Reference Description Source We replaced many calibrations that we required according to 40 CFR Part 86 and 40 CFR Part 89. We revised our approach toward instrument calibration because it did not apply to modern instruments that use other signals to correct for interferences.

§ 1065.308 Continuous analyzer system response and updating recording verification Reference Description Source We added a verification to determine the response of analyzers and the alignment of any compensation signals. We added this check to verify that analyzer response and recording rate were matched and that other signals used to compensate for interferences were aligned with the primary emissions signal.

§ 1065.309 Continuous analyzer uniform response verification Reference Description Source We added a verification to determine that an analyzer had a uniform response so that it could be added correctly to other analyzer signals.

§ 1065.310 Torque calibration Reference Description Source We adopted the calibration specifications in § 86.1308 84, § 89.306, and § 89.307, but we scaled them to the maximum torque of an engine to make Part 1065 applicable across a wide range of maximum engine torques. § 86.1308 84 § 89.306 § 89.307 Technical Amendments 87 § 1065.315 Pressure, temperature, and dewpoint calibration.

Reference Description Source We provided guidance on pressure, temperature, and dewpoint calibration. We allowed laboratories to develop their own calibration procedures because of the diversity of measurement technologies. We relied on verifications such as the linearity check to ensure measurement system performance.

§ 1065.320 Fuel flow calibration.

Reference Description Source We provided guidance on fuel flow calibration. We allowed laboratories to develop their own calibration procedures because of the diversity of measurement technologies. We relied on verifications such as the linearity check to ensure measurement system performance.

§ 1065.325 Intake air flow calibration Reference Description Source We provided guidance on intake air flow calibration. We allowed laboratories to develop their own calibration procedures because of the diversity of measurement technologies. We relied on verifications such as the linearity check to ensure measurement system performance.

§ 1065.330 Exhaust flow check.

Reference Description Source We provided guidance on exhaust flow calibration. We allowed laboratories to develop their own calibration procedures because of the diversity of measurement technologies. We relied on verifications such as the linearity check to ensure measurement system performance.

§ 1065.340 CVS calibration Reference Description Source We adopted CVS calibration specifications from § 86.1319 90 and especially § 86.1319 90( e)( 3), which specified calculations that assume isentropic compressible flow. We adopted molar flow reference signals for calibration to eliminate the use of standard pressure and temperature values, which have been a frequent source of confusion   especially across different regulations. We recognized that 40 CFR Part 86, 40 CFR Part 89, and ISO 8178 1 all have different standard conditions specified in different sections. § 86.1319 90 ( e) We adopted PDP calibration specifications from § 86.1319 90, but we reformulated the equations to make them easier to understand. § 86.1319 90 Draft Technical Support Document 88 ( f) We adopted CFV calibration specifications from § 86.1319 90 CFV, but we reformulated the calibration to take into account isentropic compressible flow. We specified the new calibration formulation to extend use of the calibration data to a wider range of molar masses of an exhaust mixture. We allowed assumptions to be made in order to reduce the new formulation to the formulation in § 86.1319 90, but we restricted use of the § 86.1319 90 formulation to a range of molar masses of flow. We provided similar guidance to this effect in the past.( 1),( 2) We specified how to calibrate multiple CFVs in parallel. § 86.1319 90 ( g) We adopted the SSV calibration in § 86.1319 90, but we used a molar reference signal. § 86.1319 90 § 1065.341 Propane check Reference Description Source We adopted the propane check of § 1319 90( f), but we extended its use to check secondary dilution systems, and we added an option to use a flowbased reference instead of the gravimetric reference in § 1319 90( f) . We recognized that the flow based reference has been used successfully in light duty CVS applications, and we allowed this reference to provide more options to engine dynamometer CVS laboratories. For the flowbased reference we required compensation for the non ideal gas behavior of pure compressed propane. § 1319 90( f)

§ 1065.345 Vacuum side leak check Reference Description Source We adopted the leak checks from § 86.1337 90 and 89.316, but we revised this check to include two step by step procedures to perform the check. We allowed either form of the check to provide more options to engine dynamometer laboratory operators and field test system operators. § 86.1337 90 § 89.316 § 1065.350 CO2 NDIR analyzer H2O interference check.

Reference Description Source We adopted the performance specification in § 89.318, and we described a step by step procedure for this check. § 89.318 § 1065.355 CO NDIR analyzer CO2 and H2O interference check.

Reference Description Source We adopted the performance specification in § 89.318, and we described a step by step procedure for this check. § 89.318 Technical Amendments 89 § 1065.362 FID calibration, response optimization, CH4 response factor determination and FID flow check Reference Description Source We adopted the performance specification in § 89.318, and we described a step by step procedure for this check. We allowed a simplified check that when completed successfully, significantly reduced the burden of the complete check. We currently use this simplified check successfully at our EPA labs; therefore, we allowed others to use it. § 89.318 § 1065.362 Non stoichiometric raw exhaust FID O2 interference verification Reference Description Source We added a FID O2 interference verification for hydrocarbon sampling from Non stoichiometric raw exhaust. The verification was based on ISO 8178. § 89.318 ISO 8178 1 § 8.8.3 § 1065.365 Nonmethane cutter penetration determination.

Reference Description Source We adopted a revised version of the nonmethane cutter efficiency determination, which is specified in ISO 8178 1 § 8.8.4. We revised this section to include a more prescriptive step by step procedure, and a simplified calculation to detemine nonmethane cutter penetration if two FIDs are used to determine NMHC. ISO 8178 1 § 8.8.4 § 1065.370 CLD H2O and CO2 interference check Reference Description Source We adopted the CLD H2O and CO2 interference check from § 86.1323 2007.( 3) Based on instrument manufacturer comments, we recommended humidifying the calibration gases to the humidity expected during testing. § 86.1323 2007 § 1065.372 NDUV NOx analyzer verification Reference Description Source We required a verification specifically for nondispersive ultraviolet detector NOx analyzers. We required this check because of its limitations. We required this check to ensure that these instruments are designed and operated appropriately.

§ 1065.376 Thermal chiller NO2 penetration check Reference Description Source We required this verification if a thermal chiller is used upstream of an NO2 detector or NO2 to NO converter. We required this check because of its limitations. We required this check to ensure that these instruments are designed and operated appropriately. Draft Technical Support Document 90 § 1065.378 NO2 to NO converter check Reference Description Source We adopted the NO2 to NO converter efficiency specifications in § 86.1323 84 and ISO 8178 1 § 8.7, however we scaled performance to the level of NO2 expected during testing. We scaled this check to make it less stringent for emissions tests that are not affected by its performance and more stringent for emissions tests that are significantly affected by its performance. § 86.1323 84 ISO 8178 1 § 8.7 § 1065.390 PM weighing process verification Reference Description Source We adopted the PM weighing process verification from § 86.1312 2007.( 3), however we scaled this check to the PM emissions expected at the standard. This prevents an unnecessarily stringent requirement for PM weighing. § 86.1312 2007 § 1065.395 Inertial PM balance specifications Reference Description Source We added a section that describes how to verify the performance of an inertial PM balance. § 86.1312 2007 Subpart E   Engine selection, preparation, and maintenance.

