Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0017-0012
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2004-07-26T04:00Z

ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Parts
85,
86,
89,
90,
91,
92,
94,
1039,
1048,
1051,
1065,
and
1068
[
AMS­
FRL­
xxxx­
x
]

RIN
2060­
xxxx
Test
Procedures
for
Testing
Highway
and
Nonroad
Engines
and
Omnibus
Technical
Amendments
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
Notice
of
Proposed
Rulemaking.

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
aims
to
revise
and
harmonize
test
procedures
from
the
various
EPA
programs
for
controlling
engine
emissions.
It
will
not
address
emission
standards,
nor
is
it
intended
to
change
the
emission
reductions
expected
from
these
EPA
programs.
Rather,
it
proposes
to
amend
40
CFR
part
1065,
which
contains
laboratory
specifications
for
equipment
and
test
fuels,
instructions
for
preparing
engines
and
running
tests,

calculations
for
determining
final
emission
levels
from
measured
values,
and
instructions
for
running
emission
tests
using
portable
measurement
devices
outside
the
laboratory.
Part
1065
currently
applies
to
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines,
land­
based
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kilowatts,
and
recreational
vehicles.
These
proposed
revisions
will
update
part
1065
to
deal
more
effectively
with
the
more
stringent
standards
recently
promulgated
by
EPA
and
will
also
clarify
and
better
define
certain
elements
of
the
required
test
procedures.
In
particular,
the
proposed
amendments
will
better
specify
the
procedures
applicable
to
field
testing
under
part
1065.

This
notice
also
proposes
to
apply
part
1065
to
highway
heavy­
duty
diesel
engine
regulations.
This
action
is
appropriate
because
EPA
has
historically
drafted
a
full
set
of
testing
specifications
for
each
vehicle
or
engine
category
subject
to
emission
standards
as
each
program
was
developed
over
the
past
three
decades.
This
patchwork
approach
has
led
to
some
variation
in
test
parameters
across
programs,
which
we
hope
to
address
by
adopting
a
common
set
of
test
requirements.
The
primary
goal
of
this
effort
is
to
create
unified
testing
requirements
for
all
engines,
which
when
implemented
will
streamline
laboratory
efforts
for
EPA
and
industry.

This
action
will
also
include
other
technical
changes
intended
to
clarify
and
better
define
requirements
for
several
different
EPA
engine
programs.
These
changes
are
relatively
minor
and
are
technical
in
scope.

DATES:
Comments:
Send
written
comments
on
this
proposed
rule
by
.
See
Section
IV
for
more
information
about
written
comments.

Hearings:
We
will
hold
an
informal
public
workshop
in
Ann
Arbor
on
.
If
anyone
requests
a
public
hearing
,
we
will
hold
it
on
.
To
request
a
public
hearing,
send
a
request
to
the
contact
in
"
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT"
by
August
13,
2004.
See
Section
IV
for
more
information
about
public
hearings.

ADDRESSES:
You
may
submit
comments,
identified
by
docket
number
OAR­
2004­
0017,
by
any
of
the
following
methods:

Federal
Rulemaking
Portal:
http://
www.
regulations.
gov.
Follow
the
on­
line
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
2
Agency
Web
Site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Follow
the
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
Note
that
this
is
not
available
until
after
this
proposal
is
published
in
the
Federal
Register.

E­
mail:
testamendments@
epa.
gov.
Specify
docket
number
OAR­
2004­
0017
in
the
body
of
the
message.

Fax:
(
202)
260­
4400.

Mail
or
Hand
Delivery:
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Air
Docket,
Mailcode
6102T,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,

NW,
Washington,
DC,
20460.

Hand
Delivery
or
Courier:
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC)
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,

Washington,
DC.,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
A­
2001­
28.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
Docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.

Instructions:
Include
the
agency
name
and
docket
number
in
all
submissions
for
this
rulemaking.
All
comments
received
will
be
posted
without
change
to
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket,
including
any
personal
information
provided.
For
detailed
instructions
on
submitting
comments
and
additional
information
on
the
rulemaking
process,
see
the
"
Public
Participation"
heading
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section
of
this
document.

Docket:
For
access
to
the
docket
to
read
background
documents
or
comments
received,
go
to
the
Web
site
at
the
url
identified
above
or
to
the
Air
Docket
at
the
address
identified
above.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Alan
Stout,
U.
S.
EPA,
Voice­
mail
(
734)
214­
4636;
E­
mail:

stout.
alan@
epa.
gov
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

A.
Regulated
Entities
This
proposed
action
would
affect
companies
that
manufacture
or
sell
engines.
Regulated
categories
and
entities
include:

Category
NAICS
Codesa
Examples
of
Potentially
Regulated
Entities
Industry
333618
Manufacturers
of
new
engines
aNorth
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)

This
list
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
regulated
by
this
action.
To
determine
whether
particular
activities
may
be
regulated
by
this
action,
you
should
carefully
examine
the
proposed
regulations.
You
may
direct
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
the
person
listed
in
"
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT."

B.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
Of
This
Document
and
Other
Related
Information
?

1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2004­

0017.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
Although
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
3
restricted
by
statute.
Documents
in
the
official
public
docket
are
listed
in
the
index
list
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EDOCKET.
Documents
may
be
available
either
electronically
or
in
hard
copy.

Electronic
documents
may
be
viewed
through
EDOCKET.
Hard
copy
documents
may
be
viewed
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC)
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
Docket
in
The
EPA
Docket
Center
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.

This
proposal
relies
in
part
on
information
related
to
our
November
2002
final
rule,
which
can
be
found
in
Public
Docket
A­
2000­
01.
This
docket
is
incorporated
by
reference
into
the
docket
for
this
action,
OAR­
2004­

0017.

2.
Electronic
Access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
"
Federal
Register"
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/
Or
you
can
go
to
the
federal­
wide
eRulemaking
site
at
www.
regulations.
gov.

An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EDOCKET.
You
may
use
EDOCKET
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number.

Certain
types
of
information
will
not
be
placed
in
the
EDOCKET.
Information
claimed
as
CBI
and
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute,
which
is
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
EPA's
policy
is
that
copyrighted
material
will
not
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
but
will
be
available
only
in
printed,
paper
form
in
the
official
public
docket.
To
the
extent
feasible,
publicly
available
docket
materials
will
be
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
When
a
document
is
selected
from
the
index
list
in
EDOCKET,
the
system
will
identify
whether
the
document
is
available
for
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Publicly
available
docket
materials
that
are
not
available
electronically
may
be
viewed
at
the
docket
facility
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
EPA
intends
to
work
towards
providing
electronic
access
to
all
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.

For
public
commenters,
it
is
important
to
note
that
EPA's
policy
is
that
public
comments,
whether
submitted
electronically
or
in
paper,
will
be
made
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
as
EPA
receives
them
and
without
change,
unless
the
comment
contains
copyrighted
material,
CBI,
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
When
EPA
identifies
a
comment
containing
copyrighted
material,
EPA
will
provide
a
reference
to
that
material
in
the
version
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
The
entire
printed
comment,
including
the
copyrighted
material,
will
be
available
in
the
public
docket.

Public
comments
submitted
on
computer
disks
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
docket
will
be
transferred
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Public
comments
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
Docket
will
be
scanned
and
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Where
practical,
physical
objects
will
be
photographed,
and
the
photograph
will
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
along
with
a
brief
description
written
by
the
docket
4
staff.

C.
How
and
To
Whom
Do
I
Submit
Comments?

We
are
opening
a
formal
comment
period
by
publishing
this
document.
We
will
accept
comments
for
the
period
indicated
under
"
DATES"
above.
If
you
have
an
interest
in
the
program
described
in
this
document,
we
encourage
you
to
comment
on
any
aspect
of
this
rulemaking.

Your
comments
will
be
most
useful
if
you
include
appropriate
and
detailed
supporting
rationale,
data,
and
analysis.
If
you
disagree
with
parts
of
the
proposal,
we
encourage
you
to
suggest
and
analyze
alternate
approaches
to
meeting
the
air
quality
goals
described
in
this
proposal.
You
should
send
all
comments,
except
those
containing
proprietary
information,
to
our
Air
Docket
(
see
"
Addresses")
before
the
end
of
the
comment
period.

You
may
submit
comments
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
identify
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
Submit
your
comments
within
the
specified
comment
period.
Comments
received
after
the
close
of
the
comment
period
will
be
marked
"
late."
EPA
is
not
required
to
consider
these
late
comments.
If
you
wish
to
submit
CBI
or
information
that
is
otherwise
protected
by
statute,
please
follow
the
instructions
in
Section
IX.
D.
Do
not
use
EPA
Dockets
or
e­
mail
to
submit
CBI
or
information
protected
by
statute.

1.
Electronically
If
you
submit
an
electronic
comment
as
prescribed
below,
we
recommend
that
you
include
your
name,
mailing
address,
and
an
e­
mail
address
or
other
contact
information
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
Also
include
this
contact
information
on
the
outside
of
any
disk
or
CD
ROM
you
submit,
and
in
any
cover
letter
accompanying
the
disk
or
CD
ROM.
This
ensures
that
you
can
be
identified
as
the
submitter
of
the
comment
and
allows
us
to
contact
you
if
we
cannot
read
your
comment
or
if
we
need
further
information
on
the
substance
of
your
comment.
Our
policy
is
that
we
will
not
edit
your
comment;
any
identifying
or
contact
information
provided
in
the
body
of
a
comment
will
be
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
we
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
we
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.

i.
EPA
Dockets
To
submit
comments
on
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
go
directly
to
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket
and
follow
the
online
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
To
access
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
from
the
EPA
Internet
Home
Page,
select
"
Information
Sources,"
"
Dockets,"
and
"
EPA
Dockets."
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
Quick
Search,"
and
then
key
in
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2004­
0017.
The
system
is
an
"
anonymous
access"
system,
which
means
we
will
not
know
your
identity,
e­
mail
address,
or
other
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.

ii.
E­
mail
5
Comments
may
be
sent
by
electronic
mail
to
testamendments@
epa.
gov.
In
contrast
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
is
not
an
"
anonymous
access"
system.
If
you
send
a
comment
via
electronic
mail
directly
to
the
Docket
without
going
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
the
e­
mail
system
automatically
captures
your
e­
mail
address.
E­
mail
addresses
that
are
automatically
captured
are
included
and
made
available
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket.

iii.
Disk
or
CD
ROM
You
may
submit
comments
on
a
disk
or
CD
ROM
that
you
send
to
the
mailing
address
identified
in
Section
IX.
A.
2
below.
Avoid
the
use
of
special
software,
characters,
and
any
form
of
encryption.

2.
By
Mail
Send
your
comments
to:
Air
Docket,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Mailcode:
6102T,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC,
20460.

3.
By
Hand
Delivery
or
Courier
Deliver
your
comments
to:
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC)
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,

NW,
Washington,
DC.,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
A­
2001­
28.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
Docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.

D.
How
Should
I
Submit
CBI
to
the
Agency?

Do
not
submit
information
that
you
consider
to
be
CBI
electronically
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
or
by
e­
mail.
Send
or
deliver
information
identified
as
CBI
only
to
the
following
address:
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Assessment
and
Standards
Division,
2000
Traverwood
Drive,
Ann
Arbor,
MI,
48105,

Attention
Docket
No.
OAR­
2004­
0017.
You
may
claim
information
that
you
submit
to
EPA
as
CBI
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI
(
if
you
submit
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
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
CBI).

Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.

In
addition
to
one
complete
version
of
the
comment
that
includes
any
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
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
you
submit
the
copy
that
does
not
contain
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,

mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
clearly
that
it
does
not
contain
CBI.
Information
not
marked
as
CBI
will
be
included
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
without
prior
notice.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
CBI
or
the
procedures
for
claiming
CBI,
please
consult
the
person
identified
in
the
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.

