1. What Are the Emission Standards and Compliance Dates? a. Exhaust emissions. We are adopting standards starting in the 2004 model year consistent with those adopted by California ARB. These standards, which apply to testing only with the applicable steady state duty cycles, are 4.0 g/ kW hr ( 3.0 g/ hp hr) for HC+ NOX emissions and 50 g/ kW hr ( 37 g/ hp hr) for CO emissions. See Section V. D for further discussion of the steady state duty cycles. We expect manufacturers to meet these standards using three way catalytic converters and electronically controlled fuel systems. These systems are similar to those used for many years in highway applications, but not necessarily with the same degree of sophistication. Adopting emission standards for these engines starting in 2004 allows a relatively short lead time. However, manufacturers will be able to achieve this by expanding their production of the same engines they will be selling in California at that time. We have designed our 2004 standards to require no additional development, design, or testing beyond what California ARB already requires. Adopting these nearterm emission standards allows us to set early requirements to introduce the lowemission technologies for substantial emission reductions with minimal lead time. The final requirements includes two principal adjustments to align with the California ARB standards. First, we specify that manufacturers' deterioration factors for 2004 through 2006 model years should be based on emission measurements over 3500 hours of engine operation, rather than the full useful life of 5000 hours. Second, for those same model years, we are applying an emission standard of 5.4 g/ kW hr ( 4.0 g/ hp hr) HC+ NOX for any inuse testing to account for the potential for additional deterioration beyond 3500 hours. This allowance for higher in use emissions is a temporary provision to ensure the feasibility of compliance in the early years of the program. Testing has shown that with additional design time, manufacturers can incorporate emission control technologies with sufficient durability that the long term standards do not require a separate inuse standard. This is separate from the field testing standards described below. Testing has shown that additional time to optimize designs to better control emissions will allow manufacturers to meet significantly more stringent emission standards that are based on more robust measurement procedures. We are therefore adopting a second tier of standards to require additional emission reductions. These later standards require manufacturers to control emissions under both steadystate and transient engine operation, as described in Section V. D below). Setting the emission standards to require additional control involves separate consideration of the achievable level of control for HC+ NOX and CO emissions. While HC+ NOX emissions contribute to nonattainment of ozone air quality standards, CO emissions contribute to nonattainment of CO air quality standards and potentially harmful exposures of individuals where engines are operating in areas where fresh airflow may be restricted. Emissioncontrol technology is able to simultaneously control these three pollutants, but a tradeoff between NOX and CO emissions persists for any given system. This relationship is determined by an engine's precise control of air fuel ratios   shifting to air fuel ratios slightly lean of stoichiometric increases NOX emissions but decreases CO emissions and vice versa. Engines using different fuels face this same situation, though gasoline engines operating under heavy load generally need to shift to richer airfuel ratios to prevent accelerated engines wear from very high combustion temperatures. Our primary focus in setting the level of the emission standards is reductions in emissions that contribute to ambient air pollution problems. At the same time, we recognize that these engines are used in many applications where there are concerns about personal exposure to the engine exhaust, including workplace exposure, focusing primarily on CO exposure. It is appropriate to take such concerns into consideration in setting the level of the standards. In this case, where the equipment using these engines can vary substantially and where the emissioncontrol technology means there is a trade off between HC+ NOX control and CO control, it is difficult to set a single, optimal standard for all three pollutants. In such a situation it is reasonable to have more than one set of standards to allow an engine to use technologies focused on controlling the pollutants of most concern for a specific application. We are not in a position, however, to readily identity the specific levels of alternative standards that are appropriate for each application or to pick specific applications that should go with different standards. We also want to ensure that engines significantly reduce emissions of all three pollutants. To address this, we are setting a combination of standards requiring more effective emission controls starting with the 2007 model year. First, we are setting benchmark emission standards of 2.7 g/ kW hr ( 2.0 g/ hp hr) for HC+ NOX emissions and 4.4 g/ kW hr ( 3.3 g/ hp hr) for CO emissions. The emission standards apply to measurements during duty cycle testing under both steady state and transient operation, including certification, production line testing, and in use testing. 76 These emission levels provide for substantial control of HC+ NOX emissions ( in fact, these standards are more stringent than those proposed), but also contain substantial control of CO emissions to protect against individual exposure as well as CO nonattainment. We are also including an option for manufacturers to certify their engines to different emission levels to allow manufacturers to build engines whose emission controls are more weighted toward controlling NOX emissions to reflect the inherent tradeoff of NOX and CO emissions. Generally this involves meeting a less stringent CO standard if a manufacturer certifies an engine with lower HC+ NOX emissions. Table V. C   1 shows several examples of possible combinations of HC+ NOX and CO emission standards. The highest allowable CO standard is 20.6 g/ kW hr ( 15.4 g/ hp hr), which corresponds with HC+ NOX emissions below 0.8 g/ kW hr VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68293 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 77 While the emission standards in this final rule require substantial emission reductions of CO and other harmful pollutants from nonroad engines, this does not replace the need for ongoing regulation of air quality to protect occupational safety and health. More specifically, in accordance with the limitations provided in Section 310( a) of the Clean Air Act ( 42 U. S. C. section 7610( a)), nothing in this rule affects the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's authority to enforce standards and other requirements under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 ( 29 U. S. C. sections 651 et seq.). ( 0.6 g/ hp hr). Manufacturers certify to any HC+ NOX level between and including 0.8 and 2.7 g/ kW hr, rounding to the nearest 0.1 g/ kW hr. They will certify also to the corresponding CO level, as calculated using the formula below, again rounding to the nearest 0.1 g/ kW hr.

TABLE V. C   1.   SAMPLES OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE DUTY CYCLE EMISSION STANDARDS FOR LARGE SI ENGINES( G/ KW HR)*

HC+ NOX CO 2.7 ................................................. 4.4 2.2 ................................................. 5.6 1.7 ................................................. 7.9 1.3 ................................................. 11.1 1.0 ................................................. 15.5 0.8 ................................................. 20.6 * As described in the Final Regulatory Support Document and the regulations, the values in the table are related by the following formula ( HC+ NOX) x CO0.784 = 8.57. These values follow directly from the logarithmic relationship presented with the proposal in the Draft Regulatory Support Document.

We believe this flexible approach to setting standards is the most appropriate and efficient way to allocate the different design strategies to achieve effective reductions of HC+ NOX emissions while providing for the best control of CO emissions where it is most needed. Testing has shown that emission controls are more likely to experience degradation with respect to controlling CO emissions than HC or NOX emissions. Manufacturers therefore have a natural incentive to certify engine families with an HC+ NOX emission level as low as possible to increase the compliance margin for meeting the CO standard. In addition, many of these engines will be used in applications where ozone is of more concern. As a result, we expect manufacturers to design most of their engines to operate substantially below the 2.7 g/ kW hr standard for HC+ NOX emissions. This approach also encourages manufacturers to continually improve their control of HC+ NOX emissions over time. At the same time, to the extent that purchasers want engines with low CO emission levels, particularly for exposure related concerns, manufacturers will be able to produce compliant engines that will provide appropriate protection. Note that engines operating at the highest allowable CO emission levels under the 2007 standards will still be substantially reducing CO emissions compared with baseline levels. The emission standards in this final rule will achieve substantial reductions, but are not designed to guarantee workplace safety or to set a safety standard. Rather, we intend to facilitate the use of engine based control technologies so that owners and operators can purchase equipment to help them address these concerns. We are not adopting any controls or limits to restrict the sale of engines meeting certain requirements into certain applications. We believe that the manufacturers and customers for these products will together make educated choices regarding the appropriate mix of emission controls for each application and that market forces will properly balance emission controls for the different pollutants in specific applications. We believe that customers for these applications, some of whom are subject to occupational air quality standards for related pollutant concentrations, will be well placed to make informed choices regarding airpollution control, especially given their ability to make choices based on the specific environmental circumstances of each particular customer. 77 We are adopting field testing standards of 3.8 g/ kW hr ( 2.8 g/ hp hr) for HC+ NOX and 6.5 g/ kW hr ( 4.9 g/ hphr for CO. As described above for dutycycle testing, field testing allows for the same pattern of optional emission standards to reflect the tradeoff of CO and NOX emissions. See Section V. D. 5 for more information about field testing. As described in Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document, we believe manufacturers can achieve these emission standards by optimizing currently available three way catalysts and electronically controlled fuel systems. Two additional provisions apply to specific situations. First, some engines need to operate with rich air fuel ratios at high loads to protect the engine from overheating. This is especially true for gasoline fueled engines, which typically experience higher combustion temperatures. When operating at such air fuel ratios, the engines may be unable to meet the CO emission standard during steady state testing because the steady state duty cycle involves sustained operation under high load conditions, unlike the transient duty cycle. If a manufacturer shows us that this type of engine operation keeps it from meeting the CO emission standard shown above for specific models, we will approve a separate CO emission standard of 31.0 g/ kW hr that would apply only to steady state testing. This standard reflects the adjustment needed at highload operation and would apply to any steady state tests for certification, production line testing, or in use testing. To prevent high in use emission levels, we are adopting several additional provisions related to this separate CO standard. Manufacturers must show that enrichment is necessary to protect the engine from damage and that enrichment will be limited to operating modes that require additional cooling to protect the engine from damage. In addition, manufacturers must show in their application for certification that enrichment will rarely occur in the equipment in which your engines are installed ( for example, an engine that is expected to operate 5 percent of the time in use with enrichment would clearly not qualify). Finally, manufacturers must include in the emission related installation instructions any steps necessary for someone installing the engines to prevent enrichment during normal operation. This option does not apply to transient or field testing, so these engines would need to meet the same formula for HC+ NOX and CO standards that apply to other engines for transient testing and for field testing. By tying the CO standard for these engines to the highest allowable CO emission level for field testing, we are effectively requiring that manufacturers ensure that in use engines employ engine protection strategies no more frequently than is reflected in the steady state duty cycles for certification. Second, equipment manufacturers have made it clear that some nonroad applications involve operation in severe environments that require the use of aircooled engines. These engines rely on air movement instead of an automotivestyle water cooled radiator to maintain acceptable engine temperatures. Since air cooling is less effective, these engines rely substantially on enrichment to provide additional cooling relative to water cooled engines. At these richer air fuel ratios, catalysts are able to reduce NOX emissions but oxidation of CO emissions is much less effective. As a result, we are adopting emission standards for these `` severeduty engines of 2.7 g/ kW hr for HC+ NOX and 130 g/ kW hr for CO. These standards apply to duty cycle VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68294 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations emission testing for both steady state and transient measurements ( for certification, production line, and inuse testing). The corresponding fieldtesting standards are 3.8 g/ kW hr for HC+ NOX and 200 g/ kW hr for CO. Severe duty applications include concrete saws and concrete pumps. These types of equipment are exposed to high levels of concrete dust, which tends to form a thick insulating coat around any heat exchanger surfaces and exposes engines to highly abrasive dust particles. Manufacturers may request approval in identifying additional severe duty applications subject to these less stringent standards if they can provide clear evidence that the majority of installations need air cooled engines as a result of operation in a severe duty environment. This arrangement generally prevents these higher emitting engines from gaining a competitive advantage in markets that don't already use air cooled engines. We believe three years between phases of emission standards allows manufacturers enough lead time to meet the more stringent emission standards. The projected emission control technologies for the 2004 emission standards should be capable of meeting the 2007 emission levels with additional optimization and testing. In fact, manufacturers may be able to apply their optimization efforts before 2004, leaving only the additional testing demonstration for complying with the 2007 standards. The biggest part of the optimization effort may be related to gaining assurance that engines will meet field testing emission standards described in Section V. D. 5, since engines will not be following a prescribed duty cycle. For engines fueled by gasoline and liquefied petroleum gas ( LPG), we specify emission standards based on total hydrocarbon measurements, while California ARB standards are based on nonmethane hydrocarbons. We believe that switching to measurement based on total hydrocarbons simplifies testing, especially for field testing of in use engines with portable devices ( See Section V. D. 5). To maintain consistency with California ARB standards in the near term, we will allow manufacturers to base their certification through 2006 on either nonmethane or total hydrocarbons ( see 40 CFR 1048.145). Methane emissions from controlled engines operating on gasoline or LPG are about 0.1 g/ kW hr. Operation of natural gas engines is very similar to that of LPG engines, with one noteworthy exception. Since natural gas consists primarily of methane, these engines have a much higher level of methane in the exhaust. Methane generally does not contribute to ozone formation, so it is often excluded from emission measurements. We have therefore specified nonmethane hydrocarbon emissions for comparison with the standard for natural gas engines. However, the emission standards based on measuring emissions in the field depend on total hydrocarbons. We are therefore adopting a NOX only field testing standard for natural gas engines instead of a HC+ NOX standard. Since control of NOX emissions for natural gas engines poses a significantly greater challenge than controlling nonmethane hydrocarbons, duty cycle testing provides adequate assurance that these engines have sufficiently low hydrocarbon emission levels. Manufacturers must show that they meet these duty cycle standards for certification and the engines remain subject to the nonmethane hydrocarbon standard in use when tested over the same duty cycles. b. Evaporative emissions. We are adopting requirements related to evaporative and permeation emissions from gasoline fueled Large SI engines. For controlling diurnal emissions, we are adopting an emission standard of 0.2 grams of hydrocarbon per gallon of fuel tank capacity during a 24 hour period. In addition, we specify that manufacturers use fuel lines meeting an industry standard for permeationresistance Finally, we require that manufacturers take steps to prevent fuel from boiling. We expect certification of manufacturers' equipment to be designbased as compared with conducting a full emission measurement program during certification. As such, meeting these evaporative requirements is much more like meeting the requirements related to controlling crankcase emissions and is therefore discussed in detail in Section V. C. 4 below.