§ 1065.405 Test engine preparation and maintenance.

Reference Description Source We required specifications for engine selection, preparation, and maintenance; however we stated that any requirements in any standardsetting part take precedence over the specifications in this subpart.

We allowed a default value 125 hours of engine service accumulation for compression ignition engines without emissions measurement.

We allowed the simulation of production governors for constant speed engines.

We described how to test engines that normally have evaporative emissions control systems ( i. e., canisters) attached to them. Technical Amendments 91 Subpart F   Running an emissions test in a laboratory § 1065.501 Overview Reference Description Source We summarized all of the step by step procedures for running an emissions test in a laboratory, and we reiterated that standard setting parts specify other information required to run an emissions test. We required variable speed and constant speed engines subject to steadystate ramped modal, and transient testing to be tested according to this subpart, including any cold start testing, hot start testing, and warmed up running engine testing. We adopted procedures in § 86.1327 through § 86.1337 ( 3), § 89.404 through § 89.408 and ISO 8178 1 § 11. We added requirements and options to the specifications in § 86.1327 through § 86.1337 ( 3), § 89.404 through § 89.408 and ISO 8178 1 § 11. § 86.1327 § 86.1337 § 86.1341 § 89.404 § 89.408 § 89.410 ISO 8178 1 § 11 § 1065.510 Engine mapping Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1332 90 for variable speed engines. We added new requirements for constant speed engines, which rely on the engine's governor or simulated governor to select the engine speed during an emissions test. We required this to ensure that constant speed engines are tested in a representative way. We describe how to map when an engine is configured with auxiliary inputs and outputs. We described how to declare certain speeds and torques, and when measured speeds and torques must be used instead of declared speeds and torques. § 86.1332 90 § 1065.512 Duty cycle generation.

Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1333 90, § 89.410, ISO 8178 1 § 11.5, and ISO 8178 1 § 11.7 to combine the requirements for steady state, ramped modal, and transient test cycle generation. We allowed constant speed engines to operate at the speed selected by the engine's governor or simulated governor. We specified how to process mapping data to generate duty cycles for a specific engine. § 86.1333 90, § 89.410, ISO 8178 1 § 11.5, ISO 8178 1 § 11.7 § 1065.514 Cycle validation criteria Reference Description Source Draft Technical Support Document 92 We adopted the cycle validation criteria of § 86.1341 90, but we revised the point omission criteria easier to understand. We revised some of the statistics to reflect the dependence of power on speed and torque. We revised the statistics to reflect the capabilities of modern dynamometer and operator demand control systems. We required only torque validation criteria for constant speed engines because we allow constant speed engines to be governed by their governor or simulated governor during emissions testing. § 86.1341 90 § 1065.520 Pre test verification procedures and pre test data collection Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1330 90, § 86.1334 84 and § 89.406, including the preconditioning cycle we added to § 86.1330 90 in January of 2001.( 3)

We replaced the hydrocarbon overflow zero and span procedure with a hydrocarbon sampling system contamination check. Up to a certain amount of contamination, we allowed emissions results correction by subtracting the contamination determined with an overflow zero check performed after an analyzer port zero and span. We required this to prevent excessive hydrocarbon contamination from biasing results. We allowed some contamination to be appropriately subtracted from emissions results, which is how the original overflow procedure worked, except that it had no limits on contamination. We required this procedure to improve test repeatability. § 86.1330 90 § 86.1334 84 § 89.406 § 1065.525 Engine starting, restarting and shutdown Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1334 84, but we have simplified the requirements because § 86.1334 84 described some starting procedures with obsolete engine components. We revised § 86.1334 84 to achieve the same intent. We specified a procedure for restarting an engine if it stalls during a discrete mode steady state test. § 86.1334 84 § 1065.530 Emission test sequence.

Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1337 90, § 89.407, and ISO 8178 1 § 11.7.1 and combined them to include PM sampling, continuous and batch sampling, and raw and dilute sampling. We required procedures to check for analyzer drift. We allowed collecting and correcting for background emissions in dilution air. We required procedures for cold starts, hotstarts soak periods, and hot running tests. We specified how to cool down aftertreatment systems. We recommended verifying gas analyzer zero and span by using a mid span reference gas. We specified how to retest a constant speed engine when it does not maintain constant speed at the highest torque. § 86.1337 90, § 89.407, ISO 8178 1 § 11.7.1. Technical Amendments 93 § 1065.545 Validation of proportional flow control for batch sampling Reference Description Source We adopted the performance specification of § 86.1310 2007 for PM sampling systems.( 3) We incorporated additional options for validating proportional sampling based on the principles of CVS sampling. § 86.1310 2007 § 1065.550 Emissions analyzer range and drift validation.

Reference Description Source We adopted the performance specifications in § 86.1340 90, § 89.406, and ISO 8178 1 § 11.8. We allowed for correction of a limited amount of analyzer drift. We developed this procedure jointly with measurement instrument manufacturers and engine manufactures. § 86.1340 90, § 89.406, ISO 8178 1 § 11.8.

§ 1065.590 PM sample preconditioning and tare weighing Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1312 2007.( 3) We added an option to perform substitution weighing, which has been used in ambient PM sampling successfully   especially when PM concentrations are very low. § 86.1312 2007 § 1065.595 PM sample post conditioning and total weighing.

Reference Description Source We adopted § 86.1312 2007.( 3) We added an option to perform substitution weighing, which has been used in ambient PM sampling successfully   especially when PM concentrations are very low. § 86.1312 2007 Subpart G   Calculations and data requirements § 1065.601 Applicability.

Reference Description Source We consolidated calculations that were specified multiple times in this part ( i. e. Part 1065). For example we consolidated statistical calculations for instrument performance, alternate system approval, and duty cycle validation in § 1065.602.

We adopted SI units for all calculations, except for one set of example calculations in § 1065.640 where we showed how to convert different reference flow meter signals to molar reference signals.

We provided completely worked out examples for every calculation, including conversion factors for various engineering units. Draft Technical Support Document 94 § 1065.602 Statistics Reference Description Source We consolidated statistics calculations that were specified multiple times in this part ( i. e. Part 1065). For example we consolidated statistical calculations for instrument performance, alternate system approval, and duty cycle validation. We added examples on how to calculate flowweighted average concentrations at a given standard for various engines. We provided these examples because we scale many measurement instrument specifications to this value tto ensure that Part 1065 is applicable across a wide range of emissions standards and sampling techniques ( e. g. raw, dilute, continuous, and batch sampling)

§ 1065.610 Test cycle generation Reference Description Source We consolidated all of the calculations for discrete mode, ramped modal, and transient test cycle generation from § 86.1333 90, § 89.410, ISO 8178 1 § 11.5, and ISO 8178 1 § 11.7. We allowed constant speed engines to operate at the speed( s) selected by the engine's governor or simulated governor. § 86.1333 90, § 89.410, ISO 8178 1 § 11.5, ISO 8178 1 § 11.7 § 1065.630 1980 International gravity formula Reference Description Source We adopted this formula to prescribe what we meant in previous regulations when we required that you account for local effects on gravity at your location, such as in § 86.1308 84( e)( 1)( i). We recommended to use this formula when conducting dynamometer torque calibration and torque linearity checks according to § 1065.308 and § 1065.310. § 86.1308 84( e)( 1)( i)