Table
of
Contents
1
For
an
overview
of
our
new
regulatory
organization,
refer
to
our
fact
sheet
entitled,
"
Plain­
Language
Format
of
Emission
Regulations
for
Nonroad
Engines"
EPA420­
F­
02­
046,
September
2002.

6
I.
Modified
Test
Procedures
for
Highway
and
Nonroad
Engines
A.
Incorporation
of
Nonroad
Test
Procedures
for
Heavy
Duty
Highway
Engines
B.
Revisions
to
Part
1065
II.
Technical
Amendments
A.
Definitions
and
Penalties
B.
Nonroad
general
compliance
provisions
(
40
CFR
part
1068)

C.
Land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
parts
89
and
1039)

D.
Marine
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
part
94)

E.
Small
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
90)

F.
Marine
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
91)

G.
Large
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
1048)

H.
Recreational
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
1051)

I.
Locomotives
(
40
CFR
part
92)

J.
Highway
engines
and
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
86)

III.
Public
Participation
IV.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
V.
Statutory
Provisions
and
Legal
Authority
I.
Modified
Test
Procedures
for
Highway
and
Nonroad
Engines
A.
Incorporation
of
Nonroad
Test
Procedures
for
Heavy
Duty
Highway
Engines
As
part
of
our
initiative
to
update
the
content,
organization
and
writing
style
of
our
regulations,
we
are
proposing
revisions
to
our
test
procedures.
1
We
have
grouped
all
of
our
engine
dynamometer
and
field
testing
test
procedures
into
one
part
entitled,
"
Part
1065:
Test
Procedures."
For
each
engine
or
vehicle
sector
for
which
we
have
recently
promulgated
standards
(
such
as
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines
or
recreational
vehicles),
we
identified
an
individual
part
as
the
standard­
setting
part
for
that
sector.
These
standard­
setting
parts
then
refer
to
one
common
set
of
test
procedures
in
part
1065.
We
intend
in
this
rule
to
continue
this
process
of
having
all
our
engine
programs
refer
to
a
common
set
of
procedures
by
applying
part
1065
to
all
heavy­
duty
highway
engines.

In
the
past,
each
engine
or
vehicle
sector
had
its
own
set
of
testing
procedures.
There
are
many
similarities
in
test
procedures
across
the
various
sectors.
However,
as
we
introduced
new
regulations
for
individual
sectors,
the
more
recent
regulations
featured
test
procedure
updates
and
improvements
that
the
other
sectors
did
not
have.
As
7
this
process
continued,
we
recognized
that
a
single
set
of
test
procedures
would
allow
for
improvements
to
occur
simultaneously
across
engine
and
vehicle
sectors.
A
single
set
of
test
procedures
is
easier
to
understand
than
trying
to
understand
many
different
sets
of
procedures,
and
it
is
easier
to
move
toward
international
test
procedure
harmonization
if
we
only
have
one
set
of
test
procedures.
We
note
that
procedures
that
are
particular
for
different
types
of
engines
or
vehicles,
for
example,
test
schedules
designed
to
reflect
the
conditions
expected
in
use
for
particular
types
of
vehicles
or
engines,
will
remain
separate
and
would
be
reflected
in
the
standard­
setting
parts
of
the
regulations.

In
addition
to
reorganizing
and
rewriting
the
test
procedures
for
improved
clarity,
we
are
proposing
to
make
a
variety
of
changes
to
improve
the
content
of
the
testing
specifications,
including
the
following:

!
Writing
specifications
and
calculations
in
international
units
!
Adding
procedures
by
which
manufacturers
can
demonstrate
that
alternate
test
procedures
are
equivalent
to
specified
procedures.

!
Including
specifications
for
new
measurement
technology
that
has
been
shown
to
be
equivalent
or
more
accurate
than
existing
technology;
procedures
that
improve
test
repeatability,
calculations
that
simplify
emissions
determination;
new
procedures
for
field
testing
engines,
and
a
more
comprehensive
set
of
definitions,
references,
and
symbols.

!
Defining
calibration
and
accuracy
specifications
that
are
scaled
to
the
applicable
standard,
which
allows
us
to
adopt
a
single
specification
that
applies
to
a
wide
range
of
engine
sizes
and
applications.

Some
emission­
control
programs
already
rely
on
the
test
procedures
in
part
1065.
These
programs
regulate
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines,
recreational
vehicles,
and
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kW.

In
this
notice,
we
are
proposing
to
adopt
the
lab­
testing
and
field­
testing
specifications
in
part
1065
for
all
heavy­
duty
highway
engines,
as
described
in
Section
II.
I.
These
procedures
would
replace
those
currently
published
in
subpart
N
in
40
CFR
part
86.
We
are
proposing
a
gradual
transition
from
the
part
86
procedures.
We
will
allow
the
use
of
part
1065
procedures
beginning
in
the
2006
model
year.
By
the
2008
model
year,
part
1065
procedures
will
be
required
for
any
new
testing.
For
all
testing
completed
for
2007
and
earlier
model
years,

manufacturers
may
continue
to
rely
on
carryover
test
data
based
on
part
86
procedures
to
certify
engine
families
in
later
years.
In
addition,
other
subparts
in
part
86,
as
well
as
regulations
for
many
different
nonroad
engines
refer
to
the
test
procedures
in
part
86.
We
are
including
updated
references
for
all
these
other
programs
to
refer
instead
to
the
appropriate
cite
in
part
1065.

Part
1065
is
also
advantageous
for
in­
use
testing
because
it
specifies
the
same
procedures
for
all
common
parts
of
field
testing
and
laboratory
testing.
It
also
contains
new
provisions
that
help
ensure
that
engines
are
tested
in
a
laboratory
in
a
way
that
is
consistent
with
how
they
operate
in
use.
These
new
provisions
will
ensure
that
engine
dynamometer
lab
testing
and
field
testing
are
conducted
in
a
consistent
way.

In
the
future,
we
may
propose
to
apply
the
test
procedures
specified
in
part
1065
to
other
types
of
engines,
so
we
encourage
companies
involved
in
producing
or
testing
other
engines
to
stay
informed
of
developments
related
to
these
test
procedures.
We
also
request
comment
on
whether
we
should
make
part
1065
applicable
for
light­
duty
vehicles,
light­
duty
trucks,
motorcycles,
and
aircraft
in
the
future.
Although
light­
duty
vehicles,
light­
duty
trucks,
8
and
motorcycles
are
tested
on
chassis
dynamometers,
rather
than
engine
dynamometers,
there
are
several
aspects
of
testing
that
are
common.
For
example,
emission
sampling
systems,
dilution
systems,
gas
analyzers,
PM
measurement
equipment,
some
test
sequences,
fuels,
analytical
gas
standards,
and
specifications
related
to
oxygenated
fuels
are
all
similar.
However,
there
are
differences,
such
as
chassis
dynamometer
specifications,

vehicle
intake
air,
exhaust
system,
and
coolant
specifications,
some
test
sequences
such
as
evaporative
and
refueling
tests,
vehicle
preparation,
and
some
emission
calculations
(
e.
g.,
g/
mi
vs
g/
kW­
hr)
that
would
have
to
be
addressed
in
any
future
decision
to
apply
part
1065
to
these
engines.

Although
testing
aircraft
engines
requires
some
special
provisions,
there
are
several
aspects
of
testing
that
are
common,
such
as
emission
sampling
systems,
dilution
systems,
gas
analyzers,
PM
measurement
equipment,
some
test
sequences,
fuels,
analytical
gas
standards,
and
specifications
related
to
oxygenated
fuels.

B.
Revisions
to
Part
1065
Part
1065
was
originally
adopted
on
November
8,
2002
(
67
FR
68242),
and
was
initially
applicable
to
standards
regulating
large
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
and
recreational
vehicles
under
40
CFR
parts
1048
and
1051.
The
recent
rulemaking
adopting
emission
standards
for
nonroad
diesel
engines
has
also
made
part
1065
optional
for
Tier
2
and
Tier
3
standards
and
required
for
Tier
4
standards.
The
test
procedures
currently
in
part
1065
are
sufficient
to
conduct
testing,
but
we
are
proposing
to
reorganize
and
add
content
to
improve
these
procedures.
In
particular,
we
propose
to
reorganize
part
1065
by
subparts
as
shown
below:

Subpart
A:
general
provisions;
global
information
on
applicability,
alternate
procedures
units
of
measure,
etc.

Subpart
B:
equipment
specifications;
required
hardware
for
testing
Subpart
C:
measurement
instruments
Subpart
D:
calibration
and
performance
checks;
for
measurement
systems
Subpart
E:
engine
selection,
preparation,
and
maintenance
Subpart
F:
test
protocols;
step­
by­
step
sequences
for
testing
and
test
validation.

Subpart
G:
calculations
and
required
information
Subpart
H:
fuels,
fluids,
and
analytical
gases
Subpart
I:
oxygenated
fuels;
special
test
procedures
Subpart
J:
field
testing
Subpart
K:
definitions,
references,
and
symbols
We
propose
to
scale
specifications
for
test
equipment
and
measurement
instruments
by
parameters
such
as
engine
power,
engine
speed
and
the
emission
standards
to
which
an
engine
must
comply.
That
way
a
single
set
of
specifications
will
cover
the
full
range
of
engine
sizes
and
our
full
range
of
emission
standards
and
our
regulations
will
therefore
specify
equipment
and
instruments
that
are
appropriate
for
a
given
engine
size
and
emission
standard.
Manufacturers
will
be
able
to
use
these
specifications
to
determine
what
range
of
engines
and
emission
standards
may
be
tested
using
a
given
laboratory
or
field
testing
system.

The
new
content
that
we
are
proposing
for
part
1065
is
mostly
a
combination
of
content
from
our
most
recent
updates
to
other
test
procedures
and
from
test
procedures
specified
by
the
International
Organization
for
Standardization
(
ISO).
In
some
cases,
however,
new
content
is
proposed
that
never
existed
in
previous
regulations.
9
This
new
content
addresses
very
recent
issues
such
as
measuring
very
low
concentrations
of
emissions,
using
new
measurement
technology,
and
performing
field
testing.
A
full
description
of
the
changes
is
in
the
Regulatory
Support
Document
that
accompanies
this
proposal.
Below
is
a
brief
description
of
the
content
of
each
subpart,

highlighting
some
of
the
new
content.

1.
Subpart
A
General
Provisions
In
Subpart
A
we
identify
the
applicability
of
part
1065
and
describe
how
procedures
other
than
those
in
part
1065
may
be
used
to
comply
with
a
standard­
setting
part.
We
specify
that
testing
must
be
conducted
in
a
way
that
represents
in­
use
engine
operation,
such
that
in
the
rare
case
where
provisions
in
part
1065
result
in
unrepresentative
testing,
other
procedures
would
be
used.
In
subpart
A
we
indicate
the
conventions
we
use
regarding
units
and
certain
measurements
and
we
discuss
recordkeeping.
We
also
provide
an
overview
of
how
emissions
and
other
information
are
used
to
determine
final
emission
results.
The
regulations
in
§
1065.15
include
a
figure
illustrating
the
different
ways
we
allow
brake­
specific
emissions
to
be
calculated.

In
Subpart
A
we
describe
how
continuous
and
batch
sampling
may
be
used
to
determine
total
emissions.

We
also
describe
the
two
ways
of
determining
total
work.
Note
that
the
figure
indicates
our
default
procedures
and
those
procedures
that
would
require
additional
approval
before
we
would
allow
them
for
use.

2.
Subpart
B
Equipment
Specifications
Subpart
B
first
describes
engine
and
dynamometer
related
systems.
Many
of
these
specifications
are
scaled
to
an
engine's
size,
speed,
torque,
exhaust
flow
rate,
etc.
We
specify
the
use
of
in­
use
engine
subsystems
such
as
air
intake
systems
wherever
possible
in
order
to
best
represent
in­
use
operation
when
an
engine
is
tested
in
a
laboratory.