2. May I Average, Bank, or Trade Emission Credits? We are not including an averaging, banking, and trading program for certifying engines. As described in Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document, we believe that manufacturers will generally be able to rely on a relatively uniform application of emission control technology to meet emission standards. The standards were selected based on the capabilities of all manufacturers to comply with all their models without an emission credit program. Moreover, overlaying an emission credit program on the flexible standards described above would be highly impractical. If such a program could be devised it would need to be very complex and would achieve little, if any, advantage to manufacturers beyond the advantages already embodied in the flexible approach we are adopting. However, as an alternative to a program of calculating emission credits for averaging, banking, and trading, we are adopting a simpler approach of `` family banking'' to help manufacturers transition to new emission standards ( see 40 CFR 1048.145 of the regulations). Manufacturers may certify an engine family early, which would allow them to delay certification of smaller engine families. This would be based on the actual sales of each engine family; this requires no calculation or accounting of emission credits. The manufacturer would have actual sales figures for the early family at the end of the production year, which would yield a total number of allowable sales for the engine family with delayed compliance. Manufacturers may certify engines to the 2004 standards early, but this would provide benefits only for complying with the 2004 standards. These `` credits'' would not apply to engines for meeting the 2007 standards.

3. Is EPA Adopting Voluntary Blue Sky Standards for These Engines? We are adopting voluntary Blue Sky standards for Large SI engines. We are setting a target of 0.8 g/ kW hr ( 0.6 g/ hphr HC+ NOX and 4.4 g/ kW hr ( 3.3 g/ hphr CO as a qualifying level for Blue Sky Series engines. The corresponding fieldtesting standards for Blue Sky Series engines are 1.1 g/ kW hr ( 0.8 g/ hp hr) HC+ NOX and 6.6 g/ kW hr ( 4.9 g/ hp hr) CO. These voluntary standards are based on achieving the maximum control of both HC+ NOX and CO emissions, as described in Section V. C. 1. To achieve these emission levels, manufacturers will need to apply significantly additional technology beyond that required for the mandatory standards. Manufacturers may start producing engines to these voluntary standards immediately after this final rule becomes effective. In addition, we are adopting interim voluntary standards corresponding with the introduction of new emission standards. Since manufacturers will not be complying early to bank emission credits, voluntary emission standards are an appropriate way to encourage manufacturers to meet emission standards before the regulatory deadline. If manufacturers certify engines to these voluntary standards, they are not eligible for participation in the family banking program described VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68295 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 78 Stoichiometry is the proportion of a mixture of air and fuel such that the fuel is fully oxidized with no remaining oxygen. For example, stoichiometric combustion in gasoline engines typically occurs at an air fuel mass ratio of about 14.7. 79 '' Measurement of Evaporative Emissions from Off Road Equipment,'' by James N. Carroll and Jeff J. White, Southwest Research Institute ( SwRI 08   Continued above. In the 2003 model year, manufacturers may certify their engines to the requirements that apply starting in 2004 to qualify for the Blue Sky designation. Since manufacturers are producing engines with emissioncontrol technologies starting in 2001, these engines are available to customers outside of California desiring emission reductions or fuel economy improvements. Similarly, for 2003 through 2006 model years, manufacturers may certify their engines to the requirements that start to apply in 2007.