§ 1065.340 CVS calibration equations Reference Description Source We adopted CVS calibration calculations from § 86.1319 90 and especially § 86.1319 90( e)( 3), which specified calculations that assume isentropic compressible flow. We adopted molar flow reference signals for calibration to eliminate the use of standard pressure and temperature values, which have been a frequent source of confusion   especially across different regulations. We recognized that 40 CFR Part 86, 40 CFR Part 89, and ISO 8178 1 all have different standard conditions specified in different sections. § 86.1319 90 ( b) We adopted PDP calibration calculations from § 86.1319 90, but we reformulated the equations to make them easier to understand. § 86.1319 90 Technical Amendments 95 ( c) We adopted CFV calibration calculations from § 86.1319 90 CFV, but we reformulated the equations to take into account isentropic compressible flow. We specified the new calibration equation to extend use of the calibration data to a wider range of molar masses of an exhaust mixture. We allowed assumptions to be made in order to reduce the new equation to the equation in § 86.1319 90, but we restricted use of the § 86.1319 90 equation to a range of molar masses of flow. We provided similar guidance to this effect in the past.( 1),( 2) We provided a description of how to account for Reynolds number viscosity effects. We reformulated the statistical tolerance criteria for an acceptable calibration equation. We described how to calibrate multiple CFVs in parallel. § 86.1319 90 ( d) We adopted the SSV equation in § 86.1319 90, but we rearranged it to use a molar reference signal. § 86.1319 90 § 1065.340 CVS flow rate equations Reference Description Source We adopted CVS flow rate calculations from § 86.1319 90 and especially § 86.1319 90( e)( 3), which specified calculations that assume isentropic compressible flow. We adopted molar flow rates to eliminate the use of standard pressure and temperature values, which have been a frequent source of confusion   especially across different regulations. We recognized that 40 CFR Part 86, 40 CFR Part 89, and ISO 8178 1 all have different standard conditions specified in different sections. § 86.1319 90 ( a) We adopted PDP flow rate calculations from § 86.1319 90, but we reformulated the equations to make them easier to understand. § 86.1319 90 ( b) We adopted CFV flow rate calculations from § 86.1319 90 CFV, but we reformulated the equations to take into account isentropic compressible flow. We specified the new flow rate equation to extend use of the flow meter to a wider range of molar masses of an exhaust mixture. We allowed assumptions to be made in order to reduce the new flow rate equation to the equation in § 86.1319 90, but we restricted use of the § 86.1319 90 flow rate equation to a range of molar masses of flow. We provided similar guidance to this effect in the past.( 1),( 2) We described how to calculate total CVS flow through multiple CFVs in parallel. § 86.1319 90 ( c) We adopted the SSV flow rate equation in § 86.1319 90, but we rearranged it to calculate a molar flow rate. § 86.1319 90 § 1065.645 Amount of water in an ideal gas.

Reference Description Source Draft Technical Support Document 96 We consolidated several other sections' requirements to calculate this value, such as those sections that required an amount of water removed correction, a buoyancy correction, a background emissions correction, chemical balances of fuel, exhaust, and intake air, and flowmeter calibrations and verifications. We specified this calculation only once in Part 1065 to ensure that this value is calculated in only one way. We adopted an internationally accepted formulation for this value from the World Meteorological Organization ( WMO), and we verified that our formula is consistent with that of Gratch because some recent versions of WMO publications have had some errors in this formula.

§ 1065.650 Emissions calculations Reference Description Source We adopted emissions calculations from § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, § 89.419, and ISO 8178 1 § 12 though § 16 to combine steady state, ramped modal, and transient testing calculations. We included raw, dilute, continuous, and batch sampling. We added a new way to calculate brake specific emissions based on the ratio of a value proportional to an emissions mass and another value similarly proportional to work. § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, § 89.419, ISO 8178 1 § 12 though § 16.

§ 1065.655 Chemical balances Reference Description Source We adopted the chemical balances from § 89.418 and ISO 8178 1 Annexe A. We specified how to use chemical balances to determine the amount of water in exhaust, the amount of carbon containing emissions in exhaust, and the dilution fraction of dilution air in diluted raw exhaust. We specified how to use these formulas to calculate raw exhaust flow based on intake air or fuel flow. § 89.418 ISO 8178 1 Annexe A § 1065.657 Drift validation and correction.

Reference Description Source We adopted the drift performance specification from § 86.1340 90, § 89.406, and ISO 8178 1 § 11.8. We added a drift correction to account for a limited amount of analyzer drift. We developed this procedure with instrument manufacturers and engine manufactures. We added this correction to improve repeatability. § 86.1340 90, § 89.406, ISO 8178 1 § 11.8.

§ 1065.659 Removed water correction.

Reference Description Source We adopted the corection in § 86.1342 90, § 89.418, , ISO 8178 1 A. 2.4, but we have revised it to take into account any condensation that occurs upstream of a flow meter. § 86.1342 90, § 89.418, ISO 8178 1 A. 2.4 Technical Amendments 97 § 1065.660 THC and NMHC determination Reference Description Source We adopted the THC and NMHC determination from § 86.1342 94, ISO 8178 § 15.4. We allowed multiplying THC by 0.98 as an approximation for NMHC. We replaced the hydrocarbon overflow zero and span procedure with a hydrocarbon sampling system contamination check. Up to a certain amount of contamination, we allowed emissions results correction by subtracting the contamination determined with an overflow zero check performed after an analyzer port zero and span. We required this to prevent excessive hydrocarbon contamination from biasing results. We allowed some contamination to be appropriately subtracted from emissions results, which is how the original overflow procedure worked, except that it had no limits on contamination. We required this procedure to improve test repeatability. § 86.1342 94, ISO 8178 § 15.4 § 1065.665 NMHCE determination Reference Description Source We adopted the THCE and NMHCE determination from § 86.1342 94 and ISO 8178 1 § 15.5 and § 15.6. We allowed multiplying THC by 0.98 as an approximation for NMHC. We replaced the hydrocarbon overflow zero and span procedure with a hydrocarbon sampling system contamination check. Up to a certain amount of contamination, we allowed emissions results correction by subtracting the contamination determined with an overflow zero check performed after an analyzer port zero and span. We required this to prevent excessive hydrocarbon contamination from biasing results. We allowed some contamination to be appropriately subtracted from emissions results, which is how the original overflow procedure worked, except that it had no limits on contamination. We required this procedure to improve test repeatability. § 86.1342 94, ISO 8178 1 § 15.5 and § 15.6 § 1065.667 Dilution air background correction Reference Description Source We adopted the dilution air background correction from § 86.1342 94, § 89.420, and ISO 8178 1 § 13.5. We recommend when to remove background emissions from dilution air. § 86.1342 94, § 89.420 ISO 8178 1 § 13.5 § 1065.670 NOx intake air humidity correction Reference Description Source Draft Technical Support Document 98 As is the case for all other provisions in Part 1065, we specified that any NOx humidity corrections in the standard setting parts may take precedent over the correction in Part 1065. For the Part 1065 correction, we adopted the NOx intake air humidity correction from § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, and ISO 8178 1 § 13.4, but we revised the equation. We used a linear fit to a recent set of comprehensive data collected for the purpose of determining a NOx humidity correction factor.( 5) We generated the equation with a least squares linear regression line of more than 300 data points generated with six different engines over a broad range of humidity conditions. We forced the correction to pass through a value of one ( 1) at 75 grains of water per pound of dry air ( 10.71 g/ kg dry air) to align it with the correction from § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, and ISO 8178 1 § 13.4. This correction is significantly more consistent with computer NOx models versus the previous correction. For example, from the range of ( 0 to 95) % relative humidity at 30

