levels in an off-road duty cycle, all testing was 

done using a steady-state 8 mode test cycle, similar to the non-road C1 certification 

cycle. Weighted emission factors, in addition to individual modal data, are presented for 

each engine test. 

Results of the baseline testing of the three in-use mechanically controlled engines 

indicate that there can be a two fold difference in emission factors for total hydrocarbon 

(THC) and particulate matter (PM) between the engines when tested with CARB diesel. 

Within the two C8.3L models, the 1997 MY engine had lower modal emissions (as 

shown in the individual modal data) for THC, NOx and PM than the 2001 MY. 

Comparison testing using CARB diesel and emulsified diesel for the three baseline 

engines showed an overall increase in total hydrocarbon emission factors of 10 to 

33 percent for the emulsified diesel. The reductions in NOx emission factors ranged 

from 18 to 22 percent for the emulsified diesel. PM emission factor reductions ranged 

from 17 to 53 percent. 

Comparisons between the on-road certified 5.9L ISB and the off-road certified QSB 

using low-sulfur diesel indicated that the on-road ISB engine had lower emissions for 

THC, NOx and PM. Total hydrocarbons were 69 percent lower, NOx emissions were 

56 percent lower and PM was 30 percent lower for the ISB compared to the QSB. 

Emission testing on the Cummins liquid propane fueled yard truck indicated that both 

the THC emission factor and NOx emission factor were higher for the LPG engine than 

the diesel fueled on-road certified ISB engine. The PM levels were significantly lower 

for the LPG engine, compared to the ISB engine. 

II. Background 

Cargo handling equipment at ports is a significant contributor to diesel PM. The most 

common type of cargo handling equipment is a yard truck. Yard trucks are also known 

as yard goats, utility tractor rigs (UTRs), hustlers, yard hostlers, and yard tractors. Yard 
E - 2 

trucks are very similar to heavy-duty on-road truck tractors, but the majority are 

equipped with off-road engines. 

Yard trucks are designed for moving cargo containers. They are used at container ports 

and intermodal rail yards as well as distribution centers and other intermodal facilities. 

Containers are loaded onto the yard trucks by other container handling equipment, such 

as rubber-tired gantry cranes, top picks, or side picks, and they are unloaded the same 

way. Yard trucks are used to move containers around a facility (yard) for moving, 

stacking and storing purposes. 

While most yard trucks are diesel-fueled, there is limited availability of those powered by 

liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), compressed natural gas (CNG), and liquefied natural 

gas (LNG). Emulsified diesel fuel has also been used as an alternative to diesel fuel in 

support of voluntary emission reductions programs. Yard trucks have a horsepower 

(hp) range of about 150 hp to 250 hp, with most being around 175 hp to 200 hp. There 

are approximately 2,300 yard trucks at California's ports and intermodal rail yards. 

There are a number of potentially effective emission control strategies for off-road yard 

trucks to reduce diesel particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). The options 

that have shown the most potential are 

1) purchasing yard trucks with on-road certified engines; 

2) using alternative fuels such as propane or natural gas; 

3) using alternative diesel fuels such as emulsified diesel; and 

4) installing aftertreatments such as diesel oxidation catalysts. 

Diesel particulate filters may not work well for yard trucks since engine exhaust 

operating temperatures may not be high enough for passive diesel particulate filters. 

To gather additional data on the operation of yard trucks and the emissions impacts of 

diesel PM control and NOx control strategies for port and intermodal yard trucks, the 

ARB, along with the Port of Los Angeles, funded a demonstration program. The 

purpose of the demonstration program was to: 

• perform chassis emission testing on in use yard trucks to measure baseline 

emission levels; 

• perform chassis emission testing to evaluate the effectiveness of promising 

control strategies such as on-road engines, alternative fuels and emulsified 

diesel; 

• perform data logging to evaluate the duty cycle of yard trucks to develop 

typical speed, temperature and engine load profiles; and 

• conduct in use emission testing for transient, container handling duty cycling. 

Currently, the first two components of the study have been completed. This appendix 

includes an overview of the emission testing, a description of the yard truck equipment 

and test fuels and the test results with preliminary findings. 
E - 3 

Emission testing was performed by University of California, Riverside, Bourns College 

of Engineering-Center for Environmental Research and Testing (UCR CE-CERT) under 

the direction of Wayne Miller, Ph.D. 

