[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 190 (Monday, October 1, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49376-49377]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21307]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER18-2466-000]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization; Federal Way
Powerhouse LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Federal Way Powerhouse LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 15, 2018.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be

listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an
eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
[email protected]. or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 25, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21307 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 245 (Tuesday, December 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 79584]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32124]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP16-297-000.
    Applicants: Young Gas Storage Company, Ltd.
    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Average Thermal
Content Adjustment Filing--2015 to be effective 12/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20151211-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-298-000.
    Applicants: Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Average Thermal
Content Adjustment Filing--2015 to be effective 12/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20151211-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/23/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 16, 2015.
 Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
 Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32124 Filed 12-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


EPA Registration Division contact: Sidney Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4)

613 by establishing a tolerance for combined residues of the insecticide, flonicamid [ N -(cyanomethyl)-4-(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridinecarboxamide] and its metabolites TFNA [4-trifluoromethylnicotinic acid], TFNA-AM [4-trifluoromethylnicotinamide] TFNG [ N -(4-trifluoromethylnicotinoyl)glycine] in or on the raw agricultural commodities vegetables, root, except sugarbeet, (subgroup 1B) at 0.45 parts per million (ppm), radish, tops, at 16 ppm, vegetables, tuberous and corm, (subgroup 1C) at 0.2 ppm, brassica, leafy greens (subgroup 5B) at 16 ppm, turnip greens at 16 ppm, hop at 7.0 ppm, and okra at 0.4 ppm. EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408(d)(2) of the FFDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the petition.  Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.  This notice includes a summary of the petitions made by ISK Biosciences Corporation, 7470 Auburn Road, Suite A, Concord, OH 44077.

.  A developmental toxicity study in rats resulted in the maternal and developmental no observed effect levels (NOELs) of 100 mg/kg/day.  The maternal lowest observed effect level (LOEL) was 500 mg/kg/day based on the treatment-related effects observed on the liver and kidney of the dams in the highest dose group.  The developmental lowest observed effect level (LOEL) was 500 mg/kg/day based on the increases in placental weights and incidences of fetal skeletal variations seen only at maternally toxic doses of 500 mg/kg/day.

     In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, the maternal and developmental NOELs were 7.5 mg/kg/day and > 25 mg/kg/day (HDT), respectively.  The maternal LOEL was 25 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weights, body weight gains and food consumption.  No adverse effects on the fetuses were observed at the highest dose.

The no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) for flonicamid technical in the rat 28-day dermal toxicity study was 1000 mg/kg/day, which was the highest dose tested.

In a 90-day rat feeding study the NOAEL was established at 200 ppm (12.11 mg/kg/day) for males and 1000 ppm (72.3 mg/kg/day) for females.  The LOAELs were 1000 ppm (60.0 mg/kg/day) for males and 5000 ppm (340 mg/kg/day) for females based on effects on hematology, triglycerides, and pathology in the liver and kidney.

In a 13-week mouse study, the NOAEL was 100 ppm (15.25 mg/kg/day in males and 20.1 mg/kg/day in females).  The LOAEL was 1000 ppm (153.9 mg/kg/day in males and 191.5 mg/kg/day in females) based on hematology effects and changes in glucose, creatinine, bilirubin, sodium, chloride and potassium levels, increased liver and spleen weights and histopathology findings in the bone marro, spleen and kidney.

In a subchronic toxicity study in dogs with capsule administration, the NOAEL was 8 mg/kg/day in males and 20 mg/kg/day in females based on findings of severe toxicity at a dose exceeding the maximum tolerated dose; symptoms included collapse, prostration and convulsions leading to early sacrifice at the LOAEL of 50 mg/kg/day.

.  In the chronic dog study with administration via using capsules, the NOEL was 8 mg/kg/day.  The LOAEL was 20 mg/kg/day based on reduced body weights in females and effects on the circulating red blood cells.