Subpart
B
next
describes
sampling
dilution
systems.
These
include
specifications
for
the
allowable
components,
materials,
pressures,
and
temperatures.
We
describe
how
to
sample
crankcase
emissions.
We
also
propose
to
allow
limited
use
of
partial­
flow
dilution
for
PM
sampling.
We
request
comment
on
whether
or
not
our
specifications
for
partial­
flow
dilution
and
our
specifications
for
proportional­
sampling
validation
(
i.
e.,

§
1065.140(
d)
and
§
1065.545)
are
sufficient
for
us
to
allow
partial­
flow
dilution
for
all
PM
sampling
without
requiring
alternate
system
approval.

Subpart
B
also
specifies
environmental
conditions
for
PM
filter
stabilization
and
weighing.
Although
these
provisions
mostly
come
from
our
recent
update
to
part
86,
subpart
N,
we
also
describe
some
new
aspects
in
detail.

The
regulations
in
§
1065.101
include
a
diagram
illustrating
all
the
available
equipment
for
measuring
emissions.

3.
Subpart
C
Measurement
Instruments
Subpart
C
specifies
the
requirements
for
the
measurement
instruments
used
for
testing.
In
subpart
C
we
10
recommend
accuracy,
repeatability,
noise,
and
response
time
specifications
for
individual
measurement
instruments,
but
we
require
that
overall
measurement
systems
meet
the
calibration
and
performance
checks
in
Subpart
D.

In
some
cases
we
allow
new
instrument
types
to
be
used
where
we
previously
did
not
allow
them.
For
example,

we
propose
to
allow
the
use
of
a
nonmethane
cutter
for
NMHC
measurement,
we
propose
to
allow
the
use
of
nondispersive
ultra­
violet
analyzers
for
NOx
measurement,
we
propose
to
allow
the
use
of
zirconia
sensors
for
NOx
and
O2
measurement,
we
propose
to
allow
various
raw
exhaust
flow
meters
for
laboratory
and
field
testing
measurement,
and
we
propose
to
allow
ultrasonic
flow
meters
for
CVS
systems.

4.
Subpart
D
Calibration
and
Performance
Checks
Subpart
D
describes
what
we
mean
when
we
specify
accuracy,
repeatability
and
other
performance
parameters.

We
propose
calibration
and
performance
checks
that
scale
with
engine
size
and
the
emission
standards
to
which
an
engine
is
certified.
We
propose
to
replace
some
of
what
we
have
called
"
calibrations"
in
the
past
with
a
series
of
performance
checks.
Because
new
instruments
have
built­
in
routines
that
linearize
signals
and
compensate
for
various
interferences,
our
typical
calibration
specifications
sometimes
conflicted
with
an
instrument
manufacturer's
instructions.
In
addition
we
propose
new
performance
checks
to
ensure
that
the
new
instruments
in
Subpart
C
are
used
correctly.

5.
Subpart
E
Engine
Selection,
Preparation,
and
Maintenance
Subpart
E
describes
how
to
select,
prepare,
and
maintain
a
test
engine.
We
updated
these
provisions
to
include
both
gasoline
and
diesel
engines.
This
subpart
is
relatively
short,
and
we
did
not
make
many
changes
to
its
original
content.

6.
Subpart
F
Test
Protocols
Subpart
F
describes
the
step­
by­
step
protocols
for
engine
mapping,
test
cycle
generation,
test
cycle
validation,

pre­
test
preconditioning,
engine
starting,
emission
sampling,
and
post­
test
validations.
We
propose
an
improved
way
to
map
and
generate
cycles
for
constant­
speed
engines.
The
constant­
speed
mapping
procedure
we
propose
better
represents
in­
use
engine
operation.
We
propose
a
more
streamlined
set
of
test
cycle
and
proportional
validation
criteria.
We
propose
to
allow
modest
corrections
for
noise
and
drift
of
emission
analyzer
signals
within
a
certain
range.
We
also
propose
a
recommended
procedure
for
weighing
PM
samples.

7.
Subpart
G
Calculations
and
Required
Information
Subpart
G
describes
all
of
the
calculations
that
are
required
in
part
1065.
We
propose
definitions
of
statistical
quantities
such
as
mean,
standard
deviation,
slope,
intercept,
t­
test,
F­
test,
etc.
By
defining
these
quantities
mathematically
we
intend
to
resolve
any
potential
mis­
communication
when
we
discuss
these
quantities
in
other
subparts.
We
propose
all
of
the
calculations
for
calibrations
and
emission
calculations
in
international
units
to
comply
with
15
CFR
1170,
which
removes
the
voluntary
aspect
of
the
conversion
to
international
units
for
Federal
11
agencies.
Furthermore,
Executive
Order
12770
(
56
FR
35801,
July
29,
1991)
reinforces
this
policy
by
providing
Presidential
authority
and
direction
for
the
use
of
the
metric
system
of
measurement
by
Federal
agencies
and
departments.
For
our
standards
that
are
not
completely
in
international
units
(
i.
e.
grams/
horsepower­
hour,

grams/
mile),
we
specify
in
part
1065
the
correct
use
of
internationally
recognized
conversion
factors.

We
also
propose
to
calculate
emissions
based
on
molar
quantities
for
flow
rates,
instead
of
volume
or
mass.

This
change
eliminates
the
frequent
confusion
caused
by
the
use
of
different
reference
points
for
standard
pressure
and
standard
temperature.
Instead
of
declaring
standard
densities
at
standard
pressure
and
standard
temperature
to
convert
volumetric
concentration
measurements
to
mass­
based
units,
we
declare
molar
masses
for
individual
elements
and
compounds.
Since
these
values
are
independent
of
all
other
parameters,
they
are
known
to
be
constant.

8.
Subpart
H
Fuels,
Fluids,
and
Analytical
Gases
Subpart
H
specifies
test
fuels,
lubricating
oils
and
coolants,
and
analytical
gases
for
testing.
Because
standardsetting
parts
for
diesel
engines
now
refer
to
part
1065,
we
are
proposing
diesel
fuel
specifications
in
part
1065.

These
fuel
specifications
are
consistent
with
those
previously
adopted,
with
one
exception.
We
propose
to
eliminate
the
Cetane
Index
specification
for
all
diesel
fuels
because
the
existing
specification
for
Cetane
Number
sufficiently
determines
the
cetane
levels
of
diesel
test
fuels.
We
propose
to
eliminate
any
detailed
specification
for
service
accumulation
fuel.
Instead,
we
propose
that
service
accumulation
fuel
may
be
a
commercially
available
inuse
fuel.
This
change
helps
ensure
that
testing
is
representative
of
in­
use
engine
operation.
We
propose
to
scale
analytical
gas
specifications
with
the
standards,
which
an
engine
must
meet.

In
addition,
we
request
comment
on
whether
or
not
we
should
consider
revising
our
specifications
for
ultra
low­
sulfur
diesel
test
fuel
to
reflect
the
expected
lower
distillation
range
relative
to
fuels
with
higher
sulfur
levels.

We
request
comment
on
whether
or
not
widening
the
distillation
ranges
by
lowering
the
lower
limit
by
5

C
would
better
reflect
in­
use
diesel
fuels
with
sulfur
concentrations
below
15
ppm.
The
following
table
shows
alternative
distillation
temperatures
for
ultralow­
sulfur
diesel
test
fuel,
with
the
lower
end
of
the
distillation
ranges
lowered
by
5

C.

Alternate
Distillation
Range
for
Ultra
Low­
sulfur
Diesel
Fuel
Distillation
Range:
Value
Initial
Boiling
Point
(
166
to
204)

C
10%
point,

C
(
199
to
238)

C
50%
point,

C
(
238
to
282)

C
90%
point,

C
(
288
to
332)

C
End
point,

C
(
316
to
366)

C
9.
Subpart
I
Oxygenated
Fuels
12
Subpart
I
describes
special
procedures
for
measuring
certain
hydrocarbons
whenever
oxygenated
fuels
are
used.
We
updated
the
calculations
for
these
procedures
in
Subpart
G.
This
subpart
is
relatively
short,
and
we
did
not
make
many
changes
to
its
original
content.
We
request
comment
on
whether
or
not
we
should
provide
additional
guidance
for
testing
with
oxygenated
fuels.

10.
Subpart
J
Field
Testing
Although
Subpart
J
Field
Testing
existed
prior
to
this
proposal,
we
are
proposing
many
changes
to
this
subpart.
We
are
proposing
that
in
general,
field
testing
equipment
and
measurement
instruments
meet
the
same
specifications
and
performance
checks
that
laboratory
instruments
meet.
However,
for
field
testing
instruments,

we
propose
to
allow
certain
deviations
from
the
laboratory
specifications.
We
propose
a
procedure
for
preparing
and
conducting
a
field
test,
and
we
propose
additional
drift
and
noise
allowances
for
emission
analyzers.

11.
Subpart
K
Definitions,
References,
and
Symbols
In
Subpart
K
we
propose
some
new
and
revised
definitions
of
vocabulary
that
we
frequently
use
in
part
1065.

For
example
we
have
revised
our
definitions
of
"
brake
power",
"
constant­
speed
engine",
and
"
aftertreatment"
to
provide
more
clarity,
and
we
have
added
new
definitions
for
things
such
as
"
300
series
stainless
steel",

"
barometric
pressure",
and
"
operator
demand".
We
also
propose
a
thorough
and
consistent
set
of
symbols,

abbreviations,
and
acronyms.
We
propose
to
update
our
references
to
include
references
of
the
National
Institute
of
Standards
and
Technology
and
the
International
Organization
for
Standardization
(
ISO).

II.
Technical
Amendments
A.
Definitions
and
Penalties
We
are
proposing
to
revise
several
definitions
that
apply
over
more
than
one
part
of
our
regulations.
These
changes
are
designed
to
harmonize
our
regulations.

We
are
proposing
to
change
the
definition
of
Marine
engine
and
Marine
vessel
to
harmonize
our
approach
to
amphibious
vehicles
and
clarify
other
issues.
We
have
treated
amphibious
vehicles
differently
whether
they
had
a
diesel
engine
or
a
spark­
ignition
engine.
We
are
proposing
to
harmonize
our
treatment
of
amphibious
vehicles
by
consistently
treating
these
as
land­
based
products.
We
are
also
adding
a
provision
defining
amphibious
vehicles
are
those
that
are
designed
primarily
for
operation
on
land
to
clarify
that
we
don't
consider
hovercraft
to
be
amphibious
vehicles.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
additional
information
related
to
these
definitions.

In
particular,
note
that
we
describe
our
interpretation
of
what
it
means
for
an
engine
to
be
"
installed
in
a
marine
vessel."
Manufacturers
have
raised
several
questions
related
to
this
issue,
especially
as
it
relates
to
portable
engines
installed
on
barges.

We
are
also
considering
changes
to
the
definition
for
Spark­
ignition
and
Compression­
ignition.
We
define
Compression­
ignition
as
relating
to
reciprocating
internal­
combustion
engines
that
are
not
spark­
ignition
engines.

We
limit
these
definitions
to
reciprocating
engines
to
avoid
including
gas
turbines
under
the
definition
of
Compression­
ignition.
We
currently
do
not
have
emission
standards
for
gas
turbines.
A
question
has
come
up
13
regarding
how
we
should
treat
rotary
engines,
such
as
the
Wankel
engine.
We
request
comment
regarding
whether
the
definition
of
Compression
ignition
should
refer
to
"
reciprocating
and
rotary
engines"
to
clarify
that
rotary
engines
not
meeting
the
definition
for
Spark­
ignition
engines
would
fall
under
our
provisions
for
compression
ignition
engines.