III. Emission Testing 

Emission Measurements

Emissions were tested for PM, total hydrocarbons (THC), CO2, CO, and NOx per 

International Organization for Standardization Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines-Exhaust Emission Measurement (ISO 8178) Parts 1, 2, and 4. 

(ISO 8178, 1996). Exhaust analysis of the gaseous components was performed using 

the continuous measurement methods listed in Table E-1. 

Table E-1. ISO 8178 Recommended Continuous Gaseous Sampling Analyzers 

Gaseous Pollutant Ambient Level Sampling Per ISO 8178

NOx Chemiluminescence 

CO Non-dispersive infrared (NDIR) 

CO2 Non-dispersive infrared (NDIR) 

Total Hydrocarbons Flame ionization detector (FID) 

Emission testing was performed using full-flow constant volume sampling (CVS) per 

ISO 8178. In the CVS method, the engine exhaust is diluted with air to maintain a 

constant total flow rate (air + exhaust) under all running conditions. Total exhaust (fullflow) is collected and mixed with air in the full-flow primary dilution tunnel. Particulate 

matter sampling is done from diluted exhaust gas. This is achieved by turbulent mixing 

of exhaust gases with air in a dilution tunnel. A sample for particulate measurement is 

drawn from that tunnel into a small secondary dilution tunnel, further mixed with air and 

collected on particulate filters maintained 52 oC, maximum. Samples for continuous gas 

phase measurements are drawn from the primary dilution tunnel. The volumetric flow 

rate of the dilution air and diluted exhaust gas are measured along with temperatures 

and pressures, allowing computation of the total mass flow rate of exhaust and mass 

emission rates of the sampled components. 

Test Cycles

Mass emission rates were measured at steady-state conditions for specified speeds 

and loads developed for off-road engine applications as listed in ISO 8178 Part 4. A 

test cycle includes a set of modes with a specified torque, speed and weighting value 

designed for specific engine uses. For a given test cycle, a weighted emission factor 

was calculated using weighted modal emission mass rates and divided by a weighted 

load value. For this testing, the 8-mode C1 test cycle was selected since it is the same 

test cycle used for non-road EPA engine certification. The chassis testing was 

performed using a vehicle chassis dynamometer, leased from Johnson Power 

Equipment, Riverside, CA. 
E - 4 

Table E-2. Weighting Factors for C1 Type ISO 8178 Test Cycles 

Mode number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 

Torque, % 100 75 50 25 10 100 75 50 25 10 0 

Speed Rated speed Intermediate speed Low idle 

Type C1 0.15 0.15 0.15 - 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - - 0.15 

Although EPA non-road certification is performed using direct engine testing, vehicle 

chassis testing was used for this phase of the program. The chassis dynamometer has 

distinct advantages for testing in-use vehicles, the most important of which is that we 

did not have to remove the engine from the vehicle. However, with chassis testing there 

will be additional variables (such as driveline losses) influencing the results. With 

vehicle chassis testing on a dynamometer, the load is applied and measured at the 

wheel instead of directly at the engine. Due to power losses in the drive train, the 

engine load will be higher than the wheel load. The brake specific emission factors, in 

g/hp-hr, presented in this report are calculated using the load at the wheel (wHp) 

instead of the engine load (Hp). Therefore, the emission factors measured in vehicle 

chassis testing are typically higher than those measured in equivalent engine testing. 

These losses may be different for each of the vehicles, depending on the vehicle design 

and drivetrain components. 

In addition, modifications were made to the C1 intermediate test points (modes 6, 7 and 

8) because the dynamometer requires a minimum wheel speed to produce sufficient 

wheel loading. Because off-road yard trucks are governed to run at a maximum speed 

of 18 to 20 mph, at lower wheel speeds (corresponding lower engine speeds, 1500 to 

1600 rpm), the wheel speed was too low for the dynamometer to generate some test 

loads. Therefore, the yard trucks had to be operated at a higher wheel speed range to 

achieve some of the intermediate load points specified in the C1 cycle. This resulted 

engine speeds which were higher than those intermediate speed points required in the 

C1 cycle for modes 6, 7 and 8. In general, the intermediate engine speed points were 

increased from specified speed points of 1500 and 1600 rpm to 1800 and 1900 rpm 

(See Table E-7). The weighed emission factors were calculated using the modified 

intermediate speed points. 