4. Are There Other Requirements for Large SI Engines?

a. Crankcase emissions. Due to blowby of combustion gases and the reciprocating action of the piston, exhaust emissions ( mostly hydrocarbons) can accumulate in the crankcase. These crankcase emissions are significant, representing about 33 percent of total exhaust hydrocarbon. Uncontrolled engines route these vapors directly to the atmosphere. We have long required that automotive engines prevent crankcase emissions. Manufacturers typically do this by routing crankcase vapors through a valve into the engine's air intake system where they are burned in the combustion process. Manufacturers may choose one of two methods for controlling crankcase emissions. First, adding positivecrankcase ventilation prevents crankcase emissions. Since automotive engine blocks are already tooled for closed crankcases, the cost of adding a valve for positive crankcase ventilation for most engines is very small. An alternative method addresses specific concerns related to turbocharged engines or engines operating in severeduty environments. Where closed crankcases are impractical, manufacturers may therefore measure crankcase emissions during any emission testing to add crankcase emissions to measured exhaust emissions for comparing with the standards. b. Diagnosing malfunctions. Manufacturers must design their Large SI engines to diagnose malfunctioning emission control systems starting with the 2007 model year ( see § 1048.110). Three way catalyst systems with closedloop fueling control work well only when the air fuel ratios are controlled to stay within a narrow range around stoichiometry. 78 Worn or broken components or drifting calibrations over time can prevent an engine from operating within the specified range. This increases emissions and can significantly increase fuel consumption and engine wear. The operator may or may not notice the change in the way the engine operates. We are not requiring similar diagnostic controls for recreational vehicles or recreational marine diesel engines, because the anticipated emission control technologies for these other applications are generally less susceptible to drift and gradual deterioration. This diagnostic requirement focuses solely on maintaining stoichiometric control of air fuel ratios. This kind of design detects problems such as broken oxygen sensors, leaking exhaust pipes, fuel deposits, and other things that require maintenance to keep the engine at the proper air fuel ratio. Some companies are already producing engines with diagnostic systems that check for consistent airfuel ratios. Their initiative supports the idea that diagnostic monitoring provides a mechanism to help keep engines tuned to operate properly, with benefits for both controlling emissions and maintaining optimal performance. There are currently no inspection and maintenance programs for nonroad engines, so the most important variable in making the emission control and diagnostic systems effective is in getting operators to repair the engine when the diagnostic light comes on. This calls for a relatively simple design to avoid the signaling of false failures as much as possible. The diagnostic requirements in this rule therefore focus on detecting inappropriate air fuel ratios, which is the most likely failure mode for threeway catalyst systems. The malfunctionindicator light must go on when an engine runs for a full minute under closed loop operation without reaching a stoichiometric air fuel ratio. Some natural gas engines may meet standards with lean burn designs that never approach stoichiometric combustion. While manufacturers may design these engines to operate at specific air fuel ratios, catalyst conversion ( with two way catalysts) would not be as sensitive to air fuel ratio as with stoichiometric designs. For these or other engines that rely on emission control technologies incompatible with the diagnostic system described above, manufacturers must devise an alternate system that alerts the operator to engine malfunctions that would prevent the emission control system from functioning properly. The automotive industry has developed a standardized protocol for diagnostic systems, including hardware specifications, and uniform trouble codes. In the regulations we reference standards adopted by the International Organization for Standardization ( ISO) for automotive systems. If manufacturers find that these standards are not applicable to the simpler diagnostic design specified for Large SI engines, we encourage engine manufacturers to cooperate with each other and with other interested companies to develop new standards specific to nonroad engines. Manufacturers may request approval to use systems that don't meet the automotive specifications if those specifications are not practical or appropriate for their engines. c. Evaporative emissions. Evaporative emissions occur when fuel evaporates and is vented into the atmosphere. They can occur while an engine or vehicle is operating and even while it is not being operated. Among the factors that affect evaporative emissions are:   Fuel metering ( fuel injectors or carburetor)   The degree to which fuel permeates fuel lines and fuel tanks   Proximity of the fuel tank to the exhaust system or other heat sources   Whether the fuel system is sealed and the pressure at which fuel vapors are ventilated. In addition, some gasoline fuel tanks may be exposed to heat from the engine compartment and high temperature surfaces such as the exhaust pipe. In extreme cases, fuel can start boiling, producing very large amounts of gasoline vapors vented directly to the atmosphere. Evaporative emissions from Large SI engines and the associated equipment represent a significant part of their overall hydrocarbon emissions. The magnitude of evaporative emissions varies widely depending on the engine design and application. LPG fueled equipment generally has very low evaporative emissions because of the tightly sealed fuel system. At the other extreme, carbureted gasoline fueled equipment can have high rates of evaporation. In 1998, Southwest Research Institute measured emissions from several gasoline fueled Large SI engines and found them to vary from about 12 g/ day up to almost 100 g/ day. 79 VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68296 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 1076), November 1998, Docket A   2000   01, document II   A   10. 80 '' Industrial Trucks, Internal Combustion Engine Powered,'' UL558, ninth edition, June 28, 1996, paragraphs 26.1 through 26.4, Docket A   2000   01, document II   A   28. See Section XI. I for our consideration of incorporating the UL requirements into our regulations by reference. 81 '' New Evaporative Control System for Gasoline Tanks,'' EPA Memorandum from Charles Moulis to Glenn Passavant, March 1, 2001, Docket A 2000   01, document II   B   16. 82 SAE J2260 `` Nonmetallic Fuel System Tubing with One or More Layers,'' November 1996 ( Docket A   2000   01, document II   A   03). 83 UL558, paragraph 19.1.1, Docket A   2000   01, document II   A   28. This study did not take into account the possibility of unusually high fuel temperatures during engine operation, as described further below. We are adopting basic measures to reduce evaporative emissions from gasoline fueled Large SI engines. First, we are adopting an evaporative emission standard of 0.2 grams per gallon of fuel tank capacity for 24 hour day when temperatures cycle between 72 ° and 96 ° F. For purposes of certification, manufacturers may choose, however, to rely on a specific design for certification instead of measuring emissions. We have identified a technology that adequately prevents evaporative emissions such that the design itself would be enough to show compliance with the evaporative emission standard for purposes of certification. Specifically, pressurized fuel tanks control evaporative emissions by suppressing vapor generation. In its standards for industrial trucks operating in certain environments, Underwriters Laboratories requires that trucks use self closing fuel caps with tanks that stay sealed to prevent evaporative losses; venting is allowed for positive pressures above 3.5 psi or for vacuum pressures of at least 1.5 psi. 80 We know that any Large SI engines or vehicles operating with these pressures would meet the standard because test data confirm the basic chemistry principles related to phase change pressure relationships showing that fuel tanks will remain sealed at all times during the prescribed test procedure. Also, similar to the Underwriters Laboratories' requirement, we specify that manufacturers must use self closing or tethered fuel caps to ensure that fuel tanks designed to hold pressure are not inadvertently left exposed to the atmosphere. In some applications, manufacturers may want to avoid high fuel tank pressures. Manufacturers may be able to meet the standard using an air bladder inside the fuel tank that changes in volume to keep the system in equilibrium at atmospheric pressure. 81 We have data showing that these systems also would remain sealed at all times during the prescribed test procedure. However, the permeation levels related to the air bladder and the long term durability of this type of system are still unknown. Once these parameters are established with test data, perhaps with some additional product development, this technology may then qualify as an option for design based certification. Similarly, collapsible bladder tanks, which change in volume to prevent generation of a vapor space or vapor emissions, may eventually be available as a technology for design based certification once permeation data are available to confirm that systems with these tanks would meet the standard. Finally, an automotive type system that stores fuel tank vapors for burning in the engine would be another alternative technology, though it is unlikely that such a system can be simply characterized and included as an option for design based certification. In addition, engine manufacturers must use ( or specify that equipment manufacturers installing their engines use) fuel lines meeting the industry performance standard for permeationresistant fuel lines developed for motor vehicles. 82 While metal fuel lines do not have problems with permeation, manufacturers should use discretion in selecting materials for grommets and valves connecting metal components to avoid high permeation materials. Evaporative emission standards for motor vehicles have led to the development of a wide variety of permeation resistant polymer components. These permeation requirements are based on manufacturers using a more effective emission controls than that specified for recreational vehicles. This is appropriate because Large SI manufacturers are able to use automotive grade materials across their product line, while recreational vehicle manufacturers have pointed out various limitations in incorporating automotivegrade materials. Conversely, Large SI manufacturers are not subject to permeation requirements related to fuel tanks, since almost all of these tanks are made of metal. Finally, based on available technologies, manufacturers must take steps to prevent fuel boiling. The Underwriters Laboratories specification for forklifts attempts to address this concern through a specified maximum fuel temperature, but the current limit does not prevent fuel boiling. 83 We are adopting a standard that prohibits fuel boiling during continuous operation at 30 ° C ( 86 ° F). Engine manufacturers must incorporate designs that reduce the heat load to the fuel tank to prevent boiling. For companies that sell loose engines, this may involve instructions to equipment manufacturers to help ensure, for example, that fuel tank surfaces are exposed to ambient air rather than to exhaust pipes or direct engine heat. Engine manufacturers may specify a maximum fuel temperature for the final installation. Such a temperature limit should be well below 53 ° C ( 128 ° F), the temperature at which summer grade gasoline ( 9 RVP) typically starts boiling. An additional source of evaporative emissions is from carburetors. Carburetors often have high hot soak emissions ( immediately after engine shutdown). We expect manufacturers to convert carbureted designs to fuel injection as a result of the exhaust emission standards. While we do not mandate this technology, we believe the need to reduce exhaust emissions will cause engine manufacturers to use fuel injection on all gasoline engines. This change alone will eliminate most hot soak emissions. Engine manufacturers using designbased certification need to describe in the application for certification the selected design measures and specifications to address evaporative losses from gasoline fueled engines. For loose engine sales, this includes emission related installation instructions that the engine manufacturer gives to equipment manufacturers. While equipment manufacturers must follow these installation instruction, the engine manufacturer has the responsibility to certify a system that meets the evaporative related requirements described in this section. This should work in practice, because engine manufacturers already provide equipment manufacturers a variety of specifications and other instructions to ensure that engines operate properly inuse after installation in the equipment. The alternative approach of requiring equipment manufacturers to certify is impractical because of the very large number of companies involved.

5. What Durability Provisions Apply? a. Useful life. We are adopting a useful life period of seven years or until the engine accumulates at least 5,000 operating hours, whichever comes first. This figure represents a minimum value and may increase as a result of data showing that an engine model is designed to last longer. This figure,

VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68297 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations which California ARB has already adopted, represents an operating period that is common for Large SI engines before they undergo rebuild. This also reflects a comparable degree of operation relative to the useful life values of 100,000 to 150,000 miles that apply to automotive engines ( assuming an average driving speed of 20 to 30 miles per hour). Some engines are designed for operation in severe duty applications with a shorter expected lifetime. Concrete saws in particular undergo accelerated wear as a result of operating in an environment with high concentrations of highly abrasive, airborne concrete dust particles. We are allowing manufacturers to request a shorter useful life for an engine family based on information showing that engines in the family rarely operate beyond the alternative useful life period. For example, if engines powering concrete saws are typically scrapped after 2000 hours of operation, this would form the basis for establishing a shorter useful life period for those engines. Manufacturers relying on designbased certification to meet the evaporative requirements must use good engineering judgment to show that emission controls will work for at least seven years. This may, for example, be based on warranty or productperformance history from component suppliers. This also applies for systems designed to address crankcase emissions. b. Warranty. Manufacturers must provide an emission related warranty for at least the first half of an engine's useful life ( in operating hours) or three years, whichever comes first. These periods must be longer if the manufacturer offers a longer mechanical warranty for the engine or any of its components; this includes extended warranties that are available for an extra price. The emission related warranty includes components related to controlling evaporative and crankcase emissions. In addition, we are adopting the warranty provisions adopted by California ARB for high cost parts. For emission related components whose replacement cost is more than about $ 400, we specify a minimum warranty period of at least 70 percent of the engine's useful life ( in operating hours) or 5 years, whichever comes first. See § 1048.120 for a description of which components are emission related. c. Maintenance instructions. We are specifying minimum maintenance intervals much like those established by California ARB for Large SI engines. The minimum intervals define how much maintenance a manufacturer may specify to ensure that engines are properly maintained for staying within emission standards. Manufacturers may schedule maintenance on catalysts, fuel injectors, electronic control units and turbochargers after 5,000 hours. For oxygen sensors and cleaning of fuelsystem components, the minimum maintenance interval is 2,500 hours. This fuel system cleaning must be limited to steps that can be taken without disassembling components. We have relaxed this from the proposed interval of 4,500 hours to take into account comments emphasizing that these maintenance steps will be necessary more frequently than the proposed interval; this shorter interval also reflects the comparable provisions that apply to automotive systems. We are also proposing a diagnostic requirement to ensure that prematurely failing oxygen sensors or other components are detected and replaced on an as needed basis. If operators fail to address faulty components after a fault signal, we would not consider that engine to be properly maintained. This could the engine ineligible for manufacturer in use testing. d. Deterioration factors. We are adopting an approach that gives manufacturers wide discretion in how to establish deterioration factors for Large SI engines. The general expectation is that manufacturers will rely on emission measurements from engines that have operated for an extended period, either in field service or in the laboratory. The manufacturer should do testing as needed to be confident that their engines will meet emission standards under the in use testing program. In deciding to certify an engine family, we can review deterioration factors to ensure that the projected deterioration accurately predicts in use deterioration. We will use results under the in use testing program to verify the appropriateness of deterioration factors. In the first two or three years of certification, manufacturers will not yet have data from the in use testing program. Moreover, manufacturers may choose to rely on technologies and calibrations for meeting the long term standards well before 2007 to simplify their product development efforts. We are therefore allowing manufacturers to rely on an assigned deterioration factor to meet the 2004 standards, while continuing to require manufacturers to meet the applicable emission standards throughout the useful life for these engines. The assigned deterioration factor may be derived from any available data that would help predict the way these systems would perform in the field, using good engineering judgment. Manufacturers may develop deterioration factors for crankcase and evaporative controls. However, we do not expect these control technologies to experience degradation that would cause a deterioration factor to be appropriate. e. In use fuel quality. Gasoline used in industrial applications is generally the same as that used for automotive applications. Improvements that have been made to highway grade gasoline therefore carry over directly to nonroad markets. This helps manufacturers be sure that fuel quality will not degrade an engine's emission control performance after several years of sustained operation. In contrast, there are no enforceable industry or government standards for LPG fuel quality. Testing data indicate that varying fuel quality has a small direct effect on emissions from a closedloop engine with a catalyst. The greater concern is that fuel impurities and heavy end hydrocarbons may cause an accumulation of deposits that can prevent an emission control system from functioning properly. While an engine's feedback controls can compensate for some restriction in air and fuel flow, deposits may eventually prevent the engine from accurately controlling air fuel ratios at stoichiometry. As described in the Final Regulatory Support Document, test data show that emission control systems can tolerate substantial fuel related deposits before there is any measurable effect on emissions. Moreover, the engine diagnostic systems described in the next section will notify the operator when fuel related deposits prevent an engine from operating at stoichiometry. In any case, a routine cleaning step should remove deposits and restore the engine to proper functioning. Data from in use testing will provide additional information related to the effects of varying fuel quality on emission levels. This information will be helpful in making sure that the deterioration factors for certifying engines accurately reflect the whole range of in use operating variables, including varying fuel quality. Our testing shows that fuel properties of conventional commercial LPG fuel allow for durable, long term control of emissions. However, to the extent that engines operating in specific areas have inferior fuel quality that prevents them from meeting emission standards, we will be pursuing nationwide requirements to set minimum quality standards for in use LPG fuel.

VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68298 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations D. Testing Requirements and Supplemental Emission Standards 1. What Duty Cycles Are Used To Measure Emissions? For 2004 through 2006 model years, we specify the same steady state duty cycles adopted by California ARB. For variable speed engines, this involves the testing based on the ISO C2 duty cycle, which has five modes at various intermediate speed points, plus one mode at rated speed and one idle mode. The combined intermediate speed points at 10, 25, and 50 percent account for over 70 percent of the total modal weighting. A separate duty cycle for the large number of Large SI engine providing power for constant speed applications, such as generators, welders, compressors, pumps, sweepers, and aerial lifts. Constant speed testing is based on the ISO D2 duty cycle, which specifies engine operation at rated speed with five different load points. This same steady state duty cycle applies to constant speed, nonroad diesel engines. Emission values measured on the D2 duty cycle are treated the same as values from the C2 duty cycle; the same numerical standards apply to both cycles. Manufacturers must generally test engines on both the C2 and D2 duty cycles. Since the C2 cycle includes very little operation at rated speed, it is not effective in ensuring control of emissions for constant speed engines. The D2 cycle is even less capable of predicting emission performance from variable speed engines. Manufacturers may, however, choose to certify their engines on only one of these two steadystate duty cycles. In this case, they would need to take steps to make sure C2 certified engines are installed only in variable speed applications and D2 certified engines are installed only in constant speed applications. Engine manufacturers would do this by labeling their engines appropriately and providing installation instructions to make sure equipment manufacturers and others are aware of the restricted certification. Equipment manufacturers are required under the regulations to follow the engine manufacturer's emission related installation instructions. Starting in 2007, we specify an expanded set of duty cycles, again with separate treatment for variable speed and constant speed applications. The test procedure is comprised of three segments: ( 1) A warm up segment, ( 2) a transient segment, and ( 3) a steady state segment. Each of these segments, described briefly in this section, include specifications for the speed and load of the engine as a function of time. Measured emissions during the transient and steady state segments must meet the same emission standards that apply to all duty cycles. In general, the duty cycles are intended to represent operation from the wide variety of in use applications. This includes highly transient low speed forklift operation, constant speed operation of portable equipment, and intermediate speed vehicle operation. Ambient temperatures in the laboratory must be between 20 ° and 30 ° C ( 68 ° and 86 ° F) during duty cycle testing. This improves the repeatability of emission measurements when the engine runs through its prescribed operation. We nevertheless expect manufacturers to design for controlling emissions under broader ambient conditions, as described in Section V. D. 5. The warm up segment begins with a cold start. This means that the engine should be near room temperature before the test cycle begins. ( Starting with an engine that is still warm from previous testing is allowed if good engineering judgment indicates that this will not affect emissions.) Once the engine is started, it operates over the first 3 minutes of the specified transient duty cycle without emission measurement. The engine then idles for 30 seconds before starting the prescribed transient cycle. The purpose of the warm up segment is to bring the engine up to normal operating temperature in a standardized way. For severe duty engines, the warm up period is extended up to 15 minutes to account for the additional time needed to stabilize operating temperatures from air cooled engines. The warm up period allows enough time for engine out emissions to stabilize, for the catalyst to warm up enough to become active, and for the engine to start closed loop operation. This serves as a defined and achievable target for the design engineer to limit cold start emissions to a relatively short period. In addition, we require manufacturers to activate emission control systems as soon as possible after engine starting to make clear that it is not acceptable to design the emission control system to start working only after the defined warm up period is complete. In addition, we may measure emissions during the warm up period to evaluate whether manufacturers are employing defeat devices. In contrast, transient testing of heavy duty highway engines requires separate cold start and hot start measurements, with an 86 percent weighting assigned to the hot start portion in calculating an engine's composite emission level. We believe this approach for nonroad engines serves to limit cold start emissions without forcing manufacturers to focus design and testing resources on this portion of operation. The transient segment of the general duty cycle is a composite of forklift and welder operation. This duty cycle was developed by selecting segments of measured engine operation from two forklifts and a welder as they performed their normal functions. This transient segment captures the wide variety of operation from a large majority of Large SI engines as fork lifts and constantspeed engines represent about 90 percent of the Large SI market. Emissions measured during this segment are averaged over the entire transient segment to give a single value in g/ kW. Steady state testing consists of engine operation for an extended period at several discrete speed load combinations. Associated with these test points are weighting factors that allow a single weighted average steadystate emission level in g/ kW. While any steady state duty cycle is limited in how much it can represent operation of engines that undergo transient operation, the distribution of the C2 modes and their weighting values aligns significantly with expected and measured engine operation from Large SI engines. In particular, these engines are generally not designed to operate for extended periods at high load, rated speed conditions. Field measurement of engine operation shows, however, that forklifts operate extensively at lower speeds than those included in the C2 duty cycle. While we believe the test points of the C2 duty cycle are representative of engine operation from many applications of Large SI engines, supplementing the steady state testing with a transient duty cycle is necessary to adequately include engine operation characteristic of what occurs in the field. A separate transient duty cycle applies to engines that are certified for constant speed applications only. These engines maintain a constant speed, but can experience widely varying loads. The transient duty cycle for these engines includes 20 minutes of engine operation based on the way engines work in a welder. Note that manufacturers selling engines for both constant speed and variable speed applications may omit the constantspeed transient test, since that type of operation is included in the general transient test. A subset of constant speed engines are designed to operate only at high VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68299 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations load. To address the operating limitations of these engines, we are adopting a modified steady state duty cycle if the manufacturer provides clear evidence showing that engines rarely operate below 75 percent of full load at rated speed. Since most Large SI engines are clearly capable of operating for extended periods at light loads, we expect these provisions to apply to very few engines. This modified duty cycle consists of two equally weighted points, 75 percent and 100 percent of full load, at rated speed. Since the transient cycle described above involves extensive light load operation, engines qualifying for this high load duty cycle would not need to measure emissions over the transient cycle. Note that the fieldtesting emission standards still apply to engines that don't certify to transient duty cycle standards. Some diesel derived engines operating on natural gas with power ratings up to 1,500 or 2,000 kW may be covered by these emission standards. Engine dynamometers with transientcontrol capabilities are generally limited to testing engines up to 500 or 600 kW. At this time emission standards and testing requirements related to transient duty cycles will not apply for engines rated above 560 kW. We will likely review this provision for Large SI engines once we have reached a conclusion on the same issue for nonroad diesel engines. For example, if we propose provisions for nonroad diesel engines that address testing issues for these very large engines, we would likely propose those same provisions for Large SI engines. Test procedures related to evaporative emissions are described in Section V. C. 4 above. In general, this involves measuring evaporative losses during a three day period of cycling ambient temperatures between 72 ° and 96 ° F.

2. What Fuels Are Used During Emission Testing? For gasoline fueled Large SI engines, we are adopting the same specifications we have established for testing gasolinefueled highway vehicles and engines. This includes the revised specification to cap sulfur levels at 80 ppm ( 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000). These fuel specifications apply for both exhaust and evaporative emissions. For LPG, we are adopting the same specifications established by California ARB. We understand that in use fuel quality for LPG varies significantly in different parts of the country and at different times of the year. Not all in use fuels outside California meet California ARB specifications for certification fuel, but fuels meeting the California specifications are nevertheless widely available. Test data show that LPG fuels with a much lower propane content have only slightly higher NOX and CO emissions ( see Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document for additional information). These data support our belief that engines certified using the specified fuel will achieve the desired emission reduction for a wide range of in use fuels. At certification manufacturers provide deterioration factors that take into account any effects related to the varying quality of commercially available fuels. For natural gas, we are adopting specifications similar to those adopted by California ARB. As described in the Summary and Analysis of Comments, we have adjusted some of the detailed specifications from the proposal to reflect new data submitted after the proposal regarding ranges of fuel properties reflecting current commercial fuels. Unlike California ARB, we apply the fuel specifications to testing only for emission measurements, not to service accumulation. Service accumulation between emission tests may involve certification fuel or any commercially available fuel of the appropriate type. We similarly allow manufacturers to choose between certification fuel and any commercial fuel for in use measurements to show compliance with field testing emission standards. Since publishing the proposal, we learned about issues related to Large SI engines that operate around landfills or oil wells, where engines may burn naturally occurring gases that are otherwise emitted to the atmosphere. These gases generally consist of methane, but a wide range of other constituents may also be mixed in. As a result, engines may require adjustment over a wide range of settings for spark timing and air fuel ratio to maintain consistent combustion. We generally believe that engine manufacturers should design their engines to operate with automatic feedback controls as much as possible to avoid the need for operators to manually adjust engines. However, in cases involving these noncommercial fuels, there is no way to improve the quality of the fuel to conform to any standardized specifications. Also, it is clearly preferred to capture and burn these gases than to emit them directly to the atmosphere, both to prevent greenhouse gas emissions and to avoid wasting this source of fuel. To address this concern, we are adopting special provisions for engines burning noncommercial fuels if they are unable to meet emission standards over the full range of adjustability needed to accommodate the varying fuel properties. Manufacturers would show that these engines can meet emission standards using normal certification fuels, but the normal provisions related to adjustable parameters would not apply. To properly constrain this provision, we are including four requirements. First, manufacturers would need to add information on an engine label instructing operators how to make adjustments that would allow for maintained emission control and overall engine performance. Second, manufacturers would include additional label language to warn operators that the engine may be used only in applications involving noncommercial fuels. Third, manufacturers must separate these engines into a distinct engine family. Fourth, manufacturers must keep a record of individual sales of such engines.

3. Are There Production Line Testing Provisions for Large SI Engines? The provisions described in Section II. C. 4 apply to Large SI engines. These requirements are consistent with those adopted by California ARB. One new issue specific to Large SI engines relates to the duty cycles for measuring emissions from production line engines. For routine production line testing, we require emission measurements only with the steady state duty cycles used for certification. Due to the cost of sampling equipment for transient engine operation, we do not require routine transient testing of production line engines. Transient testing of productionline engines would add a substantial burden, since many manufacturers have limited emission sampling capability at production facilities; also, these production facilities might be located at multiple sites. We believe that steadystate emission measurements will give a good indication of the manufacturers' ability to build engines consistent with the prototypes on which their certification data are based. We reserve the right, however, to direct a manufacturer to measure emissions with a transient duty cycle if we believe it is appropriate. One indication of the need for this transient testing would be if steady state emission levels from production line engines are significantly higher than the emission levels reported in the application for certification for that engine family. For manufacturers with the capability of measuring transient emission levels at the production line, we recommend doing transient tests to better ensure that inuse tests will not reveal problems in controlling emissions during transient VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68300 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations operation. Manufacturers need not make any measurements to show that production line engines meet fieldtesting emission standards. We expect manufacturers generally to certify their engines to the evaporative requirements using a design based approach. Accordingly, the technologies we expect manufacturers to use for controlling evaporative emissions are not subject to variation as a result of production procedures, so we are not requiring production line testing related to the evaporative requirements.