In a rat 24-month combined chronic and oncogenicity study, flonicamid technical was not carcinogenic in rats.  The NOAEL was 200 ppm (7.32 mg/kg/day) for males and 1000 ppm (44.1 mg/kg/day) for females. The LOAEL was 1000 ppm for males and 5000 ppm for females based on histopathology in the kidney, hematology effects, hepatic effects including changes in biochemical parameters, increased organ weights, and histopathological changes.  Atrophy of striated muscle fibers, cataract and retinal atrophy observed in the high dose females were considered to be due to acceleration of spontaneous age-related lesions.

.  Acute dietary exposure was compared to the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) of 3.0 mg/kg/day based on the NOEL of 300 mg/kg from the acute neurotoxicity study in rats and a 100-fold uncertainty factor.  The US population exposure is 0.38% of the aPAD and the most highly exposed subpopulation is children 1-2 years of age with 1.10% of the aPAD (95th percentile).

 PAGE  6

{<HD1>}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{
}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{
}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{
}

{<E T=’03'>}

{</E>}

{
}

{<HD2>}

{</HD2>}

{
}

{
}


MEMORANDUM

TO:  Cement Kiln MACT Docket

FROM: Steven Silverman, Attorney

RE:  Telephone Conversation with Jim Pew, Earthjustice

		On February 25, Keith Barnett and I spoke with Jim Pew of Earthjustice
regarding our data base for each of the pollutants for which we
contemplate proposing MACT standards.  Mr. Pew asked certain questions
regarding potential technical bases for subcategorizing kilns with
respect to THC emissions.  He also was adamant about not having a
standard recognizing HCl as a threshold pollutant.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 18 (Friday, January 29, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 7523]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01150]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0106]
RIN 2127-AM15

Framework for Automated Driving System Safety; Extension of
Comment Period

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM); extension of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: In response to a request from Venable LLC, NHTSA is announcing
a 60-day extension of the comment period on an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) requesting comment on NHTSA's development
of a framework for Automated Driving System (ADS) safety. The comment
period for the ANPRM was originally scheduled to end on February 1,
2021. It will now end on April 1, 2021.

DATES: The comment period for the ``Framework for Automated Driving
System Safety'' ANPRM, published on December 3, 2020, at 85 FR 78058,
is extended to April 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket number above and be
submitted by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern
time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure
someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> before coming.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Regardless of how you submit your comments, you must include the
docket number identified in the heading of this notice.
    Note that all comments received, including any personal information
provided, will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov.
Please see the ``Privacy Act'' heading below.
    You may call the Docket Management Facility at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
access to the docket to read background documents or comments received,
go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street address listed above. To
be sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> before
coming. We will continue to file relevant information in the Docket as
it becomes available.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to inform its decision-making process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. Anyone can search the
electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara R. Bennett, Attorney-Advisor,
Vehicle Rulemaking and Harmonization, Office of Chief Counsel, 202-366-
2992, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 3, 2020, NHTSA published an
ANPRM to obtain public comments on the development of a framework for
Automated Driving System (ADS) safety (85 FR 78058). The framework
would objectively define, assess, and manage the safety of ADS
performance while ensuring the needed flexibility to enable further
innovation. The Agency sought specific feedback on key components that
can meet the need for motor vehicle safety while enabling innovative
designs, in a manner consistent with Agency authorities. The ANPRM
provided a 30-day comment period, which closes on February 1, 2021.
    On December 18, 2020, NHTSA received a request from Venable LLP on
behalf of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, American Property
Casualty Insurance Association, American Trucking Associations, Motor &
Equipment Manufacturers Association, National Automotive Dealers
Association, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, Self-
Driving Coalition for Safer Streets, Truck & Engine Manufacturers
Association, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Chamber Technology
Engagement Center, (hereinafter ``the requestors''), for a 60-day
extension of the comment period. The requestors state that the ANPRM
raises a substantial number of technical and policy questions that
require significant discussion and analysis on the part of their
respective members. They suggest that an extension would offer them
enough time to consult with and seek input from experts across their
businesses about the ``many complex issues presented in the ANPRM.''
They state that having additional time to engage in such consultations
would enable them ``to better ensure that the comments they provide to
NHTSA reflect the full measure of thought and analysis that is due for
this important proceeding.'' The request can be found in the docket for
the ANPRM identified in the heading of this notice.
    In accordance with NHTSA's rulemaking procedures in 49 CFR part
553, subpart B, the Agency is granting the request to extend the
comment period 60 days. We have determined that the requestors have
shown good cause for an extension, and that the extension is consistent
with the public interest (49 CFR 553.19). A 60-day extension
appropriately balances NHTSA's interest in providing the public with
sufficient time to comment on the complex and novel questions raised in
the ANPRM, with its interest in obtaining specific feedback from
stakeholders in a timely manner. Accordingly, NHTSA is extending the
comment period until April 1, 2021.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Readers should note that, even after the comment closing
date has passed, interested persons are able to file comments in the
docket, which NHTSA will consider to the extent practicable. 49 CFR
553.23. NHTSA may also continue to file relevant information in the
docket as it becomes available. Accordingly, the Agency recommends
that readers periodically check the docket for new material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 49 CFR 501.5.