We
currently
define
Spark­
ignition
as
follows:

Spark­
ignition
means
relating
to
a
gasoline­
fueled
engine
or
any
other
type
of
engine
with
a
spark
plug
(
or
other
sparking
device)
and
with
operating
characteristics
significantly
similar
to
the
theoretical
Otto
combustion
cycle.
Spark­
ignition
engines
usually
use
a
throttle
to
regulate
intake
air
flow
to
control
power
during
normal
operation.

This
definition
has
left
some
confusion
regarding
natural
gas
engines
that
have
a
throttle,
but
perhaps
do
not
clearly
have
operating
characteristics
that
are
significantly
similar
to
the
theoretical
Otto
combustion
cycle.
As
an
alternative,
we
are
considering
the
following
definition
to
remove
this
ambiguity:

Spark­
ignition
means
relating
to
a
gasoline­
fueled
engine
or
any
other
type
of
engine
with
a
spark
plug
(
or
other
sparking
device).
Engines
that
use
diesel
fuel
are
not
spark­
ignition
engines.

Such
a
simple
approach
would
be
very
clear,
but
could
have
the
effect
of
defining
some
natural
gas
engines
that
have
operating
characteristics
that
are
significantly
similar
to
the
theoretical
diesel
combustion
cycle
as
sparkignition
engines.
This
may
be
appropriate,
but
it
would
represent
a
change
from
our
existing
policy
for
these
engines.
We
are
also
considering
another
definition,
as
follows:

Spark­
ignition
means
relating
to
a
gasoline­
fueled
engine
or
any
other
type
of
engine
with
a
spark
plug
(
or
other
sparking
device)
and
with
operating
characteristics
similar
to
the
theoretical
Otto
combustion
cycle.

Spark­
ignition
engines
usually
burn
a
premixed
charge
of
air
and
fuel.
Engines
that
use
diesel
fuel
are
not
spark­
ignition
engines.

This
definition
aims
for
consistency
with
the
existing
policy,
but
focuses
on
premixed
combustion
instead
of
the
throttle
to
indicate
whether
natural
gas
engines
are
more
appropriately
regulated
as
compression­
ignition
or
sparkignition
engines.

We
welcome
comment
on
all
of
these
possible
definitions
of
spark­
ignition,
as
well
as
other
possible
approaches
to
this
definition.

The
Clean
Air
Act
specifies
maximum
penalty
amounts
corresponding
to
each
prohibited
Act.
These
maximum
penalty
amounts
are
periodically
adjusted
for
inflation,
based
on
the
provisions
of
the
Debt
Collection
Improvement
Act.
These
maximum
penalties
have
been
updated
under
40
CFR
part
19.
The
new
maximum
penalties
are
$
32,500
for
introducing
noncompliant
engines
into
commerce
for
manufacturers
guilty
of
tampering,

and
$
2,750
for
non­
manufacturers
guilty
of
tampering.
In
addition,
the
maximum
penalty
we
can
recover
using
administrative
procedures
is
$
270,000.
We
are
proposing
to
extend
these
revised
penalties
into
each
of
our
emission­
control
programs.
14
B.
Nonroad
general
compliance
provisions
(
40
CFR
part
1068)

In
addition
to
the
changing
test
procedures
described
above,
we
are
proposing
or
considering
changes
that
would
affect
multiple
engine
categories.

We
are
proposing
several
amendments
to
the
provisions
of
40
CFR
part
1068,
which
currently
apply
to
landbased
nonroad
diesel
engines,
recreational
vehicles,
and
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kW.
We
encourage
manufacturers
of
other
engines
to
take
note
of
these
changes,
since
we
intend
eventually
to
apply
the
provisions
of
part
1068
to
all
engines
subject
to
EPA
emission
standards.
Note
that
we
are
not
requesting
comment
on
the
whole
range
of
provisions
in
part
1068,
but
rather
on
those
items
that
are
included
in
this
proposal.
These
changes
include
the
following:

"
§
1068.10:
Clarify
confidentiality
provisions
to
address
how
we
treat
information
that
we
collect
from
onsite
visits
or
testing,
as
opposed
to
information
that
manufacturers
send
to
us.

"
§
1068.30:
Add
or
correct
definitions
to
coordinate
with
the
standard­
setting
parts
and
clarify
various
terms.

"
§
1068.105:
Expand
paragraph
(
a)
to
better
explain
requirements
for
equipment
manufacturers
to
use
current
model­
year
engines.
This
relates
especially
to
the
existing
provision
that
allows
equipment
manufacturers
to
use
up
their
normal
inventories
of
engines
from
previous
model
years
in
cases
where
a
new
emission
standard
takes
effect.
We
propose
to
change
§
1068.101(
a)(
1)
to
reflect
these
changes.

"
§
1068.110:
Clarify
that
the
manufacturers'
warranty
obligation
includes
all
expenses
related
to
diagnosing
and
repairing
or
replacing
emission­
related
parts.

"
§
1068.115:
Add
text
to
paragraph
(
a)
to
provide
a
complete
list
of
reasons
for
manufacturers
to
deny
warranty
claims.
This
clarifies
that
the
list
of
reasons
given
in
paragraph
(
b)
is
descriptive,
and
is
not
intended
to
be
comprehensive.

"
§
1068.245:
Clarify
that
manufacturers
applying
for
hardship
must
use
the
provisions
of
§
1068.250
(
if
applicable)
before
applying
for
hardship
under
§
1068.245.
This
is
necessary
to
remove
the
ambiguity
resulting
from
the
current
approach,
which
specifies
that
both
§
§
1064.245
and
1068.250
are
provisions
of
last
resort.

"
§
1068.260:
Clarify
that
including
the
cost
of
separately
shipped
components
means
that
the
cost
of
shipping
must
also
be
addressed.

"
§
1068.265:
Add
provisions
that
clarify
what
manufacturers
must
do
when
they
are
required
to
meet
emission
standards
for
engines
that
are
not
certified.
A
typical
example
would
be
an
exemption
that
applies
to
new
engines
that
replace
an
old
engine
that
was
certified
to
emission
standards.
We
already
require
these
engines
to
have
the
same
degree
of
emission
control
as
the
replaced
engine.
We
do
not
want
manufacturers
to
certify
these
engines,
but
we
are
proposing
to
add
requirements
to
clarify
how
manufacturers
can
show
that
the
new
engines
meet
an
older
set
of
emission
standards.
This
involves
either
using
an
engine
that
is
the
same
as
one
that
was
certified
in
an
earlier
model
year,
or
performing
tests
to
show
that
the
engines
meet
the
specified
emission
levels.
In
any
case,
manufacturers
would
not
need
to
go
through
the
process
or
pay
the
fees
associated
with
certification.
We
recently
adopted
these
same
provisions
for
nonroad
diesel
engines
and
are
proposing
to
extend
them
to
the
other
engine
categories
covered
by
part
1068.

"
§
1068.315:
Reduce
the
ownership
requirement
for
the
identical
configuration
exemption
from
one
year
to
15
six
months;
also,
change
the
qualifying
criterion
from
"
the
same
as"
to
"
identical
to."

"
§
1068.410:
Add
provisions
allowing
manufacturers
to
test
engines
up
to
three
times
total
if
an
engine
family
reaches
a
fail
decision
under
selective
enforcement
auditing,
consistent
with
the
provisions
that
apply
under
most
of
our
programs.

"
§
1068.510:
Clarify
that
manufacturers
must
describe
the
qualifications
of
repair
personnel,
rather
than
simply
stating
that
they
are
qualified.

C.
Land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
parts
89
and
1039)

We
recently
adopted
a
new
tier
of
emission
standards
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
codifying
these
standards
in
40
CFR
part
1039.
This
rulemaking
led
us
to
make
several
regulatory
changes
to
the
existing
tiers
of
standards
for
these
engines
in
40
CFR
part
89.
In
cases
where
we
discovered
the
need
for
changes
after
publishing
the
proposed
rule,
but
we
did
not
make
those
changes
to
part
89
in
the
final
rule
out
of
concern
that
the
public
had
not
had
an
opportunity
for
comment.
Similarly,
we
are
proposing
some
adjustments
to
part
1039,
based
on
information
that
surfaced
late
in
that
rulemaking.
We
are
proposing
the
following
changes
in
part
89
and
part
1039:

"
§
89.102:
Add
the
provisions
from
the
Tier
4
final
rule
related
to
additional
allowances
under
the
equipment­
manufacturers
flexibility
program
for
technical
hardship.

"
§
89.102:
Clarify
that
equipment
manufacturers
using
allowances
under
this
section
may
use
loweremitting
engines
than
we
currently
require.

"
§
89.110:
Allow
manufacturers
to
identify
a
different
company's
name
and
trademark
on
the
emission
control
information
label,
with
additional
provisions
to
ensure
that
operators
take
certain
steps
to
ensure
that
operators
have
the
full
benefit
of
the
emission­
related
warranty.

"
§
89.130:
Refer
to
the
nearly
identical
provisions
for
rebuilding
engines
in
§
1068.120.

"
§
89.410:
Allow
manufacturers
to
use
ramped­
modal
testing,
as
specified
for
engines
that
must
meet
the
Tier
4
standards.

"
Appendix
A
to
subpart
F:
Correct
the
ranges
of
values
to
address
an
unintentional
gap
for
sales
volumes
between
300
and
500.

"
§
89.603:
Clarify
that
standards
applicable
to
Independent
Commercial
Importers
(
ICIs)
are
those
of
the
year
in
which
the
imported
engine
was
originally
produced,
for
up
to
five
engines
per
year.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
and
the
discussion
below
related
to
highway
engines
and
vehicles
for
additional
information.

"
§
§
89.913
and
89.914:
Allow
engine
and
equipment
manufacturers
to
use
the
engine­
dressing
provisions
in
§
§
1039.605
and
1039.610.

"
§
89.1003:
Clarify
that
engine
manufacturers
may
ensure
that
the
replaced
engine
is
destroyed
instead
of
taking
possession
of
it;
add
a
new
label
requirement
for
replacement
engines
that
are
allowed
to
meet
a
less
stringent
set
of
standards
that
are
in
effect
when
the
replacement
engine
is
built
(
to
address
the
case
where
the
engine
being
replaced
was
subject
to
emission
standards
less
stringent
than
the
current
standards).

"
§
89.1003:
Clarify
that
violating
the
requirements
to
rebuild
an
engine
to
its
original
configuration
is
considered
tampering
with
respect
to
the
applicable
penalties.

"
§
89.110:
Allow
manufacturers
to
identify
a
different
company's
name
and
trademark
on
the
emission
16
control
information
label,
with
additional
provisions
to
ensure
that
manufacturers
take
certain
steps
to
ensure
that
operators
have
the
full
benefit
of
the
emission­
related
warranty.

"
§
89.1
and
§
1039.5:
Allow
manufacturers
to
include
marine
auxiliary
engines
in
an
engine
family
certified
under
part
89
or
1039,
subject
to
certain
limitations.

"
§
1039.1:
Clarify
that
residence­
time
limits
do
not
apply
to
engines
used
in
stationary
applications
if
they
have
been
certified
to
nonroad
emission
standards.

"
§
1039.104,
1039.625,
and
1039.655:
Change
cross­
reference
from
§
1039.260
to
§
1068.265.

"
§
1039.125:
Clarify
that
a
manufacturer's
obligation
to
pay
for
scheduled
maintenance
under
certain
situations
is
limited
to
the
useful
life
of
the
engine.

"
§
1039.225:
Include
a
modified
FEL
as
the
basis
for
a
change
to
the
application
for
certification,
consistent
with
current
practice.

"
§
1039.240:
Adding
section
references
that
were
inadvertently
omitted.

"
§
1039.510:
Remove
provisions
that
are
covered
by
part
1065.

"
§
1039.605
and
§
1039.610:
Clarify
the
ABT
responsibilities
relative
to
engines
or
vehicles
that
are
certified
under
the
motor­
vehicle
program
and
used
in
nonroad
applications.