4. Are There In Use Testing Provisions for Large SI Engines? While the certification and production line compliance requirements are important to ensure that engines are designed and produced in compliance with established emission limits, there is also a need to confirm that manufacturers build engines with sufficient durability to meet emission limits as they age in service. Consistent with the California ARB program, we are requiring engine manufacturers to conduct emission tests on a small number of field aged engines to show they meet emission standards. We may generally select up to 25 percent of a manufacturer's engine families in a given year to be subject to in use testing. Most companies will need to test at most one engine family per year. Manufacturers may conduct in use testing on any number of additional engine families at their discretion. Manufacturers in unusual circumstances may develop an alternate plan to fulfill any in use testing obligations, consistent with a similar program we have adopted for outboard and personal watercraft marine engines. These circumstances include total sales for an engine family below 200 per year, installation only in applications where testing is not possible without irreparable damage to the vehicle or engine, or any other unique feature that prevents full emission measurements. While the regulations allow us to select an engine family every year from an engine manufacturer, there are several reasons why small volume manufacturers may expect a less demanding approach. These manufacturers may have only one or two engine families. If a manufacturer shows that an engine family meets emission standards in an in use testing exercise, that may provide adequate data to show compliance for that engine family for a number of years, provided that the manufacturer continues to produce those engines without significantly redesigning them in a way that might affect their in use emissions performance and that we do not have other reason to suspect noncompliance. Also, where we have evidence that a manufacturer's engines are likely in good in use compliance, we generally take the approach of selecting engine families based on some degree of proportionality. To the extent that manufacturers produce a smaller than average proportion of engines, they may expect us to select their engine families less frequently, especially if other available data pointed toward in use compliance. In addition, our experience in implementing a comparable testing program for recreational marine engines provides a history of how we implement in use testing requirements. Engines can be tested one of two ways. First, manufacturers can remove engines from vehicles or equipment and test the engines on a laboratory dynamometer using certification procedures. For 2004 through 2006 model year engines, this is the same steady state duty cycle used for certification; manufacturers may optionally test engines on the dynamometer under transient operating conditions. For 2007 and later model year engines, manufacturers must test engines using both steady state and transient duty cycles, as in certification. As an alternative, manufacturers may use the specified equipment and procedures for testing engines without removing them from the equipment ( referred to in this document as field testing). See Section V. D. 5 for a more detailed description of how to measure emissions from engines during normal operation in the field. Since engines operating in the field cannot be controlled to operate on a specific duty cycle, compliance is demonstrated by comparing the measured emission levels to the field testing emission standards, which have higher numerical value to account for the possible effects of different engine operation. Because the engine operation can be so variable, however, engines tested to show compliance only with the field testing emission standards are not eligible to participate in the in use averaging, banking, and trading program ( described below). Clean Air Act section 213 requires engines to comply with emission standards throughout their regulatory useful lives, and section 207 requires a manufacturer to remedy in use nonconformity when we determine that a substantial number of properly maintained and used engines fail to conform with the applicable emission standards ( 42 U. S. C. 7541). Along with the in use testing program, we would allow manufacturers to demonstrate that they have designed their engines to control emissions substantially below the emission standards that apply. If manufacturers are able to show that they have already been reducing emissions more than required by the standards, including appropriate consideration for deterioration and compliance margins, this may allow us to conclude that these accumulated additional emission reductions are sufficient to offset the high emissions from a failing engine family. In concept, this approach serves much like a banking program to recognize manufacturers' efforts to go beyond the minimum required emission reductions. This approach differs from the specific in use emission credit program that we proposed. This more general approach is preferred for two primary reasons. First, while we proposed to limit the in use emission credit program to transient testing in the laboratory, manufacturers will now be able to use emission data generated from field testing to characterize an engine family's average emission level. This becomes necessarily more subjective, but allows us to consider a wider range of information in evaluating the degree to which manufacturers are complying with emission standards across their product line. Second, this approach makes clearer the role of the emission credits in our consideration to recall failing engines. As we described in the proposal, we plan to consider average emission levels from multiple engine families in deciding whether to recall engines from a failing engine family. We therefore believe it is not appropriate to have a detailed emission credit program defining precisely how and when to calculate, generate, and use credits that do not necessarily have value elsewhere. The regulations do not specify how manufacturers would generate emission credits to offset a nonconforming engine family. This gives us the ability to consider any appropriate test data in deciding what action to take. In generating this kind of information, some general guidelines would apply. For example, we would expect manufacturers to share test data from all engines and all engine families tested under the in use testing program, including nonstandard tests that might be used to screen engines for later measurement. This allows us to understand the manufacturers' overall level of performance in controlling emissions to meet emission standards. Average emission levels should be calculated over a running three year period to include a broad range of VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68301 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations testing without skewing the results based on old designs. Emission values from engines certified to different tiers of emission standards or tested using different measurement procedures should not be combined to calculate a single average emission level. Average emission levels should be calculated according to the following equation, rounding the results to 0.1 g/ kW hr:

Average EL ( STD CL) ( UL) ( Sales) Power LF ( UL) ( Sales) Power LF i i i i i i i i i i i =   × × × ×             ÷ × × ×

Where: Average EL= Average emission level in g/ kW hr. Salesi= The number of eligible sales, tracked to the point of first retail sale in the U. S., for the given engine family during the model year. i( STD CL)= The difference between the emission standard and the average emission level for an in use testing family in g/ kW hr. ULi= Useful life in hours. Poweri= The sales weighted average rated brake power for an engine family in kW. LFi= Load factor or fraction of rated engine power utilized in use; use 0.50 for engine families used only in constant speed applications and 0.32 for all other engine families. The anticipated crankcase and evaporative emission control technologies generally are best evaluated simply by checking whether or not they continue to function as designed, rather than implementing a program to measure these emissions from in use engines. As a result, we may inspect in use engines to verify that these systems continue to function properly throughout the useful life, but are not requiring manufacturers to include crankcase or evaporative measurements as part of the in use testing program described in this section.

5. What Are the Field Testing Emission Standards and Test Procedures?

To address concerns for controlling emissions outside of the certification duty cycles and to enable field testing of Large SI engines, we are adopting procedures and standards that apply to a wider range of normal engine operation. a. What is the field testing concept? Measuring emissions from engines in the field as they undergo normal operation while installed in nonroad equipment addresses two broad concerns. First, testing of in use engines has shown that emissions can vary dramatically under certain modes of operation. Second, this provides a low cost method of testing in use engines, which facilitates in use compliance programs. Field testing addresses this by including emission measurements over the broad range of normal engine operation. This may include varying engine speeds and loads according to real operation and may include a reasonable range of ambient conditions, as described below. No engine operating in the field can follow a prescribed duty cycle for a consistent measure of emission levels. Similarly, no single test procedure can cover all real world applications, operations, or conditions. Specifying parameters for testing engines in the field and adopting an associated emission standard provides a framework for requiring that engines control emissions under the whole range of normal operation in the relevant nonroad equipment. To ensure that emissions are controlled from Large SI engines over the full range of speed and load combinations seen in the field, we are adopting supplemental emission standards that apply more broadly than the duty cycle standard, as detailed below. These standards apply to all regulated pollutants ( NOX, HC, and CO) under all normal operation ( steady state or transient). We exclude abnormal operation ( such as very low average power and extended idling time), but do not restrict operation to any specific combination of speeds and loads. In addition, the field testing standards apply under a broad range of in use ambient conditions, both to ensure robust emission controls and to avoid overly restricting the times available for testing. These provisions are described in detail below. b. How do the field testing standards apply? Manufacturers have expressed an interest in using field testing procedures before the 2007 model year to show that they can meet emission standards as part of the in use testing program. While we are not adopting specific fieldtesting standards for 2004 through 2006 model year engines, we will allow this as an option. In this case, manufacturers would conduct the field testing as described here to show that their engines meet the 5.4 g/ kW hr HC+ NOX standard and the 50 g/ kW hr CO standard. This may give manufacturers the opportunity to do testing at significantly lower cost compared with laboratory testing. Preliminary certification data from California ARB show that manufacturers are reaching steady state emission levels well below emission standards, so we expect any additional variability in field testing measurements not to affect manufacturers' ability to meet the same emission standards. The 2007 field testing standards are based on emission data measured on engines with the same emission control technology used to establish the dutycycle standards. As described above for the duty cycle standards, we are adopting a flexible approach to address the tradeoff between HC+ NOX and CO emissions. Table V. D   1 shows the range of values that define the standard for showing compliance for field testing measurements. The higher numerical values of the Tier 2 standards for field testing ( compared with duty cycle testing) reflect the observed variation in emissions for varying engine operation, and the projected effects of ambient conditions on the projected technology. Conceptually, we believe that fieldtesting standards should primarily require manufacturers to adjust engine calibrations to effectively manage airfuel ratios under varying conditions. The estimated cost of complying with emission standards includes an allowance for the time and resources needed for this recalibration effort ( see Section IX. B. for total estimated costs per engine).

TABLE V. D   1.   SAMPLES OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE FIELD TESTING EMISSION STANDARDS FOR LARGE SI ENGINES( G/ KW HR) *

HC+ NOX CO 3.8 ............................................... 6.5 3.1 ............................................... 8.5 2.4 ............................................... 11.7 1.8 ............................................... 16.8 1.4 ............................................... 23.1 VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 ER08NO02.000</ MATH> 68302 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations TABLE V. D   1.   SAMPLES OF POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE FIELD TESTING EMISSION STANDARDS FOR LARGE SI ENGINES( G/ KW HR) *   Continued HC+ NOX CO 1.1 ............................................... 31 * As described in the Final Regulatory Support Document and the regulations, the values in the table are related by the following formula ( HC+ NOX) × CO0.791 = 16.78. These values follow directly from the logarithmic relationship presented with the proposal in the Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis.