C ambient temperature, the NOx correction from § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, and ISO 8178 1 § 13.4 was 1.70 while the linear correction we adopted was 1.48. A computer NOx model, ALAMO,( 6) predicted a correction of 1.42 for an engine at rated conditions across the same humidity. For this example the linear correction is 4 % higher than the model, but the correction from § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, and ISO 8178 1 § 13.4 is 20 % high. We based this revised equation on data and verified it with a computer model to improve test repeatability. Below is an illustration of the uncorrected data( 5), the data corrected according to § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, and ISO 8178 1 § 13.4,( 5) the data corrected to the equation we adopted in Part 1065, and lines depicting the corresponding correction factors. § 86.1342 94, § 89.418, ISO 8178 1 § 13.4. Technical Amendments 99 § 1065.672 CLD quench check calculations.

Reference Description Source We adopted the chemiluminescent detector Nox analyzer quench check performance specification from § 86.1323 2007.( 3) § 86.1323 2007 § 1065.690 PM sample media buoyancy correction.

Reference Description Source We adopted the bu § 86.1312 2007,( 3) but we eliminated the temperature and humidity portions of the correction because we specified tight humidity and temperature control in the PM weighing environment. We determined that making corrections based on small changes in temperature and humidity might induce error due to the measurement error associated with them. We revised the correction so that it only accounts for changes in barometric pressure, which is the dominant parameter that causes a change in PM sample media buoyancy. We allowed the optional use of humidity and temperature buoyancy corrections, however. § 86.1312 2007. Normalized Brake specific NOx versus Amount of Water in Intake Air Uncorrected NOx, Corrected NOx, and Correction Factors 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 Amount of water in intake air, x H2O ( mol/ mol) Normalized NOx, eNOx ( g/ hp hr)

Uncorrected NOx Part 86 correction ( overcorrection)

Part 1065 correction Draft Technical Support Document 100 § 1065.695 Required data.

Reference Description Source We adopted the data requirements from § 86.1344 94, and we combined these with required data from various standard setting parts and our most recent application formats for certification. § 86.1344 94 EPA's most recent application formats for certification.

Subpart H   Engine fluids, test fuels, analytical gases, and other calibration standards § 1065.701 General requirements for test fuels Reference Description Source We are moving the general requirements for test fuels that were originally in Part 1065 to Subpart H Old Subpart C of Part 1065 ( a) Add a clarification that § 1065.10( c)( 1) does not apply for test fuels.

( d) Add allowance to use other standard methods specified in 40 CFR Part 80 to measure fuel properties.

( e) Add examples of typical ASTM fuel specifications for in use fuels.

§ 1065.703 Distillate diesel fuel Reference Description Source We deleted specific ranges of fuel parameters for diesel service accumulation fuel, which is different from § 86.1313 2007. We adopted a 10 mg/ kg minimum limit for aromatics, which is the same as the nonroad diesel engine Tier IV rule,( 7) instead of 25 mg/ kg, which was in § 86.1313 2007. We eliminated the specification for Cetane Index because it is obsolete and because we require Cetane Number, which is a more accurate determination of Cetane. § 86.1313 2007 § 1065.705 Residual fuel [ reserved]

Reference Description Source We reserved this section for a future marine residual fuel specification.

§ 1065.710 Gasoline.

Reference Description Source We adopted the test fuels that were originally in Part 1065. Old Part 1065 § 1065.715 Natural gas.

Reference Description Source We adopted the test fuels that were originally in Part 1065. Old Part 1065 Technical Amendments 101 § 1065.720 Liquefied propane gas Reference Description Source We adopted the test fuels that were originally in Part 1065. Old Part 1065 § 1065.740 Lubricants.

Reference Description Source We adopted the lubricant specification in § 89.330. § 89.330 § 1065.745 Coolants.

Reference Description Source We adopted the coolant specification in § 86.1327 98 § 86.1327 98 § 1065.750 Analytical gases.

Reference Description Source We adopted the analytical gas specifications in § 86.1314 94 and § 89.312, however, we allowed zero gas contamination to scale with the concentration expected at the standard. In some cases this will be a decrease in stringency, however, we significantly increased the stringency on the level of contaminants when very low levels of emissions are expected at the standard. We adopted these changes to improve test repeatability. § 86.1314 94, § 89.312 ( a)( 2) Add recommendation to use representative level of O2 in FID gas ( b) Add allowance to relabel gas standards ( d) Add specific requirement to use good engineering judgment when handling and storing gases to maintain stability.

§ 1065.790 Mass standards Reference Description Source We adopted the dynamometer calibration weight specifications in § 86.1308 84 and § 89.305. We specified new requirements for calibration weights for PM balances. § 86.1308 84 § 89.305 Subpart I   Testing with oxygenated fuels.

§ 1065.801 Applicability.

Reference Description Source ( b) Added paragraph to clarify that Subpart I applies for any testing that requires measurement of alcohols or carbonyls. Draft Technical Support Document 102 § 1065.805 Sampling systems.

Reference Description Source ( a)(( d) Specify requirements that were described in 40 CFR part 86. We also allow a photo acoustic analyzer to be used to measure methanol and ethanol in exhaust. We provided similar guidance in the past,( 8) which is consistent with regulations published by the California Air Resources Board.( 9)

( e) Allow collection of a single weighted sample.

( f) Allow use of CARB NMOG procedures.

§ 1065.845 Response factor determination.

Reference Description Source Add section to describe how to determine FID responses to oxygenated compounds. § 86.1321 90 § 1065.850 Calculations.

Reference Description Source We relocated the calculations to § 1065.665.

Subpart J   Field Testing § 1065.901 Applicability Reference Description Source We applied this subpart to engines with field testing requirements, including manufacturer run on vehicle testing requirements. We also allowed the equipment specified in this subpart to be used for laboratory testing. Refer to the standard setting part for applicability.

We superceded the current field testing subpart in Part 1065 with a new subpart.

§ 1065.905 General provisions.

Reference Description Source We provided a list of information needed from standard setting parts to conduct field testing according to this part. We indicated that much of this subpart relies on specifications in other subparts of Part 1065. Technical Amendments 103 § 1065.910 Field testing equipment Reference Description Source We specified the equipment we require for field testing. We included equipment for routing exhaust for sampling and flow measurement, mounting hardware, and power supplies.