"
§
1039.705:
Add
a
constraint
for
averaging,
banking,
and
trading
to
prevent
manufacturers
from
including
credits
earned
in
California
if
there
would
ever
be
a
situation
where
they
are
required
to
meet
separate
standards
in
California
(
or
another
state).

"
§
1039.740:
Correct
the
provisions
allowing
the
use
of
emission
credits
to
from
previous
tiers
of
emission
standards
to
include
an
item
that
was
inadvertently
omitted
from
the
Tier
4
final
rule,
as
described
in
the
preamble
to
that
final
rule.

"
§
1039.801:
Update
various
definitions
to
reflect
the
change
to
move
the
full
text
of
these
definitions
to
part
1068.

In
the
Tier
4
final
rule,
we
adopted
a
revised
provision
allowing
manufacturers
to
request
a
useful
life
shorter
than
that
specified
for
engines
generally.
Our
recent
experience
with
a
similar
provision
for
marine
diesel
engines
has
shown
that
it
can
be
difficult
to
implement.
The
main
difficulty
relates
to
the
extent
and
quality
of
the
information
manufacturers
must
supply
to
establish
an
alternate
useful­
life
period.
As
a
result,
we
are
interested
in
changing
this
provision.
A
similar
provision
has
been
in
place
in
part
89
since
the
beginning
of
emission
standards,
but
we
are
not
aware
of
anyone
requesting
a
shorter
useful
life
for
any
particular
application.
In
the
similar
consideration
of
this
provision
for
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines,
the
only
manufacturers
that
we
would
expect
to
consider
a
shorter
useful
life
would
be
for
engines
used
in
concrete
saws,
concrete
pumps
or
similar
severe­
duty
applications.
To
establish
a
shorter
useful
life
for
a
set
of
engines,
manufacturers
would
need
to
establish
a
separate
engine
family
and
pay
the
associated
fees
for
certification.
It
is
not
clear
that
any
manufacturer
of
nonroad
diesel
engines
would
make
the
extra
effort
or
face
the
extra
expense
of
segregating
a
family
for
a
shorter
useful
life.
We
therefore
request
comment
on
removing
this
provision.
We
also
request
comment
on
the
approach
under
consideration
for
spark­
ignition
engines,
namely
to
remove
the
current
approach
of
requesting
a
shorter
useful
life
and
replacing
it
with
a
useful
life
of
1500
hours
for
engines
used
in
concrete
saws,
concrete
pumps,
and
similar
severe­
duty
engines.
The
useful
life
in
years
would
be
the
same
for
all
engines.

During
the
Tier
4
rulemaking,
equipment
manufacturers
raised
a
concern
regarding
diesel
engines
certified
to
17
meet
Tier
4
standards
based
on
the
use
of
catalyst
technology
relying
on
ultra
low­
sulfur
fuel,
where
those
engines
are
exported
to
countries
with
a
higher
sulfur
content
in
diesel
fuel.
Many
pieces
of
equipment
may
be
designed
and
manufacturered
for
the
U.
S.
domestic
market
and
eventually
sold
to
an
end­
user
that
may
use
the
equipment
outside
of
the
United
States.
The
resulting
damage
to
the
emission­
control
system
after
extended
exposure
to
the
higher
sulfur
fuel
could
permanently
reduce
the
effectiveness
of
emission
controls.
One
possible
solution
would
be
to
require
that
engines
exported
from
the
United
States
have
the
engine
label
and
the
aftertreatment
removed
before
shipping
the
engine.
This
in
effect
invalidates
the
engine's
certification,
which
would
make
it
illegal
to
continue
to
use
the
engine
in
the
United
States,
or
to
later
import
the
engine
back
into
the
United
States.
Two
potential
drawbacks
include
reconciling
the
total
balance
of
emission
credits
under
the
averaging,
banking,
and
trading
program
and
reconciling
the
use
of
the
engine
in
an
existing
flexibility
program.
Alternatively,
we
could
require
tracking
engines
and
documenting
end­
use
status
once
it
has
been
placed
in
equipment.
We
seek
comment
on
the
use
of
such
a
provision
to
prevent
re­
importation
of
engines
that
are
exposed
to
fuel
sulfur
levels
that
would
be
considered
tampering
if
it
occurred
in
the
United
States.

D.
Marine
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
part
94)

We
are
proposing
several
changes
to
our
diesel
marine
engine
program,
in
40
CFR
part
94.
These
changes
are
intended
to
clarify
several
aspects
of
the
program.
These
changes,
which
are
described
in
more
detail
in
the
Technical
Support
Document,
are
as
follows:

°
§
94.2:
Modify
the
definitions
of
"
marine
engine"
and
"
marine
vessel"
and
add
a
new
definition
of
"
amphibious
vehicle"
to
clarify
what
kinds
of
amphibious
vehicles
are
not
considered
marine
vessels;

modify
the
definition
of
"
United
States"
to
remove
the
reference
to
the
Trust
Territories
of
the
Pacific
Islands.

°
§
94.904:
Allow
the
sale
of
an
exempted
or
excluded
engine
if
it
is
certified
or
identical
to
a
certified
engine.

°
§
94.907:
Allow
vessel
manufacturers
to
take
advantage
of
the
engine
dresser
provisions;
clarify
the
reporting
requirement
to
specify
that
the
total
number
of
dressed
engines
produced
by
all
companies
dressing
that
base
engine
for
use
in
a
marine
vessel
is
less
than
50
percent
of
total
annual
sales
for
the
base
engine;
add
language
clarifying
the
requirements
related
to
generating
and
using
emission
credits
with
these
engines.

°
§
94.912:
Exempt
marine
auxiliary
engines
from
the
part
94
requirements
as
long
as
they
are
included
in
an
engine
family
certified
under
part
1039
or
89,
subject
to
certain
limitations.

°
§
94.1001:
Revise
applicability
to
clarify
that
the
provisions
in
Subpart
K
apply
to
manufacturers,
owners,

and
operators
of
marine
vessels
that
contain
engines
with
per­
cylinder
displacement
of
at
least
2.5
liters.

°
§
94.1103:
Clarify
that
the
engine
manufacturer
may
ensure
that
the
replaced
engine
is
destroyed
instead
of
taking
possession
of
it;
add
a
new
label
requirement
for
replacement
engines
that
are
allowed
to
meet
a
less
stringent
set
of
standards
than
are
in
effect
when
the
replacement
engine
is
built
(
to
address
the
case
where
the
engine
being
replaced
was
subject
to
less
stringent
emission
standards).

The
Technical
Support
Document
also
clarifies
the
conditions
under
which
an
auxiliary
engines
used
on
a
18
marine
vessel
will
be
considered
a
marine
auxiliary
engine
and
be
subject
to
40
CFR
94.

E.
Small
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
90)

We
are
proposing
to
add
a
section
to
40
CFR
part
90
to
better
define
the
responsibilities
for
manufacturers
choosing
to
certify
their
engines
below
19
kW
to
the
emission
standards
for
Large
SI
engines
in
40
CFR
part
1048.

We
have
adopted
a
new
approach
to
define
maximum
engine
power
in
40
CFR
part
1039
for
nonroad
diesel
engines
for
purposes
of
defining
the
applicability
of
standards.
This
definition
includes
a
detailed
procedure
for
determining
this
value.
The
current
approach
for
Small
SI
engines
is
to
rely
on
a
definition
of
"
gross
power"
that
describes
generally
how
to
characterize
an
engine's
maximum
power.
We
request
comment
on
adopting
the
new
definition
of
maximum
engine
power
in
40
CFR
part
90.
This
would
have
the
advantage
of
harmonizing
our
treatment
of
this
basic
tool
to
characterize
engines
and
would
allow
for
consistent
treatment
across
programs.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
more
information.

In
addition,
we
are
updating
current
references
to
test
procedures
in
40
CFR
part
86
by
pointing
instead
to
40
CFR
part
1065.
Manufacturers
are
also
encouraged
to
review
the
proposed
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1065,
since
we
intend
eventually
to
apply
those
same
procedures
to
Small
SI
engines.

F.
Marine
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
91)

We
are
proposing
only
minimal
changes
for
marine
SI
engines
in
40
CFR
part
91.
These
changes
are
primarily
to
update
current
references
to
test
procedures
in
40
CFR
part
86
by
pointing
instead
to
40
CFR
part
1065.
We
are
also
updating
various
definitions,
as
described
in
Section
II.
A.
Manufacturers
are
also
encouraged
to
review
the
proposed
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1065,
since
we
intend
eventually
to
apply
those
same
procedures
to
marine
SI
engines.

G.
Large
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
1048)

We
adopted
emission
standards
for
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kW
in
November
2002
(
67
FR
68242).
The
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
1048
were
our
first
attempt
to
draft
emission­
control
regulations
in
plainlanguage
format.
In
the
recent
final
rule
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
we
went
through
a
similar
process,
including
extensive
interaction
with
a
different
set
of
manufacturers.
This
process
led
us
adopt
regulatory
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1039
that
differ
somewhat
from
those
in
part
1048.
Since
the
process
of
meeting
standards,
applying
for
certificates,
and
complying
with
other
emission­
related
requirements
has
a
lot
of
commonality
across
programs,
we
have
a
strong
interest
in
adopting
consistent
provisions
and
uniform
terminology
where
possible.
As
a
result,
we
are
proposing
extensive
changes
in
part
1048
to
align
with
the
regulations
in
part
1039.
Many
of
these
changes
reflect
minor
wording
differences.
The
more
significant
changes
to
part
1048
include
the
following:

"
§
1048.105:
Exclude
marine
fuel
tanks
from
the
standards
for
evaporative
emissions.
This
is
appropriate,

because
the
fuel­
hose
requirements
are
incompatible
with
Coast
Guard
requirements
and
because
we
are
developing
a
separate
emission­
control
program
that
would
apply
to
all
fuel
tanks
associated
with
marine
19
spark­
ignition
engines.

"
§
1048.135:
Add
a
requirement
for
manufacturers
to
supply
duplicate
labels.
This
corresponds
with
the
recently
adopted
provisions
of
40
CFR
1068.105(
c)
that
ensure
that
equipment
manufacturers
will
take
steps
to
prevent
the
misuse
of
duplicate
labels.

"
§
1048.135:
Allow
manufacturers
to
identify
a
different
company's
name
and
trademark
on
the
emission
control
information
label,
with
additional
provisions
to
ensure
that
manufacturers
take
certain
steps
to
ensure
that
operators
have
the
full
benefit
of
the
emission­
related
warranty.

"
§
1048.145:
Add
detailed
provisions
to
the
family­
banking
provisions
to
better
define
the
qualifying
criteria
and
the
process
for
using
this
provision.
For
example,
we
establish
a
date
by
which
manufacturers
must
begin
production
of
early­
compliant
engines
to
avoid
giving
credits
for
marginal
early
production,

we
clarify
that
the
late­
complying
engines
must
continue
to
meet
the
Tier
1
standards,
and
we
add
a
requirement
that
manufacturers
report
the
number
of
engines
they
produce
under
this
provision
to
allow
us
to
verify
compliance.

"
§
1048.310:
Clarify
that
the
maximum
testing
rate
of
1
percent
for
production­
line
testing
applies
only
after
testing
the
minimum
number
of
engines
specified.

"
§
1048.501:
Allow
an
optional
procedure
for
measuring
diurnal
emissions
from
plastic
fuel
tanks.
This
addresses
the
fact
that
we
intended
to
control
diurnal
emissions
from
fuel
tanks,
not
permeation
emissions.
This
will
have
minimal
environmental
impact,
since
plastic
fuel
tanks
are
rarely
used
with
industrial
spark­
ignition
engines.
While
we
may
consider
adding
permeation
controls
in
the
future,
we
are
proposing
to
adopt
procedures
that
would
not
require
no
upgrades
to
plastic
fuel
tanks
at
this
time.