We generally require manufacturers to show at certification that they are capable of meeting all standards that apply for the useful life. This adds a measure of assurance to both EPA and manufacturers that the engine design is sufficient for any in use engines to pass any later testing. For Large SI engines, manufacturers must show in their application for certification that they are able to meet the field testing standards. Manufacturers must submit a statement that their engines will comply with field testing emission standards under all conditions that may reasonably be expected to occur in normal vehicle operation and use. Manufacturer will provide a detailed description of any testing, engineering analysis, and other information that forms the basis for the statement. This will likely include a variety of steady state emission measurements not included in the prescribed duty cycle. It may also include a continuous trace showing how emissions vary during the transient test or it may include emission measurements during other segments of operation manufacturers believe are representative of the way their engines normally operate in the field. Two additional provisions are necessary to allow emission testing without removing engines from equipment in the field. Manufacturers must design their engines to broadcast instantaneous speed and torque values to the onboard computer and ensure that emission sampling is possible after engine installation. The test equipment and procedures for showing compliance with fieldtesting standards also hold promise to reduce the cost of production line testing. Companies with production facilities that have a dynamometer but no emission measurement capability may use the field testing equipment and procedures to get a low cost, valid emission measurement at the production line. Manufacturers may also choose to use the cost advantage of the simpler measurement to sample a greater number of production line engines. This would provide greater assurance of consistent emissions performance, but would also provide valuable quality control data for overall engine performance. See the discussion of alternate approaches to productionline testing in Section II. C. 4 for more information. c. What limits are placed on field testing? The field testing standards apply to all normal operation. This may include steady state or transient engine operation. Given a set of field testing standards, the goal for the design engineer is to ensure that engines are properly calibrated for controlling emissions under any reasonably expected mode of engine operation. Engines may not be able to meet the emissions limit under all conditions, however, so we are adopting several parameters to narrow the range of engine operation that is subject to the field testing standards. For example, emission sampling for field testing does not include engine starting. Engines can often operate at extreme environmental and geographic conditions ( temperature, altitude, etc.). To narrow the range of conditions for the design engineer, we are limiting emission measurements during field testing to ambient temperatures from 13 ° to 35 ° C ( 55 ° to 95 ° F), and to ambient pressures from 600 to 775 millimeters of mercury ( which should cover almost all normal pressures from sea level to 7,000 feet above sea level). This allows testing under a wider range of conditions in addition to helping ensure that engines are able to control emissions under the whole range of conditions under which they operate. Some additional limits to define `` normal'' operation apply to field testing. These restrictions are intended to provide manufacturers with some certainty about what their design targets are and to ensure that compliance with the field testing standards is feasible. These restrictions apply to both variable speed and constant speed engine applications. First, measurements with more than 2 minutes of continuous idle are excluded. This means that an emission measurement from a forklift while it idled for 5 minutes will not be considered valid. On the other hand, an emission measurement from a forklift that idled for multiple 1 minute periods and otherwise operated at 40 percent power for several minutes would be considered a valid measurement. Measurements with in use equipment in their normal service show that idle periods for Large SI engines are short, but relatively frequent. We therefore do not automatically exclude an emission sample if it includes an idling portion. At the same time, controlling emissions during extended idling poses a difficult design challenge, especially at low ambient temperatures. Exhaust and catalyst temperatures under these conditions can decrease enough that catalyst conversion is significantly less effective. Since extended idling is not an appropriate focus of extensive development efforts at this stage, we believe the 2 minute threshold for continuous idle appropriately balances the need to include measurement during short idling periods with the technical challenges of controlling emissions under difficult conditions. Second, measured power during the sampling period must be above 5 percent of maximum power for an emission measurement to be considered valid. Brake specific emissions ( g/ kWhr can be very high at low power because they are calculated by dividing the g/ hr emission rate by a very small power level ( kW). By ensuring that brake specific emissions are not calculated by dividing by power levels less than 5 percent of the maximum, we can avoid this problem. The data presented in Chapter 4 of the Final Regulator Support Document show that engines can meet the emission standards when operating above 5 percent of rated power. Third, some engines need to run rich of stoichiometric combustion during extended high load operation to protect against engine failure. This increases HC and CO emissions. We are adopting provisions allowing manufacturers to meet separate standards for these engines for steady state operation. For engines qualifying for these different steady state standards, we specify that a valid sample for field testing must include less than 10 percent of operation at 90 percent or more of maximum power. We expect it to be uncommon for engine installations to call for such high power demand due to the shortened engine lifetime at very high load operation. A larger engine can generally produce the desired power at a lower relative load, without compromising engine lifetime. Alternatively, applications that call for full load operation typically use diesel engines. Manufacturers may request a different threshold to allow more openloop operation. Before we approve such a request, the engine manufacturer would need to have a plan for ensuring that the engines in their final installation do not routinely operate at loads above the specified threshold. An additional parameter to consider is the minimum sampling time for field testing. A longer period allows for VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68303 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations greater accuracy, due mainly to the smoothing effect of measuring over several transient events. On the other hand, an overly long sampling period can mask areas of engine operation with poor emission control characteristics. To balance these concerns, we are applying a minimum sampling period of 2 minutes. In other rules for diesel engines, we have allowed sampling periods as short as 30 seconds. Sparkignition engines generally don't have turbochargers and they control emissions by maintaining air fuel ratio with closed loop controls through changing engine operation. Sparkignition engines are therefore much less prone to consistent emission spikes from off cycle or unusual engine operation. We believe the 2 minute sampling time requirement will ensure sufficient measurement accuracy and will allow for more meaningful measurements from engines that may be operated with very frequent but brief times at idle. We do not specify a maximum sampling time. We expect manufacturers testing in use engines to select an approximate sampling time before measuring emissions; however, the standards apply for any sampling time that meets the minimum. When selecting an engine family for the in use testing program, we will develop a plan with direction related to the way manufacturers conduct the emissionsampling effort, such as sampling time or specific types of engine operation, to ensure that testing provides relevant data. d. How do I test engines in the field? To test engines without removing them from equipment, analyzers are connected to the engine's exhaust to detect emission concentrations during normal operation. Exhaust volumetric flow rate and continuous power output are also needed to convert the analyzer responses to units of g/ kW hr for comparing to emission standards. These values can be calculated from measurements of the engine intake flow rate, the exhaust air fuel ratio and the engine speed, and from torque information. Available small analyzers and other equipment may be adapted for measuring emissions from field equipment. A portable flame ionization detector can measure total hydrocarbon concentrations. Methane measurement currently requires more expensive laboratory equipment that is impractical for field measurements. Field testing standards are therefore be based on total hydrocarbon emissions. A portable analyzer based on zirconia technology measures NOX emissions. A nondispersive infrared ( NDIR) unit can measure CO. Emission samples can best be drawn from the exhaust flow directly downstream of the catalyst material to avoid diluting effects from the end of the tailpipe. Installing a sufficiently long tailpipe extension is also an acceptable way to avoid dilution. Mass flow rates also factor into the torque calculation; this may either be measured in the intake manifold or downstream of the catalyst. Calculating brake specific emissions depends on determining instantaneous engine speed and torque levels. Manufacturers must therefore design their engines to continuously monitor engine speed and torque. The tolerance for speed measurements, which is relatively straightforward, is ± 5 percent. For torque, the onboard computer needs to convert measured engine parameters into useful units. Manufacturers generally will need to monitor a surrogate value such as intake manifold pressure or throttle position ( or both), then rely on a look up table programmed into the onboard computer to convert these torque indicators into newton meters. Manufacturers may also want to program the look up tables for torque conversion into a remote scan tool. Because of the greater uncertainty in these measurements and calculations, manufacturers must produce their systems to report torque values that are within 85 and 105 percent of the true value. This broader range allows appropriately for the uncertainty in the measurement, while providing an incentive for manufacturers to make the torque reading as accurate as possible. Under reporting torque values would over predict emissions. These tolerances are taken into account in the selection of the field testing standards, as described in Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document.

E. Special Compliance Provisions We are adopting hardship provisions to address the particular concerns of small volume manufacturers, which generally have limited capital and engineering resources. These hardship provisions are generally described in Section VII. C. For Large SI engines, we are adopting a longer available extension of the deadline, up to four years, for meeting emission standards for companies that qualify for special treatment under the hardship provisions. We will, however, not extend the deadline for compliance beyond the four year period. This approach considers the fact that, unlike most other engine categories, qualifying small businesses are more likely to be manufacturers designing their own products. Other types of engines more often involve importers, which are limited more by available engine suppliers than design or development schedules. We are not finalizing the proposed interim emission standards proposed for small volume manufacturers. We believe we can accomplish the same objectives with more flexibility, and potentially with greater net emission reductions, by relying on the hardship provisions. In addition, we are waiving the requirement for small volume manufacturers to broadcast engine speed and torque values. These companies may choose to do this to enable field testing of their products, but may be constrained in developing this capability to the extent that they rely on component suppliers to provide systems that meet EPA requirements.

F. Technological Feasibility of the Standards We are adopting emission standards that depend on the industrial versions of established automotive technologies. The most recent advances in automotive technology have made possible even more dramatic emission reductions. However, we believe that transferring some of these most advanced technologies is not appropriate for nonroad engines at this time, especially considering the much smaller sales volumes for amortizing fixed costs and the additional costs associated with the first time regulation of these engines. To comply with the 2004 model year standards, manufacturers should not need to do any development, testing, or certification work that is not already necessary to meet California ARB standards in 2004. As shown in Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document, manufacturers can meet these standards with three way catalysts and closed loop fuel systems. These technologies have been available for industrial engine applications for several years. Moreover, several manufacturers have already completed the testing effort to certify with California ARB that their engines meet these standards. Complying with emission standards nationwide in 2004 will therefore generally require manufacturers only to produce greater numbers of the engines complying with the California standards. Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document further describes data and rationale showing why we believe that the 2007 model year emission standards under the steadystate and transient duty cycles and field testing procedures are feasible. In VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68304 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations summary, testing from Southwest Research Institute and other data show that the same catalyst and fuel system technologies needed to meet the 2004 standards can be optimized to meet more stringent emission standards. Applying further development allows the design engineer to fine tune control of air fuel ratios and address any highemission modes of operation to produce engines that consistently control emissions to very low levels, even considering the wide range of operation experienced by these engines. The numerical emission standards are based on measured emission levels from engines that have operated for at least 5,000 hours with a functioning emission control system. These engines demonstrate the achievable level of control from catalyst based systems and provide a significant degree of basic development that should help manufacturers in optimizing their own engines. We believe it is appropriate to initiate the second stage of standards in 2007, because we believe that applying these emission standards earlier does not allow manufacturers enough stability between introduction of different phases of emission standards to prepare for complying with the full set of requirements in this final rule and to amortize their fixed costs. Three years of stable emission standards, plus the remaining lead time before 2004, allows manufacturers enough time to go through the development and certification effort to comply with the new standards including new test cycle requirements. The provisions to allow `` family banking'' for early compliance provide an additional tool for companies that choose to spread out their design and certification efforts. The new emission standards will either have no impact or a positive impact with respect to noise, energy, and safety, as described in Chapter 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document. In particular, the anticipated fuel savings associated with the expected emission control technologies will provide a very big energy benefit related to new emission standards. The projected technologies are currently available and are consistent with those anticipated for complying with the emission standards adopted by California ARB. The lead time for the near term and long term emission standards allows manufacturers enough time to optimize these designs to most effectively reduce emissions from the wide range of Large SI equipment applications. VI. Recreational Marine Diesel Engines This section describes the new provisions for 40 CFR part 94, which apply to engine manufacturers and importers. We are applying the same general compliance provisions from 40 CFR part 94 for engine manufacturers, equipment manufacturers, operators, rebuilders, and others. See Section II for a description of our general approach to regulating nonroad engines and how manufacturers show that they meet emission standards.