§ 1065.915 Measurement instruments.

Reference Description Source We specified the measurement instruments we require for field testing by referring to Subpart C. We explained how to use signals from an engine's electronic control module. We specified how to use redundant measurements. We specified how to address the effects of ambient conditions on field test measurement systems. We specified how to estimate torque in the field.

§ 1065.920 Calibrations and verifications Reference Description Source We referred to Subpart D for verifications. We specified an overall field test system verification against a laboratory that meets Part 1065.

§ 1065.925 Measurement instrument and equipment preparation Reference Description Source We specified a step by step set of instructions for preparing a field test measurement system for use. We based the instructions on a generic field test system by drawing on our own field testing experience and reports outlining similar instructions.( 10), ( 11)

§ 1065.930 Engine starting, restarting, and shutdown Reference Description Source We specified a step by step set of instructions for engine starting, restarting and shutdown based on lab testing, except that an engine may be shut down and restarted any number of times during a field test.

§ 1065.935 Emission test sequence.

Reference Description Source We specified a step by step set of instructions for running a field test. We based the instructions on a generic field test system by drawing on our own field testing experience and reports outlining similar instructions.( 10), ( 11) Draft Technical Support Document 104 § 1065.940 Emission calculations.

Reference Description Source We specified the same emissions calculations as used in a laboratory according to § 1065.650. We noted that information from the standard setting parts are required to define individual test intervals within a field test.

Subpart K   Definitions and other reference information § 1065.1001 Definitions Description Regulatory Text Reference We added these definitions to clarify that they have the specified conventional meaning. 300 series stainless steel, Aerodynamic diameter, Allowed procedures, Alternate procedures, Applicable standard, Aqueous condensation, Atmospheric pressure, Auto ranging, C1 equivalent ( or basis), Confidence interval, Coriolis meter, Dewpoint, Dispersion, Drift, Duty cycle, Electronic control module, Engine governed speed, Fall time, Flow weighted mean, HEPA filter, Hydraulic diameter, Hydrocarbon, Linearity, Noise, Open crankcase emissions, Partial pressure, Percent, Portable emission measurement system, Procedures, Proving ring, PTFE, Regression statistics, Repeatability, Rise time, Roughness, Round, Shared atmospheric pressure meter, Shared humidity measurement, Special procedures, Specified procedures, Standard deviation, Storage medium, Test interval, Useful life, Variable speed engine, Vehicle, We, and Zero gas.

We added or revised these definitions to have the meaning specified in other recently adopted or revised parts of Subchapter U. Adjustable parameter, Aftertreatment, Auxiliary emission control device, Designated Compliance Officer, Discrete mode, Emission control system, Emission data engine, Engine family, Exhaust gas recirculation, Fuel type, Good engineering judgment, Idle speed, Intermediate test speed, Nonmethane hydrocarbon equivalent, Nonroad engine, Ramped modal, Scheduled maintenance, Spark ignition, Steady state, and Total hydrocarbon equivalent.

We deleted these terms which are no longer used in Part 1065. Engine based, Equipment based, Fuel system, Revoking a certificate, Suspending a certificate, Wide open throttle.

§ 1065.1001 Definitions  continued.

Reference Description Source Brakepower Revised to clarify how accessory power is treated.

Calibration and Verification Verification is added to distinguish the term from calibration. Technical Amendments 105 Constant speed operation Elimination of examples.

NIST traceable Add definition and include allowance to use international equivalents with approval.

Oxides of nitrogen See Section 8. I. B.

Tolerance Add definition to clarify meaning of ranges of accuracy/ precision.

§ 1065.1005 Symbols, abbreviations, acronyms, and units of measure.

Reference Description Source We defined the symbols, abbreviations, acronyms, and units of measure that we use in Part 1065. We minimized repeating symbols for different quantities. We used symbols consistent with ISO 31. We revised symbols, abbreviations, acronyms, and units of measure to reflect the use of Part 1065 test procedures and the application of SI units, and molar flow rates.

§ 1065.1010 Reference materials.

Reference Description Source We revised Part 1065 reference materials to include new ASTM, ISO and NIST publications. We also added a reference to California's NMOG Test Procedures. Draft Technical Support Document 106 References for Chapter 8 ( 1) Letter from EPA to EMA, " Guidance Regarding Test Procedures for Heavy Duty On Highway and Non Road Engines", Gregory Green, Division Director, Certification and Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 3, 2002.

( 2) " Supporting Document for Letter to EMA Regarding Acceptable Interpretations and Alternatives to the Rules and Regulations published in the Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 12, Thursday, January 18, 2001", Matthew Spears, Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 3, 2002.

( 3) " Description of Changes to the Test Procedures Specified in 40 CFR Part 86 for Model Year 2007 and Later Heavy Duty Engines", Air Docket A 99 06, IV B 11, Matthew Spears, Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 6, 2000.

( 4) " Performance of Partial Flow Sampling Systems Relative to Full Flow Cvs for Determination of Particulate Emissions Under Steady State and Transient Diesel Engine Operation", Khalek Imad A., et al., Southwest Research Institute, Society of Automotive Engineers Technical Paper 2002 01 1718, May 2002.

( 5) " Heavy Duty Diesel Engine NO x and PM Correction Factors", Project 08 2597, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, July 27, 1999.

( 6) " A PC Based Model for Predicting Nox Reductions in Diesel Engines", Dodge, Lee G., Leone, Douglas M., Naegeli, David W., Dickey Daniel, W., Swenson, Kendall R., Southwest Research Institute Society of Automotive Engineers Technical paper 962060, 1996.

( 7) Nonroad Diesel Tier IV Rule, EPA420 F 04 037, May 2004.

( 8)" Approval of the Request to Use the Innova 1312 Photoacoustic Multi gas Monitor in the Measurement of Ethanol in Exhaust and Evaporative Emissions", Gregory Green, Division Director, Certification and Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 25, 2002.

( 9) Use of Innova Photoacoustic Multi gas Monitor to Measure Ethanol Exhaust and Evaporative Vehicle Emissions", Mail Out # MSO 2000 08, Summerfield, R. B, Mobile Source Operations Division, California Air Resources Board, June 29,2000.

( 10) " On vehicle, In use, Heavy Duty Diesel Engine ( HDDE) Protocol", Czachura Barry S. J., Analytical Engineering Incorporated, September 2, 2003. Technical Amendments 107 ( 11) " Protocol for Measurement of Air Pollutant Emissions from Ferry Boats", Culnane Mary, San Francisco Water Transit Authority, August 19, 2002. Draft Technical Support Document 108 Chapter 9: Marine Spark Ignition Engines ( 40 CFR part 91)

The following table describes the comments related to the regulation of marine spark ignition engines in 40 CFR part 91, with our response to each of these comments. All the comments came from Mercury Marine or the National Marine Manufacturers Association.