IV. Yard Truck Test Matrix 

Emission testing was performed on six yard trucks. The test matrix was designed to 

represent the makeup of the existing fleet, evaluate the effectiveness of using 

emulsified diesel, compare currently available certified on-road and off-road engines, 

and test alternatively fueled propane yard trucks. 

Selection of Yard Trucks for Testing

In order to develop a representative baseline for the yard truck test plan, the combined 

population of engines in the 2002 Port of Los Angeles and 2001 Port of Long Beach 

Baseline Emission Inventories were analyzed to determine the dominant engine make, 

model and model year groupings. (Starcrest, 2004a and Starcrest, 2004b) The 
E - 5 

inventories contain a total of 1266 yard trucks. Cummins engines represented 

approximately 94 percent of the inventory. Since Cummins represented the largest 

manufacturer grouping by far, model year distributions were developed for the two 

largest Cummins engine size groups, 5.9L and 8.3L. 

Table E-3. Engine Make and Size Breakdown 

Yard Truck Engine Make/Size Total Number Percent of Total 

Cummins 5.9 liter 687 54% 

Cummins 8.3 liter 331 26% 

Other Cummins 180 14% 

Cat (all models) 3 <1% 

Detroit Diesel (all models) 57 5% 

Other Makes 8 1% 

Total 1266 100% 

Figure E-1. Cummins Model Years Breakdown 

Port of LA & LB Yard Trucks

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002

Model Year

Percent of Total (1266)

Cummins 5.9

Cummins 8.3

Other Cummins ISC/ISB

Based on the model year (MY) breakdown for the Cummins 5.9L engines, MY 2000 is 

the most common model year at 14 percent of the total. Model Year 2002 is the next 

most common 5.9L engine size at 9 percent of the total. These two model years 

capture approximately 21 percent of the total yard truck inventory for the two ports. The 

Cummins 8.3L engine group represents the second largest engine category at 

26 percent of the yard truck inventory. Model Year 1991 is the most common Cummins 

8.3L engine at 9 percent of the total inventory. Model Year 2001 is the second most 

common Cummins 8.3L engine at approximately 5 percent of the inventory. These 

four engine makes and model years represent 37 percent of the total inventory. 
E - 6 

Table E-4. Dominant Inventory Groupings for Baseline Selection 

Cummins Engine Model Year Percent of Yard Truck Inventory 

5.9 L 2000 14 

5.9 L 2002 9 

8.3 L 1991 9 

8.3 L 2001 5 

While the model year information shown in Table E-4 was used to guide the selection of 

the test vehicles, two changes were made in developing the final test matrix. First, a 

1997 model year was substituted for the 1991 yard truck, since 1991 trucks were no 

longer available. Second, since the 2002 model year 5.9L was within the same tier 

(Tier 1) and similar in design to a 2000 model, only the 2000 model year was tested. 

The final test matrix, along with test fuels, is shown in Table E-5. 

Table E-5. Yard Truck Test Matrix 

Equipment 

(Rated speed/HP) 

Model Year Baseline 

Diesel ULSD Emulsified Diesel 

Alternative 

Fuel 

(Propane) 

Cummins 5.9L 6BT 

(2200 rpm/174 Hp) 2000 1 1 

Cummins 8.3L 6CT 

(2200 rpm/210 Hp) 1997 1 1 

Cummins 8.3L 6CT 

(2200 rpm/215 Hp) 2001 1 1 

2004 Off-Road Engine 

Cummins QSB - no 

aftertreatment 

(2500 rpm/173 Hp) 

2004 1 

2004 On-Road Engine 

Cummins ISB - no 

aftertreatment 

(2300 rpm/245 Hp) 

2004 1 

Cummins 5.9L Propane 

Fueled Engine 

with OEM-3 way Catalyst 

(2600 rpm/185 Hp) 

2004 1 

In-use Yard Trucks Testing with CARB Diesel and Emulsified Diesel

All baseline engine tests were performed using currently available CARB Diesel fuel 

that meets the specifications defined in Title 13, CCR sections 2281-2282. 