James C. Owens,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-01150 Filed 1-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: January 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 16)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 4136-4144]
[DOCID:fr24ja08-43]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0995; FRL-8518-6]
RIN 2060-A073

Emission Standards for Stationary Diesel Engines

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: With this advance notice of proposed rulemaking, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency is soliciting comment on several issues
concerning options the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency can pursue
through Federal rulemaking under the Clean Air Act to regulate
emissions of pollutants from existing stationary diesel engines,
generally, and specifically from larger, older stationary diesel
engines. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has taken several
actions over the past several years to reduce exhaust pollutants from
stationary diesel engines. The Agency continues to be interested in
exploring opportunities to further reduce exhaust pollutants from
stationary diesel engines, particularly existing stationary diesel
engines that have not been subject to federal standards. This advance
notice of proposed rulemaking is intended to explore possible options
to achieve further emissions reductions, particularly from existing
stationary diesel engines.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 25, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0995, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: Emissions
Standards for Stationary Diesel Engines Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of two copies. We request that a separate copy
also be sent to the contact person identified below (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Hand Delivery: In person or by courier, deliver comments to: EPA
Docket and Information Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West Building,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0995. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) policy is
that all comments received will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which

means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail

address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Emissions Standards for

Stationary Diesel Engines Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Air and Radiation Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Christopher S. Stoneman, Outreach
and Information Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Mail Code C304-01, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number: (919)
541-0072; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
    1. Submitting CBI.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
    C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
II. Background Information
    A. What is the purpose of this action?
    B. Why are emissions from diesel engines a health concern?
    C. What is the Agency already doing to address diesel emissions
from new and existing stationary and mobile diesel engines?
    D. What do we know about existing stationary diesel engines?
III. Specific Issues on Which EPA is Seeking Comment
    A. What particular subgroups of existing stationary diesel
engines should EPA focus on and how can EPA best find information on
those engines?
    B. Where can EPA find better information about the location and
numbers of existing stationary engines, who owns and operates them
and what impact they are having (including hours of operation)?
    C. What are appropriate and available technically-feasible,
cost-effective methods of controlling emissions from existing
stationary diesel engines?
    D. To what degree do state and local governments regulate
emissions from stationary diesel engines?
    E. What are appropriate methods of ensuring compliance with such
requirements, including record-keeping and testing issues?
IV. How EPA Intends to Proceed Following Publication of This Notice
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This notice is likely to be of interest to a variety of parties,
including owners and operators of stationary diesel engines,
manufacturers of stationary diesel engines, state and local air quality
agencies responsible for developing diesel pollution reduction
strategies, and individuals and organizations with an interest in
emissions from diesel engines. All of these parties and others
interested in stationary diesel engine issues are encouraged to read
this notice and to submit comments for EPA's consideration.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the

information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives,
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this notice will be available on the Worldwide Web through the
Technology Transfer Network (TTN). The TTN provides information and
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
Following signature, an electronic version of this document will be
posted at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg under ``Recent Additions.''