Issue Response 91.707: Mercury and NMMA expressed a need for an exemption that would allow them to import engines that are covered by a certificate, but are not yet in their certified configuration. Final assembly is planned inside the United States. We are including in the final rule a cross reference in § 91.707 to 40 CFR 1068.330, which was designed for this situation.

91.119: Southwest Research Institute and EMA requested clarification that updating the test procedure references from part 86 to part 1065 aren't intended to require lab upgrades. The references introduced in part 89 are intended only to facilitate the migration of specified test procedures for heavy duty highway engines from part 86, subpart N, to part 1065. Most of these references point to background information or optional systems. There is no intent to require new equipment or revised procedures as a result of these changed references. To ensure that this is the case, we are adding a provision in § 91.119 stating that any of the references to part 1065 may be taken from part 86 as a pre approved alternative procedure.

Mercury and NMMA noted the need to fix typographical problems that caused incorrect arithmetic symbols in equations in 91.316( d)( 6), 91.318( b)( 11), 91.325( c)( 1)( iv), 91.325( c)( 2)( iii), and 91.316( d)( 6). We agree with the corrections noted in the comment and have revised the regulations accordingly.

91.325: Mercury and NMMA suggest adding an equation to complete the provision related to water quench, namely, percent H 2 O quench = ( D1 AR)/ D × 100 We agree with the need to add an equation for the water quench check. To do this, we copied the comparable existing provisions from part 89, which apply equally well to marine spark ignition engines.

Table 2 of Appendix A to subpart E: Mercury and NMMA point out that the regulations specify a mode 4 torque point of 25 percent, and suggest changing this to 25.3 to align with the cycle specified by the International Organization for Standardization ( ISO). We do not object to the recommended change in the duty cycle, but we did not include this in the proposal. Since changing the duty cycle, even modestly, can affect the stringency of the standards and therefore affect whether an engine meets emission standards or not, we believe it is not appropriate to adopt the recommended change at this time. We may include this in the upcoming rulemaking to adopt a new tier of standards for marine spark ignition engines.

91.207: Mercury and NMMA requested that we clarify the equation for survival function in calculating emission credits, especially for the last digit, which isn't not clearly identified as an exponent. We agree with the comment and have adopted the following revised form of the equation to reduce the risk of ambiguity in published form: S( t) = exp ( 0.906 × t/

life) 4 Technical Amendments 109 91.113: Mercury and NMMA requested that manufacturers be allowed to omit the model year from the engine label, since boat owners have been confused when the model year of the boat does not match the model year of the engine ( due to manufacturing processes and inventories). It is acceptable to include the full engine family name on the label, which includes a code for the model year. We suggested an alternate approach, in which the manufacturer would include the engine's manufacture date instead of the model year. Manufacturers requested that we defer action on this item, rather than make such a change to the regulations at this time. We are taking no action on this item in the final rule, but expect to revisit the issue in the future.

91.506: Mercury and NMMA suggested that EPA should allow manufacturers to select engine families for in use testing, with 30 days for EPA to object to the family selection. This concern comes from recent experiences of waiting until late in the model year to know which family to prepare for testing, which made it harder to execute the test plan. We believe it is important for us to continue selecting engine families for in use testing. Selecting all the families for in use testing early in the year is problematic, since it is possible in many cases for manufacturers to produce all the engines in the engine family in much less than a 12 month period. We believe the best approach is to select most of the families early in the model year, reserving a small number of families that can be selected later in the year. Manufacturers are welcome to share their suggestions for selecting families at any time. Draft Technical Support Document 110 Chapter 10: General Compliance Provisions ( 40 CFR part 1068)

I. Summary and Analysis of Comments We received several comments on the proposed provisions in 40 CFR part 1068, with additional comments raising new issues for us to consider. All these comments came from the Engine Manufacturers Association, except where otherwise indicated. The following discussion presents a summary and analysis of all these comments. Section II identifies the changes included in the proposal, with a brief rationale for each of those changes.

Issue Response 1068.30   Definitions: The proposed change to the definition of Exemption should reference Tier 4 and Tier 3 ( not Tier 2 and Tier 1). Since part 1068 applies broadly to different engine categories, we believe it is important to make the language as general as possible. We are therefore changing the definition to address the situation for an exemption from a Tier 3 standard, which may require the manufacturer to meet less stringent Tier 1 or Tier 2 standards as a condition of the exemption.

1068.30   Definitions: The definition for Motor vehicle should recite the full definition or simply refer to part 85, rather than summarizing content. We agree with the comment and have changed the regulations accordingly.

1068.240   Replacement engines: Change label language to more clearly specify the year of applicable standards. The label should state the first applicability date for the standards for which the exemption applies, and the first applicability date for the standards that were in effect for the replaced engine. We agree with the comment and have changed the regulations accordingly.

1068.245 and 1068.250   Hardship: An engine meeting alternate standards should have a label saying the engine is exempt, not " meets requirements under 1068.245 or 1068.250." Industry comments from previous rulemakings have led us to differentiate engines exempted with a requirement to meet less stringent standards from those that remain uncontrolled. For marketing reasons and for EPA compliance efforts, it is important to identify an engine as meeting applicable requirements, if alternate standards apply. The proposed § 1068.265 included label language that would conflict with the proposed labeling changes in § 1068.245 and § 1068.250. We have changed the hardship provisions to allow EPA to specify label language appropriate for such engines. Technical Amendments 111 1068.260   Delegated assembly: The current requirements allowing separate shipment of aftertreatment components should be set up to waive auditing requirements for manufacturers that include the price of the aftertreatment in the cost of the engine for the equipment manufacturer. If the component cost is already covered, the equipment manufacturer has enough incentive to make the final installation without additional oversight. The cost of shipping should not be counted as part of the cost of the component. Also, the temporary label shipping as part of the aftertreatment cost. The temporary label adds an unnecessary burden that provides no added value. The commenter also requested clarification regarding the method for auditing an equipment manufacturer if the engine manufacturer also makes the equipment. We continue to believe the provisions adopted in § 1068.260 are appropriate for nonroad engines. The more extensive oversight and control mechanisms are important to ensuring that engines are assembled correctly, since there are so many possible equipment manufacturers and so many different business relationships among companies. Given that we are requiring engine manufacturers to include the cost of aftertreatment components in the price of the engine, we believe it is implicitly clear that the engine manufacturer is responsible for shipping costs, so we have removed the proposal to restate that in the regulations. We are making two other adjustments to the proposal:  We are removing the requirement for engine manufacturers to arrange for direct shipment of aftertreatment components from the supplier to the equipment manufacturer, since a third party may appropriately be involved to produce system assemblies for integration into equipment.  We are adding a paragraph to clarify that integrated manufacturers can meet their auditing requirements by maintaining a database for matching up engiens with the appropriate aftertreatment components.

1068.260   Caterpillar commented that we should allow them to complete their engine assembly at different facilities, including some steps performed by another company under contract. We have added a new provision allowing manufacturers to assemble engines in different locations, provided that they maintain control of the engines at all times, and inform us that they are using this exemption. We may require that manufacturers take certain steps to ensure that engines end up in their certified configuration. We have also modified the labeling requirements in 1068.201( c) to allow for more flexible approaches to labeling exempted engines.