(CCR Title 13, Sections 2281, 2282) The baseline yard trucks were also tested with 

water emulsified diesel, developed to reduce both NOx and PM, to evaluate the impact 

of voluntary emission reduction programs. 
E - 7 

The emulsified diesel, Chevron Proformix fuel, is a water emulsified diesel fuel that 

consists of a blend of water, conventional diesel fuel and an additive package, utilizing 

Lubrizol’s PuriNOx technology. Small amounts of the additive package are added to the 

fuel to maintain the emulsion, enhance cetane and lubricity, inhibit corrosion, protect 

against freezing and prevent foaming. The water is suspended in droplets within the 

fuel lowering PM emissions by creating a leaner fuel environment in the engine. Also, 

the emulsified fuel creates a cooling effect in the combustion chamber, thereby, 

decreasing NOx emissions. 

On-road and Off-road Engine Comparisons

A direct comparison between a current (MY 2004) electronically controlled off-road 

engine (QSB 5.9L) and a current (MY 2004) electronically controlled on-road engine 

(ISB 5.9L) was conducted. While both these engines are certified, the on-road engine is 

certified with a transient on highway test procedure. The off-road engine is certified 

using a non-road 8 mode (C1) steady state test procedure. To directly compare the 

emission levels of both engines in an off-road application, both engines were tested 

using the modified non-road 8 mode (C1) steady state test procedure described above. 

Low-sulfur diesel (15 ppm) was used for this component of the testing to best represent 

proposed regulatory control strategies. 

Liquid Propane Yard Tractors

Alternative fuels, such as liquid propane gas, are options available to reduce emissions 

from compression ignition engines. Cargo handling equipment applications, specifically 

yard tractors, are typically using LPG as an alternative to diesel fuel at some terminals. 

Engines using alternative fuel have emission levels than are comparable or lower than 

new diesel engines operating on CARB diesel fuel. Currently the Port of Los Angeles 

has 53 LPG yard tractors in service. The test plan included one 2004 Cummins LPG 

fueled yard tractor. As with the diesel fueled Cummins ISB engine, this engine is 

certified with an on highway transient test procedure. To directly compare to the other 

yard trucks tested in this program, the LPG yard truck was tested using the modified 

non-road 8 mode (C1) steady state test procedure described above. 

V. Results and Discussion 

In-use Yard Trucks with CARB Diesel (baseline) and Emulsified Diesel 

Three in-use yard trucks were tested with both CARB diesel and Proformix emulsified 

diesel. The yard trucks tested were a 2000 MY Cummins B5.9L, a 2001 MY Cummins 

C8.3L and a 1997 MY Cummins C8.3L. We were not able to test the 1997 MY 

Cummins C8.3L engines in modes 6 and 7 due to automatic shifting of the transmission. 

Therefore, we were not able to calculate corresponding C1 (modified) weighted 

emission factors for that engine. To compare emissions between the three in-use 

trucks, modal values are shown in Figure E-2. Comparison of the 2000 MY B5.9L and 

the 2001 MY C8.3L baseline weighted emission factors show significantly different 

emission levels. As shown in Table E-6 and Figure E-3, the C1 weighed emissions for 

the 2000 MY B5.9L engine was 2.8 g/wHp-hr, 7.13 g/wHp-hr and 1.5 g/wHp-hr, 
E - 8 

respectively, for THC, NOx and PM. The C1 weighed emissions for the 2001 MY C8.3L 

engine was 0.48 g/wHp-hr, 8.49 g/wHp-hr and 0.35 g/wHp-hr respectively for THC, NOx 

and PM. 

Emission testing of the 2000 MY B5.9L with emulsified diesel shows an increase in THC 

of 33 percent with reductions in NOx of 18 percent and reductions in PM of 17 percent. 

Emission testing of the 2001 MY C8.3L with emulsified diesel shows an increase in THC 

of 10 percent with reductions in NOx of 22 percent and reductions in PM of 53 percent. 

The variations in reductions indicate that the levels of reductions may be dependent on 

engine design and baseline engine emission levels. Results also show that for certain 

engine types, emulsified fuel is very effective technology to reduce PM significantly, 

while also providing reductions in NOx. 