II. Background Information

A. What is the purpose of this action?

    The EPA has taken several actions over the past few years to reduce

exhaust pollutants (e.g., particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs)) from mobile and
stationary diesel engines as these pollutants have been associated with
several health-related concerns, including cancer, respiratory
problems, and premature death. Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of
hundreds of constituents in either a gas or particle form resulting
from the complete and incomplete combustion of fuel and small amounts
of engine oil. While EPA uses the term ``diesel exhaust'' as a static
concept throughout this document, EPA recognizes that the mixture of
chemicals in diesel engine exhaust can vary in important ways,
particularly when comparing exhaust from uncontrolled engines to
exhaust from controlled engines.\1\ Diesel exhaust varies significantly
in chemical composition and particle sizes between different engine
types (heavy-duty, light-duty), engine operating conditions (e.g.,
idle, acceleration, deceleration) and fuel formulations (high/low
sulfur). Over 600 compounds or elements have been identified in diesel
exhaust.\2\ The emissions include particles composed of carbon and/or
inorganic constituents with organics, trace elements and ions absorbed
onto the particles, and organic and inorganic gases. The PM present in
diesel exhaust consists primarily of fine particles (generally
referring to particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers ([mu]m) in
diameter), including a subgroup with a large number of ultrafine
particles (generally referring to particles less than 0.1 [mu]m in
diameter). Collectively, these particles have a large surface area
which makes them effective for absorbing organic and inorganic HAPs.
Their small size also makes them highly respirable and able to reach
deeply into the lungs.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ While the EPA Diesel Health Assessment Document refers to
``diesel exhaust'' in general, it also notes that the ``health
hazard conclusions are based on exhaust emissions from diesel
engines built prior to the mid-1990s. * * * As new and cleaner
diesel engines, together with different diesel fuels, replace a
substantial number of existing engines, the general applicability of
the health hazard conclusions will need to be reevaluated.,''
``Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 600/8-90/057F, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/dieselfinal.pdf
, May 2002, p. 1-3.

    \2\ ``Expanding and Updating the Master List of Compounds
Emitted by Mobile Sources--Phase III Final Report,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA420-R-06-005, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/toxics/420r06005.pdf
, February 2006.

    \3\ ``Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Volume II Document No. EPA600/P-99/
002bF, October 2004, Chapter 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed below, EPA has already taken several actions to reduce
pollution from diesel engines. In combination, these efforts will
improve air quality by substantially reducing emissions of pollutants
from these engines. However, the Agency continues to be interested in
exploring further opportunities to reduce exhaust pollutants from
diesel engines generally, and specifically from larger, older
stationary diesel engines, the subject of this notice.
    Some stakeholders are encouraging the Agency to review whether
there are further ways to reduce emissions of pollutants from existing
stationary diesel engines. In its comments on EPA's 2006 proposed rule
for new stationary diesel engines,\4\ Environmental Defense suggested
several possible avenues for the regulation of existing stationary
diesel engines, including use of diesel oxidation catalysts or
catalyzed diesel particulate filters, as well as the use of ultra-low
sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel. Environmental Defense suggested that such
controls can provide significant pollution reductions at reasonable
cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Standards of Performance for Stationary Spark Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollution for Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines,'' 71 FR 33803-33855, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.html,