1068.265   Conditional exemptions: EMA requested that we clarify the requirement to use an alternative to the engine family name on the label. The labeling requirements should also be coordinated with the label language under the applicable exemption provisions. We have modified the label language to more clearly describe the way manufacturers must identify the engines. The full engine family name would be inappropriate, since the engines are not certified and therefore do not have an engine family identification. At the same time, all the engine family identifiers apply except for the model year, so we have revised the regulations to require the label to identify the engine by the otherwise applicable engine family code except for the digit related to model year.

1068.325   Repair exemption: EMA recommended changing the exemption allowing an owner to import a nonroad engine solely for the purpose of repair or alteration to align with the similar provisions for locomotive and marine diesel engines. This would generally allow engine operation as needed for transportation to facilitate repairs. This change is already incorporated into the regulatory provisions of 1068.325. No further change is needed.

In addition to these comments, we have identified a variety of additional minor changes and adjustments to include in the final rule, such as changes to correct organizational and nomenclature errors. In addition, these changes include:

" Revising § 1068.305 to change the phone number related to the importation form. Draft Technical Support Document 112 " Revising § 1068.315 to add a reference to the new exemption for delegated assembly, include a specific reference to the hardship provisions in § 1068.250, and renumber the surrounding paragraphs accordingly.

" Revising § 1068.325 to remove the general requirement to get EPA approval for engines that are imported under a temporary exemption. The provisions or individual exemptions may require EPA approval, but our longstanding policy for most temporary exemptions is to rely on the bonding requirement to ensure compliance, rather than a specific approval step.

" Revising § 1068.330 to include an exemption for importing complete engines that will be installed in an application subject to equipment based standards. This was intended under the original regulations, but this is unclear due to the different situation for products subject to engine based and equipment based standards. We are also defining " equipment" in § 1068.30 to further clarify these provisions. Also, we have made a change to remove the bonding requirement for certificate holders importing partially complete engines. Since we have an established compliance relationship with these companies, we believe it would be unnecessarily burdensome to require them to maintain a bond for their ongoing production processes.

" Revising § 1068.335 to clarify that the temporary exemptions in both § 1068.325 and § 1068.330 are covered by the applicable penalty language. This is intended primarily to clarify that the exemption for partially complete engines is treated as one of the temporary exemptions, even though it is not listed with the usual set of temporary exemptions for importing noncompliant products.

" Clarifying the reporting responsibilities under the separate shipment provisions of § 1068.260. The original regulation was unclear about deadlines whether there was a problem to report or not. We are revising the language consistent with the most appropriate interpretation, that the specified 90 day reporting requirement in § 1068.260( a)( 6)( ii) applies to audit reports where there is no problem. The existing requirement to report problems after 15 days in § 1068.260( d) is independent of this routine reporting responsibility.

II. Summary of Rulemaking Changes We are making various changes to the general compliance provisions in 40 CFR part 1068, which currently applies to land based nonroad diesel engines, recreational vehicles, and nonroad sparkignition engines over 19 kW. We encourage manufacturers of other engines to take note of these changes, since we intend eventually to apply the provisions of part 1068 to all engines subject to EPA emission standards. The following changes in part 1068 were in the proposed rulemaking, with any appropriate adjustments as noted above.

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

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

" § 1068.105: Expand paragraph ( a) to better explain requirements for equipment manufacturers to use current model year engines. This relates especially to the existing provision that allows equipment manufacturers to use up their normal inventories of engines from previous model Technical Amendments 113 years in cases where a new emission standard takes effect. We are changing § 1068.101( a)( 1) to reflect these changes.

" § 1068.110: Clarify that the manufacturers' warranty obligation includes all expenses related to diagnosing and repairing or replacing emission related parts. This is not intended to include incidental expenses ( such as replacement units during warranty service), consequential damage ( such as damage caused by engine malfunction), or opportunity costs ( such as foregone revenue from engine downtime).

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

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

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

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

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

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


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25335-25336]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08724]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 107, 171, 172, 173, 178, and 180

[Docket No. PHMSA-2020-0102 (HM-219D); Notice No. 2023-06]
RIN 2137-AF49

Hazardous Materials: Adoption of Miscellaneous Petitions and
Updating Regulatory Requirements

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On March 3, 2023, PHMSA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), entitled ``Hazardous Materials: Adoption of
Miscellaneous Petitions and Updating Regulatory Requirements (HM-
219D),'' proposing changes to update, clarify, improve the safety of,
or streamline various regulatory requirements. In response to a request
for an extension of the comment period submitted by Worthington
Industries, PHMSA is extending the comment period for the HM-219D NPRM
for an additional 45 days. Comments to the HM-219D NPRM will now be due
by June 16, 2023.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before June 16, 2023. To the
extent possible, PHMSA will consider late-filed comments.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference Docket No. PHMSA-2020-0102 (HM-
219D) and may be submitted in the following ways:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Dockets Management System, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Dockets Operations, M-30, Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To the Docket Management System: Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
Docket Number (PHMSA-2020-0102) for this notice at the beginning of the
comment. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four
methods. All comments received will be posted without change to the
Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) and will include any personal
information you provide.
    Docket: For access to the dockets to read associated documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov or DOT's Docket
Operations Office (see ADDRESSES).
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its process. DOT posts these
comments without change, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
https://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA; 5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the
submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission
containing CBI as ``PROPIN'' for ``proprietary information.''
Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Steven Andrews, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590-0001. Any commentary that PHMSA receives that is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Andrews, Standards and
Rulemaking Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    PHMSA published the HM-219D NPRM \1\ on March 3, 2023, in response
to 18 petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated community
between May 2018 and October 2020 that requested PHMSA address a
variety of provisions, including but not limited to those pertaining to
packaging, hazard communication, and the incorporation by reference of
certain documents. These proposed revisions maintain or enhance the
existing high level of safety under the Hazardous Materials Regulations
while providing clarity and appropriate regulatory flexibility in the
transport of hazardous materials. On April 6, 2023, PHMSA received a
comment to the HM-219D NPRM docket submitted by Worthington Industries
requesting that PHMSA rescind certain elements of the HM-219D NPRM or
(in the alternative) extend the comment period for responding to the
NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Hazardous Materials: Adoption of Miscellaneous Petitions
and Updating Regulatory Requirements NPRM [88 FR 13624] at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/03/2023-03366/hazardous-materials-adoption-of-miscellaneous-petitions-and-updating-regulatory-requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Comment Period Extension