Figure E-2. Modal Emission Factors for Baseline Yard Truck Engine Testing with 

CARB Diesel 

Baseline Yard Truck PM data

CARB Diesel

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

100%/Rated

Spd

75%/Rtd

Spd

50%/Rtd

Spd

10%/Rtd

Spd

100%/Int

Spd 

75%/Int Spd

50% /Int

Spd

Low idle

g/wHp-hr

Cummins B5.9 2000

CARB

Cummins C8.3 2001

CARB

Cummins C8.3 1997

CARB

Baseline Yard Truck NOx data

CARB Diesel

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

100%/Rated

Spd

75%/Rtd

Spd

50%/Rtd

Spd

10%/Rtd

Spd

100%/Int

Spd 

75%/Int Spd

50% /Int

Spd

Low idle

g/wHp-hr

Cummins B5.9 2000

CARB

Cummins C8.3 2001

CARB

Cummins C8.3 1997

CARB

Baseline Yard Truck THC data

CARB Diesel

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

100%/Rated

Spd

75%/Rtd

Spd

50%/Rtd

Spd

10%/Rtd

Spd

100%/Int

Spd 

75%/Int Spd

50% /Int

Spd

Low idle

g/wHp-hr

Cummins B5.9 2000 CARB

Cummins C8.3 2001 CARB

Cummins C8.3 1997 CARB
E - 9 

Table E-6. Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Yard Truck 

Engine Testing with CARB Diesel and Emulsified Diesel 

Engine 

Type 

Cummins 

5.9L 6BT 

2000 MY 

Cummins 

5.9L 6BT 

2000 MY 

Cummins 

8.3L 6CT 

2001 MY 

Cummins 

8.3L 6CT 

2001 MY 

Cummins 

8.3L 6CT 

1997 MY 

Cummins 

8.3L 6CT 

1997 MY 

Fuel 

CARB 

Diesel 

Emulsified 

Diesel 

CARB 

Diesel 

Emulsified 

Diesel 

CARB 

Diesel 

Emulsified 

Diesel 

g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr 

THC 0.28 0.38 0.48 0.52 N/A 

See Note 2 

N/A 

See Note 2 

THC 

% reduction 

See Note 1 

-33 

See Note 1 

-10 

See Note 1 

N/A 

See Note 2 

NOx 7.13 5.85 8.49 6.64 N/A 

See Note 2 

N/A 

See Note 2 

NOx 

% Reduction 18 22 N/A See Note 2 

PM 0.15 0.12 0.35 0.16 N/A 

See Note 2 

N/A 

See Note 2 

PM 

% Reduction 17 53 N/A 

See Note 2 

Note 1. Negative number indicates Increase in Total Hydrocarbon 

Note 2. A weighted C1 emission factor could not be calculated because modes 6 and 7 were not 

performed due to automatic transmission shifting. 

Figure E-3. Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Yard Truck 

Engine Testing with CARB Diesel and Emulsified Diesel 

THC and PM C1 (modifed) Weighted Emission 

Factors with CARB and Emulsifed Diesel

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

THC PM

Pollutant

g/whp-hr

NOx C1 (modified) Weighted Emission Factors 

with CARB and Emulsifed Diesel

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

NOx

Pollutant

g/whp-hr

Cummins B5.9 2000

CARB

Cummins B5.9 2000

Emulsifed

Cummins C8.3 2001

CARB

Cummins C8.3 2001

Emulsified

On-road and Off-road Engine Comparisons

Emission testing was performed on an electronically controlled 2004 off-road certified 

engine (QSB 5.9L) and an electronically controlled 2004 on-road certified engine 

(ISB 5.9L) using low-sulfur diesel fuel (<15 ppm sulfur). The modified C1 weighed 

emissions for the 2004 QSB engine was 0.16 g/wHp-hr, 5.54 g/wHp-hr and 

0.14 g/wHp-hr respectively for THC, NOx and PM. The C1 weighed emissions for the 
E - 10 

2004 ISB engine was 0.05 g/wHp-hr, 2.45 g/wHp-hr and 0.10 g/wHp-hr respectively for 

THC, NOx and PM. 