June 12, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of discussions with Environmental Defense and other
interested stakeholders, EPA is undertaking this Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR). The purpose of this action is to solicit
comment and collect information to aid decision-making related to the
reduction of HAP emissions from existing stationary diesel engines and
specifically from larger, older engines under Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 112 authorities.\5\ The Agency is seeking comment on the
larger, older engines because available data indicate that they emit
the majority of PM and toxic emissions from non-emergency stationary
engines as a whole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ If reductions in HAP emissions occur in the future through
the issuance of EPA regulation, because some HAPs are in the
particulate form, a reduction in HAP emissions may also result in
reductions of emissions of particulate matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA requests comment on specific, well supported information
that will assist the Agency with moving forward with the regulation of
existing stationary diesel engines (Section III). The areas for which
EPA is seeking comment include:
     Locations of stationary diesel engines;
     Usage and duty cycles;
     Technical parameters that help define ``older'' engines
for purposes of defining potential subcategories of engines;
     Which stationary diesel engines to control;
     Appropriate controls for those engines;
     Existing stationary engine control measures in place,
including State and local requirements;
     Costs and cost effectiveness of, and emission reductions
associated with, different control technologies and control strategies;
and
     Monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements for
owners and operators of existing stationary engines subject to
emissions standards.
    In this ANPR, EPA provides background information on:
     Existing and other proposed efforts to control stationary
engine emissions;
     Some of the information we have on existing stationary
diesel engines; and
     Health concerns related to emissions from diesel engines.

B. Why are emissions from diesel engines a health concern?

    EPA published a Diesel Health Assessment Document (Diesel HAD) in
September 2002.\6\ Some of the HAD's important results are summarized
here. The Diesel HAD classified exposure to diesel exhaust as ``likely
to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation'' at environmental levels of
exposure. Other agencies at the international, federal and state level
have come to similar conclusions.\7\ The EPA Diesel HAD provided
insight into the possible ranges of lung cancer risk that might be
present in the population resulting from environmental exposure to
diesel emissions. Lifetime cancer risk may exceed 10-5 and
could be as high as 10-3. Because of uncertainties, the
analysis acknowledged that the risks could be lower than
10-4 or 10-5, and a zero risk from diesel exhaust
exposure was not ruled out. This range of values includes numerous
uncertainties and, as discussed in the Diesel HAD, does not constitute
an Agency cancer unit risk range suitable for estimating the number of
cancer cases resulting from exposure to diesel exhaust. EPA's 1999
National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) does not include a
quantitative estimate of cancer risk for diesel exhaust, but it
concludes that diesel exhaust ranks with the other emissions that the

national-scale assessment suggests pose the greatest relative risk.\8\
The purpose of this national-scale assessment is to provide a
perspective on the magnitude of risks posed by outdoor sources of air
toxics and to identify the pollutants and sources that are important
contributors to these health risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 600/8-90/057F, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/dieselfinal.pdf
, May 2002.

    \7\ A [0] number of other agencies (National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, the International Agency for
Research on Cancer, the World Health Organization, California EPA,
and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) have made
similar classifications regarding the diesel exhaust lung cancer
hazard.
    \8\ For more information on NATA, see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/risksum.html
.

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

    The Diesel HAD established an inhalation Reference Concentration
(RfC) of 5 [mu]g/m\3\ for diesel exhaust as measured by diesel PM.\9\
The Diesel HAD concludes ``that acute exposure to DE [diesel exhaust]
has been associated with irritation of the eye, nose, and throat,
respiratory symptoms (cough and phlegm), and neurophysiological
symptoms such as headache, lightheadedness, nausea, vomiting, and
numbness or tingling of the extremities.'' \10\ There is also evidence
of immunologic effects such as the exacerbation of allergenic responses
to known allergens and asthma-like symptoms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ An RfC is defined by EPA as ``an estimate of a continuous
inhalation exposure to the human population, including sensitive
subgroups, with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude,
which is likely to be without appreciable risks of deleterious
noncancer effects during a lifetime.''
    \10\ ``Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust,''
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 600/8-90/057F, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/dieselfinal.pdf
, May 2002, p. 9-9.

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

    Diesel exhaust is a mixture that includes HAPs that are known or
suspected human carcinogens or have noncancer effects, including
benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, polycyclic organic
matter (POM), and naphthalene. Benzene\11\ and 1,3-butadiene\12\ are
known human carcinogens. Noncancer health effects may include
neurological, cardiovascular, liver, kidney, and respiratory effects,
as well as effects on the immune and reproductive systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Integrated Risk Information System File for Benzene, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/subst/0276.htm
, 2000.