"
§
1048.505:
Allow
manufacturers
to
use
ramped­
modal
testing
for
simplified
measurement
of
steady­
state
emission
results.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
additional
discussion
or
ramped­
modal
testing.

For
discussion
of
additional
changes,
see
the
Technical
Support
Document.

In
the
November
2002
final
rule,
we
adopted
a
provision
allowing
manufacturers
to
request
a
useful
life
shorter
than
that
specified
for
engines
generally.
Our
recent
experience
with
a
similar
provision
for
marine
diesel
engines
has
shown
that
it
can
be
difficult
to
implement.
The
main
difficulty
relates
to
the
extent
and
quality
of
the
information
manufacturers
must
supply
to
establish
an
alternate
useful­
life
period.
As
a
result,
we
are
interested
in
changing
this
provision.
As
far
as
we
are
aware,
the
only
manufacturers
that
might
reasonably
consider
a
shorter
useful
life
would
be
for
engines
used
in
severe­
duty
applications.
To
establish
a
shorter
useful
life
for
a
set
of
engines,
manufacturers
would
need
to
establish
a
separate
engine
family
and
pay
the
associated
fees
for
certification.
During
the
rulemaking,
manufacturers
of
these
engines
suggested
that
their
engines
rarely
operate
longer
than
1500
hours.
We
therefore
request
comment
on
removing
the
current
approach
of
requesting
a
shorter
useful
life
and
replacing
it
with
a
useful
life
of
1500
hours
for
severe­
duty
engines.
The
useful
life
in
years
would
be
the
same
for
all
engines.

H.
Recreational
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
1051)

We
are
proposing
to
make
several
adjustments
and
clarifications
to
the
regulations
for
recreational
vehicles
in
part
1051,
including
the
following:

"
Clarify
the
characteristics
for
evaporative
emission
families
to
include
items
we
inadvertently
omitted
20
from
the
November
2002
final
rule,
and
make
it
clearer
how
evaporative
and
exhaust
emission
families
relate
to
each
other.

"
Clarify
the
evaporative
test
procedures
regarding
steps
to
seal
the
fuel
tank.

"
Define
"
Fuel
lines"
to
remove
uncertainty
related
to
which
products
are
subject
to
permeation
standards.

"
Specify
a
maximum
8­
hour
time
period
between
refueling
and
starting
the
permeation
test
run
and
clarify
that
extending
permeation
testing
from
two
weeks
to
four
weeks
depends
on
establishing
a
linear
change
in
emissions
based
on
daily
measurements.

"
Clarify
that
youth­
model
ATVs
and
off­
highway
motorcycles
count
toward
meeting
the
phase­
in
requirements.

"
Remove
the
ATV
FEL
cap
for
carbon
monoxide,
which
was
inadverently
left
in
the
final
regulations.

"
Specify
that
the
warranty
period
may
be
based
on
hours
of
engine
operation
in
addition
to
odometer
readings.

"
Allow
rounding
of
Normalized
Emission
Rates
to
one
decimal
place,
rather
than
to
the
nearest
whole
number,
and
adding
additional
equations
for
smaller
engines.

"
Change
the
minimum
useful
life
for
youth­
model
ATVs
and
off­
highway
motorcycles
to
5,000
kilometers
and
500
hours.

"
Allow
all
ATVs
certifying
to
J1088
to
use
the
raw
gas
sampling
provisions
of
Part
91
for
engine
testing
through
the
2008
model
year,
which
was
intended
in
the
November
2002
final
rule.

"
Allows
manufacturers
to
test
engines
based
on
an
engine's
maximum
power
if
that
better
represents
in­
use
operation,
rather
than
using
the
specified
procedure
to
establish
maximum
test
speed.

"
Adopt
a
speed
threshold
to
exclude
low­
speed
all­
terrain
vehicles
from
part
1051.
For
example,
low­
speed
amphibious
vehicles
not
meeting
the
definition
the
definition
of
offroad
utility
vehicles
would
be
covered
by
part
90
instead
of
part
1051.

We
adopted
emission
standards
for
recreational
vehicles
in
November
2002
(
67
FR
68242).
The
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
1051
were
our
first
attempt
to
draft
emission­
control
regulations
in
plain­
language
format.
In
the
recent
final
rule
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
we
went
through
a
similar
process,
including
extensive
interaction
with
a
different
set
of
manufacturers.
This
process
led
us
to
adopt
regulatory
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1039
that
differ
from
those
in
part
1051.
Since
the
process
of
meeting
standards,
applying
for
certificates,
and
complying
with
other
emission­
related
requirements
has
a
lot
of
commonality
across
programs,
we
have
a
strong
interest
in
adopting
consistent
provisions
and
uniform
terminology
as
much
as
possible.
As
a
result,
we
are
proposing
extensive
changes
in
part
1051
to
align
with
the
regulations
in
part
1039.
Many
of
these
changes
reflect
minor
wording
differences.
The
more
significant
changes
to
part
1051
include
the
following:

"
§
1051.135:
Allow
manufacturers
to
identify
a
different
company's
name
and
trademark
on
the
emission
control
information
label,
with
additional
provisions
to
ensure
that
operators
take
certain
steps
to
ensure
that
operators
have
the
full
benefit
of
the
emission­
related
warranty.

"
§
1051.135:
Add
a
requirement
for
manufacturers
to
supply
duplicate
labels.
This
corresponds
with
the
recently
adopted
provisions
of
40
CFR
1068.105(
c)
that
ensure
that
equipment
manufacturers
will
take
steps
to
prevent
the
misuse
of
duplicate
labels.

"
§
1051.135:
Add
a
requirement
to
include
the
hang­
tag
label
with
normalized
emission
rates
in
the
2
"
Recommended
Technical
Amendments
to
EPA
Tier
0/
1/
2
Locomotive
Rule,"
Handout
from
the
Engine
Manufacturers
Association,
October
2003
(
Docket
#
OAR­
2004­
0017­
0002).

3
"
Inclusion
of
the
Railpower
Green
Goat
Hybrid
Locomotive
40
CFR
92
Averaging,
Trading,
and
Banking"
e­
mail
from
Christopher
Weaver,
Railpower,
May
7,
2004
(
Docket
#
OAR­
2004­
0017­
0003).

21
application
for
certification.

"
§
1051.225:
For
situations
where
the
Family
Emission
Limit
changes
during
a
model
year,
the
manufacturer
calculates
the
credit
balance
for
the
family
based
on
the
FEL
that
applies
for
the
corresponding
production
volume.
This
allows
manufacturers
to
generate
more
credits
(
or
use
fewer
credits),
but
this
is
consistent
with
the
fact
that
manufacturers
are
liable
for
the
emission­
control
performance
of
each
engine
relative
to
the
FEL
that
applied
at
the
point
of
production.

"
§
1051.501:
Add
"
or
add"
in
paragraph
(
b)(
2)
to
clarify
that
the
addition
of
fuel
would
not
be
allowed
after
the
first
weight
measurement
is
taken
in
the
permeation
test
run.

"
§
1051.705:
Add
a
constraint
for
averaging,
banking,
and
trading
to
prevent
manufacturers
from
including
credits
earned
in
California
if
there
would
ever
be
a
situation
where
they
are
required
to
meet
separate
standards
in
California
(
or
another
state).

"
§
1051.505
and
1051.615:
We
request
comment
on
adding
an
option
to
allow
manufacturers
to
conduct
steady­
state
testing
using
ramped­
modal
cycles,
as
described
in
the
Technical
Support
Document.

We
request
comment
on
all
these
changes
to
part
1051.

I.
Locomotives
(
40
CFR
part
92)

We
are
proposing
a
variety
of
changes
for
our
locomotive
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
92
to
make
correct
various
technical
references
and
typographical
errors.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
and
the
proposed
regulations
for
additional
information.

In
addition,
we
are
requesting
comment
on
a
few
additional
items.
The
Engine
Manufacturers
Association
recommended
several
revisions
to
the
locomotive
regulations.
2
We
are
proposing
many
of
these
changes,
and
are
requesting
comment
on
those
that
we
are
not
proposing.
We
are
especially
interested
in
comments
related
to
EMA's
request
to
revise
the
accuracy
specifications
found
in
§
§
92.104(
b)(
1)(
i),
92.105(
d),
92.106(
b)(
1)(
ii),

92.107(
a)(
1),
and
92.126(
b)(
3).
These
comments
generally
express
a
concern
that
the
adopted
specifications
require
too
much
precision
or
accuracy.
We
request
further
comment
on
the
achievable
level
of
precision
and
accuracy
for
these
specifications,
and
on
the
degree
to
which
we
should
change
the
specified
values.

The
standards
for
locomotive
engines
currently
do
not
apply
to
engines
used
in
locomotives
if
they
have
a
maximum
power
below
750
kW.
These
engines
are
generally
designed
and
manufactured
for
other
applications,
so
they
are
excluded
from
locomotive
standards
and
procedures.
We
have
received
a
request
that
we
allow
engines
below
750
kW
that
are
used
in
locomotives
to
optionally
certify
to
locomotive
standards
instead
of
the
otherwise
applicable
requirements
of
40
CFR
part
89.3
This
commenter
suggested
the
following
addition
to
the
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
92:
22
The
manufacturer
or
remanufacturer
of
a
vehicle
propelled
by
an
engine
rated
less
than
750
kW,
but
that
otherwise
meets
all
the
requirements
of
this
definition
may
elect
to
have
it
treated
under
this
part
rather
than
under
part
89
by
giving
written
notice
of
such
election
to
the
Administrator.
All
of
the
provisions
of
this
part
shall
apply
to
vehicles
for
which
such
an
election
is
made.

We
continue
to
believe
that
engines
below
750
kW
should
be
regulated
as
nonroad
diesel
engines
under
part
89.

However,
we
request
comment
on
this
suggestion
to
allow
manufacturers
to
optionally
meet
the
standards
in
part
92
instead.
We
also
request
comment
regarding
the
applicability
of
the
line­
haul
emission
standards
to
these
lowpower
locomotive
engines.
Finally,
we
request
comment
on
alternate
calculations
to
address
the
equivalent
tractive
horsepower
of
hybrid
locomotives.

J.
Highway
engines
and
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
86)

1.
Light­
duty
Vehicles
a.
Calculation
Method
for
Nonmethane
Hydrocarbons
Text
changes
are
proposed
to
properly
align
EPA
and
CARB
calculation
methods
for
measuring
nonmethane
hydrocarbons
from
gasoline,
diesel,
methanol,
ethanol,
and
liquefied
petroleum
gas
fueled
light­
duty
vehicles.

Harmonization
of
EPA
and
CARB
testing
and
calculation
practices,
including
proper
accounting
for
the
methane
response
of
the
total
hydrocarbon
FID,
was
anticipated
when
Tier
2
regulations
were
developed.
Modifying
the
language
in
86.121­
90(
d)
and
86.144­
94(
c)(
8)(
vi)
to
explicitly
require
the
use
of
a
measured
methane
response
factor,
as
opposed
to
the
current
CFR
text
which
specifies
an
assumed
methane
response
factor
of
1.0,
will
align
the
calculation
methods.
Calculating
nonmethane
hydrocarbon
using
a
measured
methane
response
factor
is
the
technically
correct
calculation
and
measurement
method.

b.
Correction
to
Tier
2
Regulations
On
December
6,
2002,
we
made
some
minor
technical
amendments
to
EPA's
Tier
2/
Gasoline
Sulfur
regulations
(
67
FR
72821,
December
6,
2002).
However,
those
actions
mistakenly
reversed
a
prior
correction
to
Table
S04­
2
in
§
86.1811­
04(
c)(
6)
that
was
made
on
February
28,
2000
(
65
FR
10598,
February
28,
2000).
We
are
now
reestablishing
the
correct
version
of
that
table.
Specifically,
in
§
86.1811­
04(
c)(
6),
in
Table
S04­
2,
the
"
Notes"
entry
corresponding
with
"
Bin
No.
9"'
should
read
"
a
b
e
f
g
h".

