Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0017-0100
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2005-05-09T04:00Z

1
April
15,
2005
ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS
CONCERNING
SEPARATE
SHIPMENT
OF
AFTERTREATMENT
SYSTEMS
FOR
HIGHWAY
APPLICATIONS
85.1713
Delegated­
assembly
exemption
1.
Section
85.1713(
b)(
6)
requires
that
the
engine
manufacturer
"
keep
records
to
document
how
many
engines
you
produce
under
this
exemption."
A
record
of
engine
quantities
built
under
the
exemption
seems
a
rather
useless
record
for
either
the
manufacturer
or
for
EPA.
This
requirement
should
simply
be
stated
as
a
requirement
to
keep
affidavits
on
file
for
the
5
year
duration
specified.

2.
Section
85.1713
(
e)
states
that
the
exemption
expires
when
the
OEM
"
takes
possession"
of
the
engine.
This
could
be
problematic
in
that
if,
for
some
reason,
the
engine
must
be
returned
to
the
engine
manufacturer,
the
expired
exemption
will
have
prohibited
its
shipment
back
the
engine
manufacturer's
facility.
EMA
proposes
that
the
language
be
modified
to
state
that
"
Once
the
vehicle
manufacturer
installs
the
engine
into
the
vehicle
with
the
required
aftertreatment,
the
exemption
expires "

3.
Section
85.1713
(
g)(
1)
states
that
"
If
we
suspend
or
revoke
the
exemption
for
any
of
your
engine
families
under
this
paragraph
(
g),
this
exemption
will
not
apply
for
future
certificates
unless
you
demonstrate
that
the
factors
causing
the
nonconformity
do
not
apply
to
the
other
engine
families."
While
we
believe
we
understand
the
intent,
it
implies
that
there
is
no
opportunity
for
an
engine
manufacturer
to
take
corrective
action
so
as
to
restore
the
exemption
in
future
model
years
for
the
engine
family
for
which
the
exemption
was
revoked,
and
likewise
have
it
available
for
other
engine
families
for
which
similar
circumstances
might
exist,
even
if
the
corrective
action
can
be
applied
to
those
families
as
well.
EMA
requests
that
EPA
add
language
to
provide
for
the
opportunity
that
the
engine
manufacturer
can
restore
its
good
standing
with
EPA
and
take
advantage
of
the
exemption
where
needed.

4.
Section
85.1713
(
c)(
3)(
v)
allows
for
engine
manufacturers
who
also
produce
vehicles
to
"
meet
your
auditing
responsibilities
under
paragraph
(
c)(
2)(
iii)
of
this
section
by
maintaining
a
database
showing
how
you
pair
aftertreatment
components
with
the
appropriate
engines."
The
reference
to
"
paragraph
(
c)(
2)(
iii)"
should
be
"
paragraph
(
c)(
3)(
iii)."

5.
Section
85.1713
(
c
)(
3)(
vi)
requires
that
manufacturers
keep
records
of
audits,
but
it
is
unclear
whether
they
should
likewise
be
maintained
for
5
years
as
is
the
case
for
contractual
agreements
as
specified
in
85.1713
Section
(
b)(
6).
Two
North
LaSalle
Street
Suite
2200
Chicago,
Illinois
60602
Tel:
312/
827­
8700
Fax:
312/
827­
8737
www.
enginemanufacturers.
org
2
6.
Section
85.1713
(
f)
requires
the
engine
manufacturer
to
"
notify
us
within
15
days
if
you
find
from
an
audit
or
another
source
that
a
vehicle
manufacturer
has
failed
to
meet
its
obligations
under
this
section."
This
requirement
is
in
conflict
with
Section
85.1713
(
c)(
3)(
vi),
which
states
that
the
engine
manufacturer
"
must
keep
records
of
these
audits
and
provide
a
report
describing
any
uninstalled
or
improperly
installed
aftertreatment
components
to
us
within
90
days
of
the
audit."
EMA
proposes
that
the
conflicting
language
of
Section
85.1713
(
f)
be
deleted,
and
that
Section
85.1713
(
c
)(
3)(
vi)
(
90
days)
be
retained
as
the
required
timing
for
submission
of
such
a
report.

EMADOCS:
6708.2