A. Overview We are adopting exhaust and crankcase emission standards for recreational marine diesel engines with power ratings greater than or equal to 37 kW. We are adopting emission standards for HC, NOX, CO, and PM beginning in 2006. We believe manufacturers will be able to use technology developed for land based nonroad and commercial marine diesel engines. To encourage the introduction of low emission technology, we are also adopting voluntary `` Blue Sky'' standards which are 40 percent lower than the mandatory standards. We also recognize that there are many small businesses that manufacture recreational marine diesel engines. We are therefore including several regulatory options for small businesses that will help minimize any unique burdens caused by emission regulations. Diesel engines are primarily available in inboard marine configurations, but may also be available in sterndrive and outboard marine configurations. Inboard diesel engines are the primary choice for many larger recreational boats.

B. Engines Covered by This Rule The standards in this section apply to recreational marine diesel engines. We excluded these engines from the requirements applying to commercial marine diesel engines because at the time we thought their operation in planing mode might impose design requirements on recreational boat builders and to allow us more time for further evaluation prior to setting standards ( 64 FR 73300, December 29, 1999). Commercial marine vessels tend to be displacement hull vessels, designed and built for a unique commercial application ( such as towing, fishing, or general cargo). Power ratings for engines used on these vessels are analogous to land based applications, and these engines generally have warranties for 2,000 to 5,000 hours of use. Recreational vessels, on the other hand, tend to be planing vessels. Engines used on these vessels are designed to achieve higher power output with less engine weight. This increase in power reduces the lifetime of the engine, so recreational marine engines have shorter warranties than their commercial counterparts. In our previous rulemaking, recreational engine industry representatives raised concerns about the ability of these engines to meet the commercial standards without substantial changes in the size and weight of the engine. Such changes may have an impact on vessel builders, who might have to redesign vessel hulls to accommodate the new engines. Because most recreational vessel hulls are made with fiberglass molds, this may be a significant burden for recreational vessel builders. Our further evaluation of these issues leads us to conclude that recreational marine diesel engines can achieve those same emission standards without significant impacts on engine size and weight, and therefore without significant impacts on vessel design. Section VI. G of this document, Chapters 3 and 4 of the Final Regulatory Support Document, and Section II. A of the Summary and Analysis of Comments describe the several technological changes we anticipate manufacturers will use to comply with the new emission standards. None of these technologies has an inherent negative effect on the performance or power density of an engine. As with engines in land based applications, we expect that manufacturers will be able to use the range of technologies available to maintain or even improve the performance capabilities of their engines. We are establishing a separate regulatory program for recreational marine diesel engines in this rule, with most aspects the same as for commercial marine diesel engines but with certain aspects of the program tailored to these applications, notably the not to exceed emissions requirements. To distinguish between commercial and recreational marine diesel engines for the purpose of emission controls, it is necessary to define `` recreational marine diesel engine.'' The commercial marine diesel engine rule defined recreational marine engine as a propulsion marine engine that is intended by the manufacturer to be installed on a recreational vessel. The engine must be labeled to distinguish it from a commercial marine diesel engine. The label must read: `` THIS ENGINE IS CATEGORIZED AS A RECREATIONAL ENGINE UNDER 40 CFR PART 94. INSTALLATION OF THIS ENGINE IN ANY NONRECREATIONAL VESSEL IS A VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68305 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW SUBJECT TO PENALTY.'' We are revising this definition to include a requirement that a recreational marine engine must be a Category 1 marine engine ( have a displacement of less than 5 liters per cylinder). Category 2 marine engines are generally designed with characteristics similar to commercial marine engines. Vessels using engines of this size generally require engines that can operate longer at higher power than typical recreational boats; therefore, these engines generally have a lower power density and are not offered in a `` recreational'' rating. For the purpose of the recreational marine diesel engine definition included in the proposal, recreational vessel was defined as `` a vessel that is intended by the vessel manufacturer to be operated primarily for pleasure or leased, rented, or chartered to another for the latter's pleasure.'' Because certain vessels that are used for pleasure may have operating characteristics that are more similar to commercial marine vessels ( such as excursion vessels and charter craft), we drew on the Coast Guard's definition of a `` small passenger vessel'' ( 46 U. S. C. 2101 ( 35)) to further delineate what would be considered to be a recreational vessel. Specifically, the term `` operated primarily for pleasure or leased, rented or chartered to another for the latter's pleasure'' does not include the following vessels: ( 1) Vessels of less than 100 gross tons that carry more than 6 passengers; ( 2) vessels of 100 gross tons or more that carry one or more passengers; or ( 3) vessels used solely for competition. For the purposes of this definition, a passenger is defined by 46 U. S. C 2101 ( 21, 21a) which generally means an individual who pays to be on the vessel. We received several comments in this rulemaking on these definitions. Engine manufacturers were concerned that the definitions may be unworkable for engine manufacturers, because they cannot know whether a particular recreational vessel might carry more than six passengers at a time. All they can know is whether the engine they manufacture is intended by them for installation on a vessel designed for pleasure and having the corresponding characteristics for planing, power density, and performance requirements. We are not revising our existing definition of recreational marine vessel. As discussed in the Summary and Analysis of Comments, a vessel will be considered recreational if the boat builder intends that the customer will operate it consistent with the recreational vessel definition. Relying on the boat builder's intent is necessary because manufacturers need to establish a vessel's classification before it is sold, whereas the Coast Guard definitions apply at the time of use. The definition therefore relies on the intent of the boat builder to establish that the vessel will be used consistent with the above criteria. If a boat builder manufactures a vessel for a customer who intends to use the vessel for recreational purposes, we would always consider that a recreational vessel, regardless of how the owner ( or a subsequent owner) actually uses it. The engine manufacturer will not be expected to ensure that their engines are used only in recreational craft; however, they would be required to label their recreational engines as described above. The vessel builders will then be required to install properly certified recreational ( or commercial) marine engines in recreational vessels and certified commercial marine engines in commercial vessels.

C. Emission Standards for Recreational Marine Diesel Engines This section describes the new emission standards and implementation dates, with an outline of the technology that can be used to achieve these levels. The technological feasibility discussion below ( Section VI. G) describes our technical rationale in more detail.

1. What Are the Emission Standards and Compliance Dates?

The emission standards for recreational marine diesel engines are the same as the Tier 2 standards for commercial marine diesel engines with two years additional lead time. We are setting the standards at the same level because recreational marine diesel engines can use all the technologies projected for Tier 2 and these technologies are expected to lead to compliance. As with commercial marine engines this technology will be available in the lead time provided to allow compliance with the emission standards. Many of these engines already use this technology. This includes electronic fuel management, turbocharging, and separate circuit aftercooling. In fact, because recreational engines have much shorter design lives than commercial engines, it is easier to apply raw water aftercooling to these engines, which allows manufacturers to enhance performance while reducing NOX emissions. Engine manufacturers will generally increase the fueling rate in recreational engines, compared to commercial engines, to gain power from a given engine size. This helps bring a planing vessel onto the water surface and increases the maximum vessel speed without increasing the weight of the vessel. This difference in how recreational engines are designed and used affects emissions. However, the technology listed above can be used to meet the emission standards while still meeting the performance requirements of a recreational engine. We are adopting the commercial marine engine standards for recreational marine diesel engines, allowing two years beyond the dates that standards apply for the commercial engines. This gives engine manufacturers additional lead time in adapting technology to their recreational marine diesel engines. For manufacturers producing only recreational marine engines the implementation dates provide three to six years of lead time beyond this notice. Based on our evaluation of the industry, we believe that manufacturers who produce only recreational marine engines would likely be small businesses and would have the option of additional lead time, and other flexibility, as discussed in Section VI. E. The emission standards and implementation dates for recreational marine diesel engines are presented in Table VI. C   1. The subcategories refer to engine displacement in liters per cylinder.

TABLE VI. C   1.   RECREATIONAL MARINE DIESEL EMISSION STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION DATES Subcategory HC+ NOX g/ kW hr PM g/ kW hr CO g/ kW hr Implementation date power   37 kW disp < 0.9 ............................................................................... 7.5 0.40 5.0 2007 0.9   disp < 1.2 ................................................................................................ 7.2 0.30 5.0 2006 1.2   disp < 2.5 ................................................................................................ 7.2 0.20 5.0 2006 disp   2.5 ......................................................................................................... 7.2 0.20 5.0 2009 VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68306 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations Manufacturers commented that engines with less than 2.5 liters per cylinder, but more than 560 kW would have no lead time beyond the landbased nonroad diesel engine standards and that some commercial marine engines in this category would actually have to certify two years before nonroad engines. In this case this is caused by the way we define subclasses, but has technology and cost implications for the engines involved. To address this, we are providing an optional implementation date of 2008 for certain commercial and recreational marine engines ( see the Summary and Analysis of Comments for more detail). To be eligible for this option, the engine must be derived from a land based nonroad engine with a rated power greater than 560 kW and have a displacement of 2.0 to 2.5 liters per cylinder. To use this option, we are requiring that engines certified under this option meet an HC+ NOX standard of 6.4 g/ kW hr through model year 2012. We believe this emission level, which matches the Tier 2 level for land based nonroad engines, should be achievable given the extra lead time for development. Testing would still be performed on the appropriate marine duty cycles. Based on our analysis in the Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for commercial marine engines, HC+ NOX emissions measured over the marine duty cycles should be similar to those measured over the landbased nonroad duty cycle. We are also adopting not to exceed emission standards and related requirements similar to those finalized for commercial marine diesel engines. This is discussed below in Section VI. C. 8.