2.
Highway
Motorcycles
a.
Highway
Motorcycle
Labeling
Requirements
On
January
15,
2004,
we
finalized
new
emission
standards
for
highway
motorcycles
(
69
FR
2398,
January
15,

2004).
These
new
standards
are
implemented
in
two
stages:
a
"
Tier
1"
that
is
effective
in
the
2006
through
2009
model
years,
and
a
"
Tier
2"
that
takes
effect
starting
with
the
2010
model
year.
These
standards
are
generally
23
harmonized
with
California
emission
standards
that
take
effect
two
years
earlier.
Under
the
new
standards,
Class
III
motorcycles
must
comply
with
a
new
HC+
NOx
emission
standard
on
a
corporate
average
basis.
This
new
flexibility
allows
manufacturers
to
market
motorcycles
that
produce
more
pollution
than
the
designated
average
standard
as
long
as
they
are
balanced
out
by
sales
of
less­
polluting
models
such
that
the
manufacturers'

salesweighted
corporate
average
remains
below
the
standard.
Averaging
is
also
optionally
allowed
for
Class
I
and
II
motorcycles.

Since
publishing
the
final
rule,
however,
we
realized
that
the
labeling
language
for
highway
motorcycles
is
not
helpful
in
the
context
of
the
new
averaging
standard.
The
current
federal
labeling
language
(
see
40
CFR
86.413­

78)
only
requires
that
a
motorcycle
label
indicate
compliance
with
EPA
standards
for
a
given
model
year.
This
is
all
that
is
needed
when
there
is
no
uncertainty
regarding
what
the
applicable
emission
standards
are.
In
the
context
of
the
type
of
averaging
program
we
finalized,
however,
the
manufacturers
essentially
choose
their
own
emission
standard
(
up
to
a
cap)
for
each
engine
family.
The
manufacturer­
selected
emission
standard
is
known
as
a
"
Family
Emission
Limit,"
or
FEL.
For
example,
a
manufacturer
with
two
engine
families
might
market
one
meeting
a
standard
of
2.2
grams/
mile
HC+
NOx
and
another
one
meeting
a
standard
of
0.5
grams/
mile
HC+
NOx.

If
these
are
equally­
selling
engine
families,
then
the
manufacturer
will
meet
the
required
Tier
1
average
of
1.4
grams/
mile
HC+
NOx.

In
the
case
described
above,
a
label
with
only
the
model
year
will
not
provide
adequate
information
regarding
the
applicable
emission
standard.
Historically
both
EPA
and
ARB
have
required
labels
that
identify
the
specific
applicable
FEL
for
vehicles
certified
under
averaging
programs.
Therefore,
we
are
amending
the
labeling
requirements
with
two
goals
in
mind.
First,
the
label
must
provide
sufficient
information
regarding
the
applicable
emission
standard
and
model
year,
as
well
as
specific
tune­
up
information.
Second,
the
label
requirements
should
be
aligned
with
ARB
to
the
greatest
degree
possible
to
prevent
a
situation
where
the
manufacturer
has
to
apply
two
labels
to
a
motorcycle
to
meet
two
different
sets
of
requirements.
The
new
labeling
language
in
40
CFR
86.413­

2006
accomplishes
both
of
these
goals.

b.
Highway
Motorcycle
Fuel
Specifications
In
our
final
rule
setting
new
emission
standards
for
highway
motorcycles
(
69
FR
2398,
January
15,
2004)
we
updated
the
fuel
specifications
for
motorcycle
emission
testing
to
be
consistent
with
the
fuel
specifications
finalized
on
February
10,
2000,
as
part
of
our
"
Tier
2
Motor
Vehicle
Emissions
Standards
and
Gasoline
Sulfur
Control
Requirements"
(
65
FR
6697,
February
10,
2000).
This
was
necessary
to
ensure
that
motorcycles
are
tested
using
fuels
consistent
with
those
available
in
the
marketplace.
We
received
no
negative
comments
on
making
this
change.
It
is
necessary
at
this
time
to
correct
some
errors
that
were
made
in
updating
the
motorcycle
test
fuel
specification.
The
specific
corrections
are:

°
Changing
the
volume
percent
of
aromatics
from
"
35
minimum"
to
"
35
maximum";

°
Changing
the
phosphorous
g/
liter
specification
from
0.005
g/
liter
to
0.0013
g/
liter
(
the
alternative
specification
is
0.005
g/
U.
S.
gallon);

°
Changing
the
sulfur
weight
percent
from
0.08
maximum
to
0.008
maximum;
and
°
Changing
the
volatility
test
procedure
from
"
ASTM
D
3231"
to
"
ASTM
D
323."
4
"
Guidance
Regarding
Test
Procedures
for
Heavy­
Duty
On­
Highway
and
Non­
Road
Engines,
"
December
3,
2002
(
OAR­
2004­
0017­
xxxx).

24
3.
Heavy­
duty
highway
engines
As
discussed
above,
we
are
proposing
to
adopt
the
lab­
testing
and
field­
testing
specifications
in
part
1065
for
heavy­
duty
highway
engines,
including
both
diesel
and
otto­
cycle
engines.
These
procedures
replace
those
currently
published
in
subparts
D,
N,
and
P
in
40
CFR
part
86.
We
are
proposing
a
gradual
transition
from
the
part
86
procedures
over
a
period
of
two
model
years
in
order
to
fully
migrate
to
part
1065,
no
later
than
model
year
2008.
Manufacturers
would
not
need
to
conduct
new
testing
if
they
are
able
to
use
carryover
data,
but
any
new
testing
for
2008
and
later
model
years
would
be
done
using
the
part
1065
procedures.
Migrating
heavy­
duty
highway
engines
to
the
part
1065
procedures
allows
us
to
include
all
the
testing­
related
improvements
in
the
HD2007
rule,
including
those
we
have
adopted
through
guidance.
4
In
addition,
part
1065
incorporates
revisions
based
on
updated
procedures
for
sampling
low
concentrations
of
PM.

We
are
also
proposing
to
require
manufacturers
to
use
ramped­
modal
testing
to
show
that
they
meet
steadystate
emission
standards
using
the
Supplemental
Emissions
Test
(
SET),
which
will
be
required
for
model
year
2007
and
later
engines.
The
conventional
approach
for
steady­
state
testing
is
to
measure
emissions
separately
for
each
mode.
Ramped­
modal
testing
involves
a
single,
continuous
emission
measurement
as
the
engine
operates
over
the
test
modes
in
a
defined
sequence,
including
short
transition
segments
between
modes.
Ramped­
modal
testing
offers
several
advantages,
primarily
that
of
increased
accuracy
for
measuring
very
low
levels
of
PM
emissions.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
additional
information
on
the
advantages
of
ramped­
modal
testing.

Part
1065
bases
the
denormalized
duty
cycle
on
"
maximum
test
speed,"
which
differs
somewhat
from
the
traditional
approach
from
part
86
of
relying
on
rated
speed.
We
request
comment
on
whether
or
not
we
need
to
adjust
how
maximum
test
speed
is
applied
to
heavy­
duty
highway
diesel
engines
to
better
represent
in­
use
operation.
Specifically,
we
request
comment
on
whether
or
not
we
should
specify
that
maximum
test
speed
should
be
equal
to
the
112
%
speed
from
the
duty
cycle
for
this
particular
sequence.
This
would
shift
the
prescribed
speeds
that
are
in
excess
of
100
%
speed
to
be
no
greater
than
99.92
%
of
maximum
test
speed.
This
adjustment
would
prevent
excessive
speeds,
while
ensuring
our
intent
to
specify
maximum
test
speed
to
test
an
engine
over
its
complete
operating
range.

Finally,
we
are
proposing
a
minor
adjustment
to
the
phase­
in
process
for
the
HD2007
standards
to
allow
manufacturers
to
make
their
compliance
demonstration
either
on
the
basis
of
model
years
or
calendar
years.
This
increases
the
flexibility
for
manufacturers
to
define
their
model
year
without
affecting
their
ability
to
show
that
they
meet
their
phase­
in
obligations.
Because
the
phase­
in
period
is
three
years
under
either
approach,
we
believe
this
adjustment
would
not
harm
the
environmental
objectives
of
the
program.

4.
Importation
of
nonconforming
highway
engines
and
vehicles.
25
The
Agency
is
proposing
revisions
to
40
CFR
part
85,
subpart
P
regarding
the
applicable
emission
standards
for
imported
nonconforming
highway
vehicles
and
engines,
including
light­
duty
vehicles
(
passenger
cars),

lightduty
trucks,
heavy­
duty
vehicles,
heavy­
duty
engines,
and
motorcycles.
This
proposal
clarifies
that
these
nonconforming
vehicles
and
engines
are
required
to
meet
the
emission
standards
in
effect
when
the
vehicle
or
engine
was
originally
produced,
not
the
emission
standards
in
effect
when
the
vehicle
or
engine
is
modified.
This
approach
is
consistent
with
the
requirements
for
light­
duty
Independent
Commercial
Importers
(
ICIs)
which
have
been
in
effect
since
1996
(
61
FR
5842,
February
14,
1996).

Most
of
the
issues
related
to
this
proposal
were
previously
addressed
in
the
1996
rule.
An
excerpt
from
that
1996
rule
provides
the
a
brief
summary
of
the
basis
for
this
proposal.
Section
I.
A
of
the
1996
final
rule
reads
in
part:

As
proposed,
EPA
is
eliminating
the
requirement
that
nonconforming
light­
duty
vehicles
and
Light­
duty
trucks
imported
pursuant
to
40
CFR
85.1501
or
85.1509
meet
the
part
86
emission
standards
in
effect
at
the
time
of
modification.
These
vehicles,
with
a
few
exceptions,
will
instead
be
required
to
meet
emission
standards
(
with
applicable
deterioration
factors
applied)
that
were
in
effect
at
the
time
of
original
vehicle
production,
using
currently
applicable
testing
procedures.

The
specific
standards
applicable
to
these
vehicles
are
contained
in
a
new
§
85.1515....

As
discussed
in
the
proposal
(
Supplementary
Document
pp.
27­
28,
Docket
No.
A­
89­
20),
when
EPA
promulgated
the
prior
requirement
to
meet
standards
applicable
at
the
time
of
modification,
the
Agency
had
no
data
or
evidence
suggesting
that
older
vehicles
could
not
be
modified
to
meet
current
year
emission
standards.
Since
that
rulemaking,
EPA
has
obtained
evidence
suggesting
that
many
older
vehicles
cannot
be
modified
to
meet
current
year
standards
without
extraordinary
cost,
which
makes
the
conversion
financially
unfeasible
for
many
owners
of
such
vehicles.
Today's
rule
would
give
owners
of
older
vehicles
a
way
to
import
their
vehicles.
In
addition,
it
would
have
been
significantly
more
difficult
and
costly
for
importers
to
modify
vehicles
to
comply
with
the
current
model
year
standards
beginning
in
January,
1996,
when
the
standards
applicable
to
small
volume
manufacturers
became
substantially
more
stringent.
EPA
agrees
with
the
statements
submitted
by
ICIs
after
the
close
of
the
comment
period
that
the
expense
of
such
modifications
would
have
a
serious
deleterious
effect
on
their
businesses
and
would
not
justify
the
costs.