    \12\ Integrated Risk Information System File for 1,3-Butadiene,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/subst/0139.htm
, 2002.

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

    Several of the HAPs emitted by diesel engines (e.g., acrolein,
benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, naphthalene, and POM) were
identified in EPA's 1999 NATA as national or regional cancer and/or
noncancer risk drivers.\13\ However, EPA does not have high confidence
in the NATA data for all these compounds.\14\ It should be noted that
the NATA modeling framework has a number of limitations which prevent
its use as the sole basis for setting regulatory standards. These
limitations and uncertainties are discussed on the 1999 NATA Web site.
Even so, this modeling framework is very useful in identifying air
toxic pollutants and sources of greatest concern, setting regulatory
priorities, and informing the decision making process.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ More information on NATA risk drivers is available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/risksum.html.

    \14\ See ``Control of Emissions From New Marine Compression-
Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder; Proposed
Rule,'' 72 FR 69521-69552, 69534, http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2007/December/Day-07/a23556.htm
, December 2007.

    \15\ For more information on NATA, see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/risksum.html
.

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

    Diesel emissions contain fine and ultra-fine PM and contribute
significantly to ambient PM2.5 concentrations in many areas
of the country.\16\ The nature of the effects that have been reported
to be associated with fine particle exposures include premature
mortality, aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease (as
indicated by increased hospital admissions and emergency department
visits), changes in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms,
as well as new evidence for more subtle indicators of cardiovascular
health (71 FR 61152, October 17, 2006).\17\ The PM Air Quality Criteria
Document also notes that the PM components of gasoline and diesel
engine exhaust represent one class of hypothesized likely important
contributors to the observed ambient PM-related increases in lung
cancer incidence and mortality.\18\ The PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standard is designed to provide protection from the
noncancer and premature mortality effects of PM2.5 as a
whole, of which diesel PM is a constituent.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ ``Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust,''
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 600/8-90/057F, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/dieselfinal.pdf
, May 2002, p. 2-97, Table 2-23.

    \17\ Detailed information on the health effects of PM is
provided in: ``Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Volume I, EPA600/P-99/002aF and
Volume II, EPA600/P-99/002bF, October 2004; ``Review of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standard for Particulate Matter: Policy
Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information, OAQPS Staff
Paper,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-452/R-05-005,
2005; ``National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate
Matter; Proposed Rule,'' 71 FR 2620-2708, 2626-2637, http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/actions.html
, January 17, 2006 and

``National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter;
Final Rule,'' 71 FR 61144-61233, http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/actions.html
, October 17, 2006.

    \18\ ``Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Volume I, EPA600/P-99/002aF and
Volume II, EPA600/P-99/002bF, October 2004, p. 8-318.
    \19\ ``Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Locomotive
Engines and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters
per Cylinder; Proposed Rule,'' 72 FR 15937-15986, 15958, http://www.epa.gov/oms/locomotv.htm
, April 3, 2007.

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

    Diesel exhaust also includes NOX and volatile organic
compounds, which react in the presence of sunlight to form ozone. Ozone
contributes to serious public health problems, including aggravation of
respiratory disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions and
emergency room visits, school absences, lost work days, and restricted
activity days), changes in lung function and increased respiratory
symptoms, altered respiratory defense mechanisms, and chronic
bronchitis. In addition, there is suggestive evidence of a contribution
of ozone to cardiovascular-related morbidity and highly suggestive
evidence that short-term ozone exposure directly or indirectly
contributes to non-accidental and cardiopulmonary-related mortality,
but additional research is needed to more fully establish underlying
mechanisms by which such effects occur.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Detailed information regarding the health effects of
ozone[0] is provided in: ``Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and
Related Photochemical Oxidants (Final),'' U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006, pp. 7-97 and 8-78;
``Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone:
Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information, OAQPS
Staff Paper,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-452/R-07-
003, January 2007; and ``National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone: Proposed Rule,'' 72 FR 37818-37919, 37844 and 37836, http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/actions.html
, July 11, 2007.