Comparisons between the QSB and ISB on low-sulfur diesel show that the ISB has 

69 percent lower THC, 56 percent lower NOx levels and 30 percent lower PM. These 

results indicate that the emission levels for the on-road certified ISB engine are 

significantly lower than the QSB, when tested under the same off-road modified C1 test 

cycle. 

Liquid Propane Yard Tractors

Emission testing was performed for a 2004 on-road certified Cummins LPG engine. 

The C1 (modified) weighed emissions were 0.15 g/wHp-hr, 3.58 g/wHp-hr and 0.007 

g/wHp-hr respectively for THC, NOx and PM. These results indicate that both the THC 

and NOx are higher for the LPG engine, compared to the 2004 MY on-road certified ISB 

engine. PM is significantly lower for the LPG than either the ISB or QSB engines. 

Modal data for all the tests is included in Table E-7. 

Table E-7. Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Current 

Off-road, On-road and LPG Yard Truck Engines 

Pollutant 

Cummins 2004 

QSB 5.9L 

Low-Sulfur Diesel 

Cummins 2004 

5.9L ISB 

Low-Sulfur Diesel 

Cummins 2004 

5.9L LPG 

 g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr g/wHp-hr 

THC 0.16 0.05 0.15 

NOx 5.54 2.45 3.58 

PM 0.14 0.10 0.007 

Figure E-4. Average Modified C1 Weighted Emissions Factors for Off-road, 

On-road and LPG Yard Truck Engines 

THC and PM C1 Weighted Emission Factors for 

QSB, ISB and LPG Engines

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

THC PM

Pollutant

g/whp-hr

2004 Offroad QSB

Low Sulfur Diesel

2004 Onroad ISB

Low Sulfur Diesel

2004 LPG 

Nox C1 Weighted Emission Factors for QSB, 

ISB and LPG Engines

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

NOx

Pollutant

g/whp-hr

2004 Offroad

QSB Low Sulfur

Diesel

2004 Onroad ISB

Low Sulfur Diesel

2004 LPG 
E - 11 

REFERENCES: 

(CCR Title 13, Sections 2281, 2282) Standards for Diesel Fuel, Title 13, California Code 

of Regulations, sections 2281, and 2282. 

(ISO 8178, 1996) International Organization for Standardization. RIC Engines-Exhaust 

emission measurement ISO/DP 8178 Test Procedure, Part 1, August 15, 1996, Part 2, 

August 15, 1996, and Part 4, August 15, 1996. 

(Starcrest, 2004a) Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC. The Port of Los Angeles, Final 

Draft, Port-Wide Baseline Air Emission Inventory; June 2004. 

(Starcrest, 2004b) Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC. 2002 Baseline Emissions 

Inventory, Cargo Handling Equipment, Rail Locomotives, and Heavy-Duty Vehicles; 

March 2004. 
E - 12 

Table E-8. All Yard Truck Modal Data 

Cummins 2004 QSB 5.9L (Capacity) 

Low-Sulfur Diesel 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

Not 

Available 

 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 122.50 2507.00 0.12 0.41 5.49 827.83 0.14 

75%/Rtd Spd 90.50 2492.00 0.14 0.56 4.90 944.40 0.16 

50%/Rtd Spd 61.50 2501.50 0.18 0.87 4.89 1117.43 0.18 

10%/Rtd Spd 12.00 2500.50 1.30 4.31 18.11 3344.00 0.42 

100%/Int Spd 134.00 2202.50 0.08 0.36 5.76 730.10 0.12 

75%/Int Spd 102.00 2202.00 0.14 0.39 5.11 765.07 0.09 

50% /Int Spd 68.50 2200.00 0.17 0.58 4.83 878.16 0.09 

Low idle 1.23 750.00 2.65 12.89 41.70 3591.49 0.23 

C1 Emfac 0.16 5.54 0.14 

 

Extra Data Points 

Int load/IS 42.50 1500.00 0.23 0.32 7.27 805.84 0.04 

Cummins 2004 5.9L ISB (Ottawa) 

Low-Sulfur Diesel 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

Not 

Available 

 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 164.50 2298.00 0.03 0.56 2.11 785.53 0.11 