Although
the
intent
of
the
1996
rule
was
clear,
we
are
proposing
to
make
regulation
changes
to
make
the
regulation
language
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
1996
rule.
The
1996
final
rule
added
40
CFR
85.1515,
which
provided
a
list
of
the
emission
standards
applicable
to
imported
light­
duty
vehicles
and
light­
duty
trucks
based
on
the
original
production
(
OP)
year
of
the
vehicle.
Tables
1
and
2
in
40
CFR
85.1515
correctly
indicate
that
the
emission
standards
applicable
for
pre­
1994
imported
light­
duty
vehicles
and
light­
duty
trucks
are
based
on
the
original
production
year
of
the
vehicle.
Tables
1
and
2
also
correctly
indicate
(
in
a
footnote)
that
1994
and
later
imported
lightduty
vehicles
and
light­
duty
trucks
are
required
to
meet
the
applicable
emission
standards
as
"
Specified
in
40
CFR
part
86
for
the
OP
year
of
the
vehicle,
per
85.1515(
c)."
However
§
85.1515(
c)(
1)
incorrectly
indicates
that
"
Nonconforming
motor
vehicles
or
motor
vehicle
engines
of
1994
OP
model
year
and
later
conditionally
imported
pursuant
to
§
85.1505
or
§
85.1509
shall
meet
all
of
the
emission
standards
specified
in
40
CFR
part
86
for
the
model
year
in
which
the
motor
vehicle
or
motor
vehicle
engine
is
modified."
(
emphasis
added)

This
ambiguity
in
the
regulations
was
unfortunately
not
corrected
after
the
1996
rule
changes
became
effective.

Nor
was
it
corrected
when
Interim
non­
Tier
2
and
Tier
2
requirements
were
adopted
for
import
vehicles
(
65
FR
6698,

February
10,
2000).
Although
the
2000
rulemaking
did
not
intend
to
change
the
highway
engine
or
vehicle
importation
process,
the
regulations
continued
to
indicate
that
nonconforming
motor
vehicles
and
motor
vehicle
engines
must
meet
the
emission
standards
in
the
model
year
in
which
the
motor
vehicle
or
motor
vehicle
engine
is
modified;
see
40
CFR
85.1515(
c)(
2)(
ii)
through
(
d).
We
have
now
received
several
petitions
from
light
duty
ICIs
to
26
correct
the
regulations
to
permit
vehicles
imported
by
ICIs
to
meet
OP
year
standards.

In
summary,
for
the
reasons
discussed
in
the
provisions
of
61
FR
5842,
February
14,
1996,
we
are
proposing
changes
to
correct
the
regulations
for
nonconforming
highway
vehicles
so
they
are
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
1996
final
rule.
This
proposal
will
require
imported
highway
vehicles
to
meet
the
emission
standards
in
effect
the
year
the
vehicle
was
originally
produced,
not
the
emission
standards
in
effect
in
the
year
the
vehicle
or
engine
is
modified.

We
are,
however,
concerned
that
ICI
provisions
which
apply
OP
year
standards
could
be
used
as
a
way
to
circumvent
our
Tier
2
light
duty
standards
and
our
new
more
stringent
motorcycle
standards.
Thus
we
are
proposing
to
cap
each
ICI's
annual
production
of
vehicles
meeting
OP
year
standards
when
OP
year
standards
are
less
stringent
than
the
standards
that
apply
during
the
year
of
modification.
We
are
proposing
a
cap
of
a
total
of
50
light
duty
vehicles
and
trucks
and
50
motorcycles.
This
does
not
impact
the
number
of
vehicles
an
ICI
may
produce
that
are
certified
to
the
standards
that
apply
during
the
year
of
modification.

While
we
have
never
had
an
ICI
for
highway
HDEs,
we
are
also
proposing,
consistent
with
the
above,
to
make
clear
that
the
applicable
standards
for
HDEs
imported
by
an
ICI
would
be
those
of
the
year
of
original
production.
For
HDEs,
we
are
proposing
an
annual
cap
of
five
on
an
ICI's
production
of
engines
certified
to
OP
year
standards
that
are
less
stringent
than
those
that
apply
during
the
year
of
modification.
This
will
address
the
possibility
that
ICIs
could
provide
an
avenue
by
which
truck
purchasers
could
avoid
the
additional
costs
of
new
trucks
with
engines
meeting
aftertreatment­
based
engine
standards.
We
are
proposing
a
similar
amendment
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
as
described
elsewhere
in
this
document.

We
believe
it
is
appropriate
to
have
different
caps
on
the
quantity
of
vehicles
and
engines
that
can
be
certified
to
OP
year
standards,
where
OP
year
standards
are
less
stringent
than
those
that
apply
during
the
year
of
modification.

The
sales
of
light­
duty
vehicles
and
trucks
are
many
times
greater
than
those
of
heavy­
duty
highway
engines
and
nonroad
diesel
engines
combined.
Further,
we
believe
that
the
caps
for
light­
duty
vehicles
light­
duty
trucks,
and
motorcycles
should
be
larger
than
those
for
nonroad
and
highway
engines
to
accommodate
an
industry
that
has
grown
up
around
the
light­
duty
ICI
program.
The
light­
duty
and
motorcycle
ICIs
can
provide
additional
consumer
choice
and
also
provide
an
avenue
by
which
(
for
a
price)
someone
who
has
lived
outside
of
the
United
States,
including
returning
U.
S.
military
personnel,
can
bring
a
used
personal
vehicle
they
acquired
overseas
into
conformity
with
U.
S.
emission
requirements.
No
such
ICI
industry
exists
for
highway
or
nonroad
engines.
Where
OP
year
standards
are
applied
to
highway
and
nonroad
engines,
we
are
proposing
a
lower
cap.
We
believe
it
will
be
appropriate
to
limit
the
activities
of
engine
ICIs,
when
previous
model
year
engines
are
involved,
to
those
specialized
trucks
or
pieces
of
equipment
for
which
demand
is
so
low
that
normal
certification
didn't
occur
or
might
not
occur.
While
we
want
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
the
importation
of
highly
specialized
vehicles
or
equipment
that
might
otherwise
be
unavailable
in
the
United
States,
we
do
not
want
to
develop
an
industry
that
simply
provides
older
equipment
that
would
most
likely
be
built
with
engines
meeting
significantly
less
stringent
standards.

III.
Public
Participation
We
request
comment
on
all
aspects
of
this
proposal.
This
section
describes
how
you
can
participate
in
this
process.
27
A.
How
and
to
Whom
Do
I
Submit
Comments?

B.
Will
There
Be
a
Public
Hearing?

If
you
would
like
a
public
hearing
in
addition
to
the
planned
workshop,
contact
us
by
August
13,
2004
as
described
above
in
"
DATES"
If
a
public
hearing
is
requested,
we
will
hold
it
on
September
13,
2004
starting
at
9:
00
am
EDT.

Contact
us
for
updated
information
about
the
possibility
of
a
public
hearing.

If
you
would
like
to
present
testimony
at
a
public
hearing,
we
ask
that
you
notify
the
contact
person
listed
above
at
least
ten
days
beforehand.
You
should
estimate
the
time
you
will
need
for
your
presentation
and
identify
any
needed
audio/
visual
equipment.
We
suggest
that
you
bring
copies
of
your
statement
or
other
material
for
the
EPA
panel
and
the
audience.
It
would
also
be
helpful
if
you
send
us
a
copy
of
your
statement
or
other
materials
before
the
hearing.

We
will
arrange
for
a
written
transcript
of
the
hearing
and
keep
the
official
record
of
the
hearing
open
for
30
days
to
allow
you
to
submit
supplementary
information.
You
may
make
arrangements
for
copies
of
the
transcript
directly
with
the
court
reporter.

C.
Comment
Period
The
comment
period
for
this
rule
will
end
on
.

IV.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
the
Agency
must
determine
whether
the
regulatory
action
is
"
significant"
and
therefore
subject
to
review
by
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
and
the
requirements
of
this
Executive
Order.
The
Executive
Order
defines
a
"
significant
regulatory
action"
as
any
regulatory
action
that
is
likely
to
result
in
a
rule
that
may:

°
Have
an
annual
effect
on
the
economy
of
$
100
million
or
more
or
adversely
affect
in
a
material
way
the
economy,
a
sector
of
the
economy,
productivity,
competition,
jobs,
the
environment,
public
health
or
safety,
or
State,
Local,
or
Tribal
governments
or
communities;

°
Create
a
serious
inconsistency
or
otherwise
interfere
with
an
action
taken
or
planned
by
another
agency;

°
Materially
alter
the
budgetary
impact
of
entitlements,
grants,
user
fees,
or
loan
programs,
or
the
rights
and
obligations
of
recipients
thereof;
or
°
Raise
novel
legal
or
policy
issues
arising
out
of
legal
mandates,
the
President's
priorities,
or
the
principles
set
forth
in
the
Executive
Order.

Because
the
rule
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs,
it
is
not
a
significant
regulatory
action
and
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
Executive
Order
12866.
Any
new
costs
associated
with
this
rule
will
be
minimal.
In
addition,
some
of
the
changes
will
substantially
reduce
the
burden
associated
with
testing,
as
described
in
the
Regulatory
Support
Document.
28
B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
This
rule
does
not
include
any
new
collection
requirements,
as
it
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs.

C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
We
have
determined
that
it
is
not
necessary
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
in
connection
with
this
rule.

We
have
also
determined
that
this
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
For
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
this
final
rule
on
small
entities,
a
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(
1)
A
small
business
that
meet
the
definition
for
business
based
on
SBA
size
standards;
(
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
not­
for­
profit
enterprise
which
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.
This
rule
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs.

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
that
alternative
was
not
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.
We
have
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.
This
rule
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs.
The
requirements
of
UMRA
therefore
do
not
apply
to
this
action.
29
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"
is
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
proposed
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
proposed
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
proposed
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.

F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
With
Indian
Tribal
Governments
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
"
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments"
(
65
FR
67249,

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."

This
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
This
rule
will
be
implemented
at
the
Federal
level
and
impose
compliance
costs
only
on
engine
manufacturers
and
ship
builders.
Tribal
governments
will
be
affected
only
to
the
extent
they
purchase
and
use
equipment
with
regulated
engines.
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
30
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
proposed
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
Executive
Order
because
it
does
not
involve
decisions
on
environmental
health
or
safety
risks
that
may
disproportionately
affect
children.

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
effect
on
the
supply,
distribution,
or
use
of
energy.

I.
National
Technology
Transfer
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
(
e.
g.,
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
proposed
rule
involves
technical
standards.
The
International
Organization
for
Standardization
(
ISO)
has
a
voluntary
consensus
standard
that
can
be
used
to
test
engines.
However,
the
test
procedures
in
this
proposal
reflect
a
level
of
development
that
goes
substantially
beyond
the
ISO
or
other
published
procedures.
The
proposed
procedures
incorporate
new
specifications
for
transient
emission
measurements,
measuring
PM
emissions
at
very
low
levels,

measuring
emissions
using
field­
testing
procedures.
The
procedures
we
adopt
in
this
rule
will
form
the
working
template
for
ISO
and
national
and
state
governments
to
define
test
procedures
for
measuring
engine
emissions.
As
such,
we
have
worked
extensively
with
the
representatives
of
other
governments,
testing
organizations,
and
the
affected
industries.

EPA
welcomes
comments
on
this
aspect
of
the
proposed
rulemaking.

V.
Statutory
Provisions
and
Legal
Authority
Statutory
authority
for
the
engine
controls
proposed
today
can
be
found
in
42
U.
S.
C.
7401
­
7671q.

List
of
Subjects
31
40
CFR
Part
85
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
86
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Labeling,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,

Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

40
CFR
Part
89
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,

Labeling,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research,
Vessels,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
90
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
91
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Warranties
40
CFR
Part
92
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,

Labeling,
Railroads,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Warranties
40
CFR
Part
94
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Incorporation
by
reference,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Vessels,

Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
1039,
1048,
and
1051
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
1065
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Incorporation
by
reference,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research.
32
40
CFR
Part
1068
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,

Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Warranties.

Dated:

___________________________________

Michael
Leavitt
Administrator.