2. Will I Be Able To Average, Bank, or Trade Emissions Credits? Manufacturers may use emission credits from recreational marine diesel engines to show that they meet emission standards. Section II. C. 3 gives an overview of the emission credit program, which is consistent with what we have adopted for Category 1 commercial marine diesel engines. The emission credit program covers HC+ NOX and PM emissions, but not CO emissions. Consistent with our land based nonroad and commercial marine diesel engine regulations, manufacturers may not simultaneously generate HC+ NOX credits while using PM credits on the same engine family, and vice versa. This is necessary because of the inherent trade off between NOX and PM emissions in diesel engines. We are adopting the same maximum value of the Family Emission Limit ( FEL) as for commercial marine diesel engines. For engines with a displacement of less than 1.2 liters/ cylinder, the maximum values are 11.5 g/ kW hr HC+ NOX and 1.2 g/ kW hr PM; for larger engines, the maximum values are 10.5 g/ kW hr HC+ NOX and 0.54 g/ kW hr PM. These maximum FEL values were based on the comparable landbased emission credit program and will ensure that the emissions from any given family certified under this program not be significantly higher than the applicable emission standards. We believe these maximum values will prevent backsliding of emissions above the baseline levels for any given engine model. Also, we are concerned that the higher emitting engines may cause increased emissions in areas such as ports that may have a need for PM or NOX emission reductions. Nonetheless, it is acknowledged that recreational marine diesel engines constitute a small fraction of PM and HC + NOX emissions in nonattainment areas. Emission credits generated under this program have no expiration, with no discounting applied. This is consistent with the commercial marine credit program and gives manufacturers more options in implementing their engine designs. However, if we revisit these standards later, we will have to reevaluate this issue in the context of whether future advances in technology would result in a large amount of accumulated credits that would adversely impact the timely implementation of any new requirements. Consistent with the land based nonroad diesel rule, we will also not allow manufacturers to use credits generated on land based engines for demonstrating compliance with marine diesel engines. In addition, credits may not be exchanged between recreational and commercial marine engines. The emission standards for recreational engines are based on the baseline levels of current recreational marine engines and the capability of technology to reduce emissions from recreational marine engines. The standard is, therefore, premised on the capability and use of recreational marine technology and not on the capability and use of technology on other engines. Emissions from land based, commercial, and recreational marine engines are measured over different duty cycles and have different useful lives. Correction factors would be difficult to generate and they would add complexity and uncertainty to the value of the credits. Furthermore, we are concerned that allowing cross program trading could create an inequity between manufacturers with diverse product lines and those with more limited offerings, thereby potentially creating a competitive advantage for diverse companies over small companies selling only recreational marine engines. If a manufacturer were to do this, we do not believe it is likely that they would sell emission credits at a price that would be economical for small manufacturers. We will allow early banking of emission credits relative to the standard. Early banking of emission credits may allow for a smoother implementation of the recreational marine standards. These credits are generated relative to the new emission standards and are undiscounted. We will also allow manufacturers to generate early credits relative to their pre control emission levels. If manufacturers choose this option they will have to develop baseline emission levels specific to each participating engine family. Credits will then be calculated relative to the manufacturergenerated baseline emission rates, rather than the standards. To generate the baseline emission rates, a manufacturer must test three engines from the family for which the baseline is being generated. The baseline will be the average emissions of the three engines. Under this option, engines must still certify to the standards to generate credits, but the credits will be calculated relative to the generated baseline rather than the standards. Any credits generated between the level of the standards and the generated baseline will be discounted 10 percent. This is to account for the variability of testing inuse engines to establish the familyspecific baseline levels, which may result from differences in hours of use and maintenance practices as well as other sources of potential uncertainty about the representativeness if the baseline. Manufacturers commented that credits should not be generated under the early banking program for the portion of NOX reductions above the MARPOL Annex VI standard. We believe this approach is reasonable since this should be a common upper limit for all engines. Therefore, if manufacturers use this option, any baseline NOX levels determined to be above the MARPOL Annex VI standard must be adjusted to that level for determining early credits.

3. Is EPA Proposing Voluntary Standards for These Engines? a. Blue Sky. We are adopting voluntary emission standards based on a 45 percent reduction beyond the mandatory standards. An engine family meeting the voluntary standards VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68307 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations qualifies for designation as Blue Sky Series engines. These voluntary standards are the same as those adopted for commercial marine diesel engines ( see Table VI. C   2). While the Blue Sky Series emission standards are voluntary, a manufacturer choosing to certify an engine under this program must comply with all the requirements that apply to this category of engines, including allowable maintenance, warranty, useful life, rebuild, and deterioration factor provisions. This program is effective immediately when we publish this rule. To maximize the potential for other groups to create incentive programs, without double counting, we do not allow manufacturers to earn marketable credits for their Blue Sky Engines.

TABLE VI. C   2.   BLUE SKY VOLUNTARY EMISSION STANDARDS FOR RECREATIONAL MARINE DIESEL ENGINES [ g/ kW hr]

Rated brake power ( kW) HC+ NOX PM power   37 kW displ.< 0.9 ............... 4.0 0.24 0.9  displ.< 1.2 ........... 4.0 0.18 1.2  displ.< 2.5 ........... 4.0 0.12 2.5  displ. .................. 5.0 0.12 b. MARPOL Annex VI. The MARPOL Annex VI standards are for NOX emissions from marine diesel engines rated above 130 kW. We encourage engine manufacturers to make Annex VI compliant engines available and boat builders to purchase and install them before we apply the EPA Tier 2 standards. If the treaty enters into force, the standards would go into effect retroactively to all boats built January 1, 2000 or later. One advantage of using MARPOL compliant engines is that if this happens, users will be in compliance with the standard without having to make any changes to their engines.

4. What Durability Provisions Apply?

Several provisions help ensure that engines control emissions throughout a lifetime of operation. Section II. C gives a general overview of durability provisions associated with emissions certification. This section discusses these provisions specifically for recreational marine diesel engines. a. How long do my engines have to comply? Manufacturers must produce engines that comply over a useful life of ten years or until the engine accumulates 1,000 operating hours, whichever occurs first. The hours requirement is a minimum value for useful life, and manufacturers must comply for a longer period in those cases where they design their engines to be operated longer than 1,000 hours. In making the determination that engines are designed to last longer than the 1,000 hour value, we will consider evidence such as whether the engines continue to reliably deliver the necessary power output without an increase in fuel consumption that the user would find unacceptable and thus might trigger a maintenance or rebuild action by the user. b. How do I demonstrate emission durability? We are extending the durability demonstration requirements for commercial marine diesel engines to also cover recreational marine diesel engines. This means that recreational marine engine manufacturers, using good engineering judgment, will generally need to test one or more engines for emissions before and after accumulating the number of hours consistent with the engine useful life ( usually performed by continuous engine operation in a laboratory). The results of these tests are referred to as `` durability data,'' and are used to determine the rates at which emissions are expected to increase over the useful life of the engine for each engine family The rates are known as deterioration factors. However, in many cases, manufacturers may use durability data from a different engine family, or for the same engine family in a different model year. Because of this allowance to use the same data for multiple engine families, we expect durability testing to be very limited. We also specify that manufacturers must collect durability data and generate deterioration factors using the same methods established for commercial marine diesel engines. These requirements are in 40 CFR 94.211, 94.218, 94.219, and 94.220. These sections describe when durability data from one engine family can be used for another family, how to select to the engine configuration that is to be tested, how to conduct the service accumulation, and what maintenance can be performed on the engine during this service accumulation. Under 40 CFR 94.220, manufacturers may project deterioration rates from engines with an accumulation of less than 1,000 hours, as long as the amount of service accumulation completed and projection procedures are determined using good engineering judgment. c. What maintenance may be done during service accumulation? For engines certified to a 1,000 hour useful life, the only maintenance that may be done must be: ( 1) Regularly scheduled, ( 2) unrelated to emissions, and ( 3) technologically necessary. This typically includes changing engine oil, oil filter, fuel filter, and air filter. For recreational marine diesel engines certified to longer lives, these engines will be subject to the same minimum allowable maintenance intervals as commercial marine engines. These intervals and the allowable maintenance are specified in 40 CFR 94.211. d. Are there production line testing provisions? We are adopting the production line testing requirements from commercial marine engines for recreational marine diesel engines, with the additional provisions described in II. C. 4. A manufacturer must test one percent of its total projected annual sales of Category 1 engines each year to meet production line testing requirements. We are not adopting a minimum number of tests, so a manufacturer who produces no more than 100 marine diesel engines is not required to do any production line testing. Similar to the commercial marine requirements, manufacturers have the option of using alternative production line testing programs with EPA approval. Manufacturers commented that we should limit the number of engines tested for a given engine family to five, arguing that five engines would be sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the standards. Although there isn't necessarily an engineering rationale for capping the number of tests for each engine family to five, we believe that statistical certainty can be determined using the Cumulative Sum method described for recreational vehicles in 40 CFR part 1051, subpart D. Therefore, we are providing the option of using the Cumulative Sum method for determining sample sizes under the production line testing program. For marine engines, PM would need to be included in this methodology. Under the Cumulative Sum method, a statistical analysis is applied to test results to establish the number of tests needed. This may limit the number of engines tested to less than 1 percent of the production volume in cases where there is low variability in the test data.

5. Do These Standards Apply to Alternative Fueled Engines? These new standards apply to all recreational marine diesel engines, without regard to the type of fuel used. While we are not aware of any alternative fueled recreational marine diesel engines currently being sold into the U. S. market, alternate forms of the hydrocarbon standards address the potential for natural gas fueled and VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 17: 09 Nov 07, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 08NOR2. SGM 08NOR2 68308 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 217 / Friday, November 8, 2002 / Rules and Regulations alcohol fueled engines. In our regulation of highway vehicles and engines, we determined that nonmethane standards should be used in place of total hydrocarbon standards for engines fueled with natural gas ( which is comprised primarily of methane) ( 59 FR 48472, September 21, 1994). These alternate forms follow the precedent set in previous rulemakings to make the standards similar in stringency and environmental impact. Similarly, we are applying HCequivalent ( HCE) standards instead of total hydrocarbon standards to alcoholfueled highway engines and vehicles ( 54 FR 14426, April 11, 1989). HCequivalent emissions are calculated from the oxygenated organic components and non oxygenated organic components of the exhaust, summed together based on the amount of organic carbon present in the exhaust. Alcohol fueled recreational marine engines must therefore comply with total hydrocarbon equivalent ( THCE) plus NOX standards instead of THC plus NOX standards.

6. Is EPA Controlling Crankcase Emissions? Manufacturers must prevent crankcase emissions from recreational marine diesel engines, with one exception. Turbocharged recreational marine diesel engines may be built with open crankcases, as long as the crankcase ventilation system allows for measurement of crankcase emissions. For these engines with open crankcases, we will require crankcase emissions to be either routed into the exhaust stream to be included in the exhaust measurement, or to be measured separately and added to the measured exhaust mass. These measurement requirements do not add significantly to the cost of testing, especially where the crankcase vent is simply routed into the exhaust stream prior to the point of exhaust sampling. These provisions are consistent with our previous regulation of crankcase emissions from such diverse sources as commercial marine engines, locomotives, and passenger cars.

7. What Are the Smoke Requirements? We are not adopting smoke requirements for recreational marine diesel engines. Marine diesel engine manufacturers have stated that many of their engines, though currently unregulated, are manufactured with smoke limiting controls at the request of customers. Users seek low smoke emissions both because they dislike the exhaust residue on decks and because they can be subject to penalties in ports with smoke emission requirements. In many cases, marine engine exhaust gases are mixed with water prior to being released. This practice reduces smoke visibility. Moreover, we believe that applying PM standards will have the effect of limiting smoke emissions as well.