75%/Rtd Spd 123.50 2301.50 0.04 0.43 2.27 832.49 0.07 

50%/Rtd Spd 82.50 2304.50 0.05 0.56 2.65 958.43 0.09 

10%/Rtd Spd 16.50 2308.50 0.47 3.54 6.65 2815.44 0.32 

100%/Int Spd 133.50 2006.50 0.04 0.51 2.06 787.58 0.09 

75%/Int Spd 101.00 2003.50 0.04 0.46 2.14 810.43 0.10 

50% /Int Spd 67.00 2001.50 0.06 0.62 2.46 931.81 0.12 

Low idle 1.65 700.50 0.53 3.17 45.49 2697.01 0.10 

C1 Emfac 0.05 2.45 0.10 

 

Extra Data Points 

Int load/IS 79.50 1501.00 0.04 0.40 2.62 764.06 0.06 
E - 13 

 

Cummins 2004 5.9L 

LPG (Yalmar) 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

1199.00 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 133.90 2600.00 0.20 0.01 6.18 814.65 0.016 

75%/Rtd Spd 99.42 2598.00 0.06 0.01 2.41 862.27 0.008 

50%/Rtd Spd 65.95 2601.00 0.20 0.01 2.11 1069.87 0.005 

10%/Rtd Spd 12.98 2601.50 0.31 0.04 9.14 3436.44 0.009 

100%/Int Spd 116.41 1798.00 0.16 0.01 3.20 675.49 0.002 

75%/Int Spd 85.93 1814.50 0.06 0.03 1.92 703.78 0.001 

50% /Int Spd 54.95 1808.00 0.30 0.01 2.09 861.34 0.001 

Low idle 1.34 750.50 0.90 20.38 3.54 5355.75 0.034 

C1 Emfac 0.15 3.58 0.007 

 
E - 14 

 

Cummins B5.9 2000 

(Ottawa) 

CARB Diesel 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

12380.00 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 100.92 2201.50 0.15 0.48 6.55 851.02 0.18 

75%/Rtd Spd 68.95 2201.00 0.35 0.64 6.64 938.15 0.15 

50%/Rtd Spd 45.96 2197.50 0.51 0.96 7.32 1113.45 0.19 

10%/Rtd Spd 8.99 2201.50 2.68 7.99 20.56 3749.73 1.09 

100%/Int Spd 126.40 1899.50 0.13 0.46 6.70 704.12 0.10 

75%/Int Spd 101.42 1901.00 0.10 0.32 6.93 721.70 0.08 

50% /Int Spd 67.95 1899.00 0.39 0.42 6.99 794.08 0.09 

Low idle 1.01 642.50 4.50 8.78 65.57 3001.99 0.82 

C1 Emfac 0.28 7.13 0.15 

 

Extra Data Points 

Int load/IS 110.42 1552.50 0.09 0.68 7.51 656.83 0.11 

<100/RS-match lubrizol 79.94 2199.50 0.37 0.52 6.89 916.10 0.16 

<100/IS-match lubrizol 116.41 1898.00 0.16 0.37 6.93 722.75 0.09 

 

Cummins B5.9 2000 

(Ottawa) 

Emulsified Diesel 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

12374.00 

 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 81.94 2198.50 0.44 0.65 5.28 901.69 0.17 

75%/Rtd Spd 68.95 2202.50 0.26 0.82 5.35 936.97 0.14 

50%/Rtd Spd 45.96 2200.00 0.65 1.33 6.02 1102.62 0.18 

10%/Rtd Spd 9.49 2199.50 2.72 14.56 17.11 3455.66 0.84 

100%/Int Spd 112.41 1899.00 0.20 0.37 5.69 725.27 0.06 

75%/Int Spd 101.92 1897.50 0.10 0.34 5.51 720.00 0.05 

50% /Int Spd 67.95 1902.00 0.32 0.44 5.71 788.78 0.07 

Low idle 0.82 634.50 12.59 32.98 61.20 4015.34 0.96

C1 Emfac 0.38 5.85 0.12 

 

Extra Data Points 

Int load/IS 93.43 1502.00 0.11 0.38 6.58 641.82 0.03 
E - 15 

 

Cummins C8.3 2001 

(Ottawa) 