    PHMSA initially provided a 60-day comment period for the HM-219D
NPRM, which closes on May 2, 2023. In response to a request to extend
the comment period from Worthington Industries, PHMSA is extending the
comment period for an additional 45 days. The comment period will now
close on June 16, 2023. This extension provides the public with an
additional 45 days and should provide adequate opportunity for the
public to submit comments; however, PHMSA may at its discretion extend
the comment period further if necessary. To the extent possible, PHMSA
will also consider late-filed comments.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 20, 2023, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.97.
William S. Schoonover,
Associate Administrator of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023-08724 Filed 4-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 187 (Thursday, September 26, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50730-50733]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20855]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0699; Product Identifier 2019-NM-148-AD; Amendment
39-19736; AD 2019-18-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Model
382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G airplanes; and Model C-130A, HP-C-130A,
EC-130Q, and C-130B airplanes. This AD requires a visual inspection of
the center wing upper and lower rainbow fittings for cracks, an eddy
current inspection of the center wing lower rainbow fittings for
cracks, and replacement if necessary. This AD was prompted by reports
of cracked inner tangs of the center wing lower rainbow fittings. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 11, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 11,
2019.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by November 12, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company,
Customer Support Center, Dept. 3E1M, Zone 0591, 86 S. Cobb Drive,
Marietta, GA 30063; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0699.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0699; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone:
800-647-5527) is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Gray, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA received reports of cracked inner tangs of the center wing
lower rainbow fitting. Each tang (node) contains a single attachment
bolt to the outer wing. If three or more tangs fail, the rainbow
fitting can no longer carry limit load and the rainbow fitting may
fail. This condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the
center wing lower rainbow fittings, wing separation, and loss of the
airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382-57-98, Revision 1, dated August 16, 2019. This service
information describes procedures for a visual inspection of the center
wing upper and lower rainbow fittings for cracks, an eddy current
inspection of the center wing lower rainbow fittings for cracks, and
replacement if necessary. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between this AD and the Service Information.''

Impact on Intrastate Aviation in Alaska

    In light of the heavy reliance on aviation for intrastate
transportation in Alaska, the FAA fully considered the effects of this
AD (including costs to be borne by affected operators) from the
earliest possible stages of AD development. This AD is based on those
considerations, and was developed with regard to minimizing the
economic impact on operators to the extent possible, consistent with
the safety objectives of this AD. In any event, the Federal Aviation
Regulations require operators to correct an unsafe condition identified
on an airplane to ensure operation of that airplane in an airworthy
condition. The FAA has determined in this case that the requirements
are necessary and the indirect costs would be outweighed by the safety
benefits of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin A382-57-
98, Revision 1, dated August 16, 2019, specifies that, for certain
airplanes, Service Bulletin 382-57-97, or the results of a Lockheed
Martin Operational Usage Evaluation (OUE) should be used to determine
the number of flight hours on the center wing lower rainbow fittings.
This AD would not allow the use of Service Bulletin 382-57-97 or the
OUE to determine the number of flight hours on the center wing lower
rainbow fittings, because Service Bulletin 382-57-97 and the OUE have
not been approved by the FAA. If operators are unable to determine the
number of flight hours on the center wing lower rainbow fittings, they
must do the actions required by this AD within 30 days after the
effective date of this AD.

Justification for Immediate Adoption and Determination of the Effective
Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment
procedures for rules when the agency, for ``good cause,'' finds that
those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without seeking comment prior to the
rulemaking. Similarly, Section 553(d) of the APA authorizes agencies to
make rules effective in less than thirty days, upon a finding of good
cause.
    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because cracked inner tangs of the center wing lower rainbow fittings
could result in failure of the center wing lower rainbow fittings, wing
separation, and loss of the airplane. Furthermore, based upon the age
of the fleet it is likely that many airplanes are beyond the threshold
specified in this AD. Thus, the compliance time for the required action
is shorter than the time necessary for the public to comment and for
publication of the final rule.
    Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B). In addition, for the reasons stated above, the FAA finds
that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this
amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an

opportunity for public comment. However, the FAA invites you to send
any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your
comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the
docket number FAA-2019-0699 and Product Identifier 2019-NM-148-AD at
the beginning of your comments. The FAA specifically invites comments
on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects
of this final rule. The FAA will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Carl
Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Atlanta ACO Branch,
1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
404-474-5606; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without notice and comment,
RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 30 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections...........................  16 work-hours x $85 per               $0          $1,360         $40,800
                                         hour = $1,360.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
inspection. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft
that might need these replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement...................................  740 work-hours x $85 per hour =          $15,000         $77,900
                                                 $62,900.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs''
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2019-18-09 Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
Company: Amendment 39-19736; Docket No. FAA-2019-0699; Product
Identifier 2019-NM-148-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 11, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1)
and (2) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
Company Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G airplanes.
    (2) The airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (x),
type certificated in the restricted category.
    (i) LeSEA Model C-130A airplanes, Type Certificate Data Sheet
(TCDS) A34SO, Revision 1.
    (ii) T.B.M, Inc., (transferred from Central Air Services, Inc.)
Model C-130A airplanes, TCDS A39CE, Revision 3.
    (iii) Western International Aviation, Inc., Model C-130A
airplanes, TCDS A33NM.
    (iv) USDA Forest Service Model C-130A airplanes, TCDS A15NM,
Revision 4.
    (v) Snow Aviation International, Inc., Model C-130A, TCDS TQ3CH,
Revision 1.
    (vi) Heavylift Helicopter, Inc., Model C-130A, TCDS A31NM,
Revision 1.
    (vii) Hawkins & Powers Aviation, Inc., Model HP-C-130A, TCDS
A30NM, Revision 1.
    (viii) Coulson Aviation (USA), Inc., Model EC-130Q, TCDS
T00019LA, Revision 2.
    (ix) Lockheed-Georgia Company, 282-44A-05, Model C-130B, TCDS
A5SO.
    (x) Surplus Model C-130A airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracked inner tangs of the
center wing lower rainbow fittings. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address such cracks, which could result in failure of the center
wing lower rainbow fittings, wing separation, and loss of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Inspections

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Before the
accumulation of 15,000 flight hours on the lower center wing rainbow
fitting, or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later, do the inspections required by paragraphs
(g)(1) and (2) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382-57-98, Revision 1, dated August 16, 2019. If any
cracks are found during any inspection required by paragraphs (g)(1)
and (2) of this AD, replace the rainbow fitting before further
flight.
    (1) Do a visual inspection of the center wing upper and lower
rainbow fittings for any cracks.
    (2) Do an eddy current inspection of the center wing lower
rainbow fittings for any cracks.

(h) Compliance Time Exception

    For any airplane on which the number of flight hours on the
lower rainbow fitting cannot be determined, do the inspections
required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD within 30 days
after the effective date of this AD.

(i) No Reporting

    Although Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382-57-98, Revision 1, dated August 16, 2019, specifies to
report inspection findings, this AD does not require any report.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company
Alert Service Bulletin A382-57-98, dated August 9, 2019.

(k) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199 to operate the airplane to a location where the
airplane can be modified, provided no more than two tangs (nodes)
are found cracked during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by a Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin
Aeronautics Company Designated Engineering Representative (DER) that
has been authorized by the Manager, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, to make
those findings. To be approved, the repair, modification deviation,
or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Carl Gray,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
404-474-5606; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (n)(3) and (4) of this AD.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin
A382-57-98, Revision 1, dated August 16, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company,
Customer Support Center, Dept. 3E1M, Zone 0591, 86 S. Cobb Drive,
Marietta, GA 30063; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on September 16, 2019.
Suzanne Masterson,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-20855 Filed 9-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P