CARB Diesel 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

8195.00 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 106.92 2203.50 0.22 1.37 8.38 981.54 0.37 

75%/Rtd Spd 81.44 2202.50 0.47 0.99 7.98 1011.25 0.29 

50%/Rtd Spd 54.46 2201.00 0.88 1.24 8.14 1172.24 0.37 

10%/Rtd Spd 10.99 2201.00 3.10 5.96 18.96 3764.49 2.13 

100%/Int Spd 104.92 1899.00 0.24 1.15 8.55 904.76 0.30 

75%/Int Spd 77.44 1902.00 0.24 0.67 8.02 912.57 0.22 

50% /Int Spd 52.46 1900.00 0.71 0.95 7.54 995.84 0.28 

Low idle 1.07 592.00 6.77 11.51 55.46 3048.79 0.37 

C1 Emfac 0.48 8.49 0.35 

 

Extra Data Points 

Int load/IS 63.95 1602.00 0.31 0.52 8.46 866.40 0.23 

<100/RS-match lubrizol 89.43 2198.00 0.61 1.15 8.35 1035.70 0.33 

<100/IS-match lubrizol 97.43 1899.50 0.28 1.04 8.31 916.53 0.29 

 

Cummins C8.3 2001 

(Ottawa) 

Emulsified Diesel 

Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

9999.00 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 90.43 2195.00 0.52 0.72 6.11 991.86 0.15 

75%/Rtd Spd 81.44 2200.50 0.33 0.75 6.22 1001.94 0.15 

50%/Rtd Spd 53.46 2201.50 0.74 1.08 6.71 1170.14 0.20 

10%/Rtd Spd 11.49 2202.00 2.26 6.60 15.96 3468.46 0.78 

100%/Int Spd 98.92 1902.00 0.41 0.64 6.63 905.22 0.13 

75%/Int Spd 77.44 1899.00 0.27 0.60 6.15 909.89 0.13 

50% /Int Spd 52.46 1899.50 0.49 0.84 6.17 989.54 0.13 

Low idle 0.90 625.50 14.55 38.40 60.49 4043.04 0.40

C1 Emfac 0.52 6.64 0.16 

 

Extra Data Points 

Int load/IS 63.95 1600.00 0.30 0.60 6.33 875.45 0.15 
E - 16 

 

Cummins C8.3 1997 

(Capacity) 

CARB Diesel 

Not all modes were done due to transmission shifting 

Modal Average Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

451.00 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC CO NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 124.41 2403.50 0.15 0.31 2.90 1028.80 0.20 

75%/Rtd Spd 92.93 2398.50 0.24 0.35 3.03 1093.36 0.17 

50%/Rtd Spd 61.95 2398.00 0.33 0.66 3.38 1257.92 0.26 

10%/Rtd Spd 11.99 2403.50 2.15 6.84 10.62 4033.58 1.04 

100%/Int Spd N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

75%/Int Spd N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

50% /Int Spd 41.47 1800.50 0.41 0.34 4.91 1181.09 0.15 

Low idle 1.24 701.00 3.54 2.81 38.29 4722.73 0.46 

C1 Emfac N/A N/A N/A 

 

Cummins C8.3 1997 

(Capacity) 

Emulsified Diesel 

Not all modes were done due to transmission shifting 

Modal Average Eng 

Hr/Odometer 

453.00 

Test Mode g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr g/bhp-hr gm/bhphr g/bhp-hr 

Percent Load/Speed Load (Hp) RPM THC m CO m NOx CO2 PM 

100%/Rated Spd 101.42 2402.00 0.19 0.35 2.55 1094.28 0.13 

75%/Rtd Spd 92.93 2398.00 0.21 0.43 2.59 1109.79 0.13 

50%/Rtd Spd 61.95 2404.50 0.36 1.26 2.95 1294.14 0.21 

10%/Rtd Spd 11.99 2398.00 3.53 34.47 10.04 4000.38 0.78 

100%/Int Spd N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

75%/Int Spd N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

50% /Int Spd 40.96 993.50 0.48 0.97 4.05 1208.95 0.11 

Low idle 1.01 700.00 6.87 32.37 36.26 5942.74 0.28 

C1 Emfac N/A N/A N/A