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

    Tables 3 and 4 in the Section II.D. below indicate that older,
larger non-emergency stationary source diesel engines generate a
substantial share of the emissions from all stationary diesel engines.
In this context, it is important to consider the health effects
associated with diesel exhaust.

C. What is the Agency already doing to address diesel emissions from
new and existing stationary and mobile diesel engines?

    EPA has undertaken several specific regulatory efforts to control
emissions from new or reconstructed stationary diesel engines. In June
2004, EPA published national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP) for stationary reciprocating internal combustion
engines (RICE) \21\ with a site rating of greater than 500 brake horse
power (BHP) located at major sources.\22\

The rule contains emission limitations for new and reconstructed
compression ignition (i.e. diesel) stationary RICE, among other
sources. In that action, EPA identified stationary RICE as major
sources of HAP emissions, such as formaldehyde, acrolein, methanol, and
acetaldehyde. The NESHAP required all RICE above 500 BHP located at
major sources to meet HAP emission standards reflecting the application
of the maximum achievable control technology (MACT). EPA estimated at
the time that 40% of stationary RICE would be located at major sources
and thus, subject to the final rule. New or reconstructed stationary
RICE that operate exclusively as emergency or limited use units were
subject only to initial notification requirements. The RICE rule is
projected to reduce total national HAP emissions by an estimated 5,600
tons per year (tpy) in the 5th year after the rule is promulgated. EPA
expects that engine manufacturers will achieve the expected reductions
by installing diesel oxidation catalysts. The emissions reduction
performance provided by the installation of diesel oxidation catalysts
through this rule were projected to reduce PM emissions from the
affected engines by 20-30%, compared with uncontrolled engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ A reciprocating engine is an internal combustion engine
that uses reciprocating motion to convert heat energy into
mechanical work.
    \22\ ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines,'' 69 FR
33474-33522, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.html, June 15, 2004.

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

    In July 2006, EPA published new source performance standards (NSPS)
for new stationary compression ignition (CI) internal combustion
engines (ICE).23 24 The standards implement section 111(b)
of the CAA and are based on the Administrator's determination that
stationary CI ICE cause, or contribute significantly to, air pollution
that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or
welfare. The standards require all new, modified, and reconstructed
stationary CI ICE to use the best demonstrated system of continuous
emission reduction of PM, NOX, hydrocarbons and CO
considering costs, non-air quality health, and environmental and energy
impacts. The CI ICE NSPS affects stationary CI ICE that commenced
construction, modification or reconstruction after July 11, 2005. EPA
generally requires that engines affected by the rulemaking use ULSD
\25\ for all engines (emergency and non-emergency). EPA expects that
non-emergency engines will need to use diesel particulate filters and
NOX aftertreatment to meet the NSPS. The final standards
will reduce NOX by an estimated 38,000 tpy, PM by an
estimated 3,000 tpy, sulfur dioxide by an estimated 9,000 tpy,
nonmethane hydrocarbons by an estimated 600 tpy, and CO by an estimated
18,000 tpy in the year 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ ``Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression
Ignition Internal Combustion Engines; Final Rule,'' 71 FR 39153-
39185, http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2006/July/Day-11/a5968.htm, July

11, 2006.
    \24\ Similar to the diesel engines covered by the RICE rule,
these compression ignition, internal combustion engines are also
reciprocating, diesel engines. However, the 2006 NSPS rulemaking
covered fewer types of engines and different pollutants than the
June 2004 RICE rule. The 2006 rulemaking addressed criteria
pollutants from compression ignition engines, while the 2004 RICE
rule addressed HAP emissions from both compression-ignition and
spark-ignition engines, both of which are reciprocating engines. For
that reason, the 2004 engine rule refers to the engines it covers as
``RICE'' rather than the narrower term used to describe the engines
covered by the 2006 engine rule: CI ICE.
    \25\ EPA also requires ULSD for nonroad and on-highway engines
that should help ensure widespread availability of the fuel for
stationary engines. See ``Control of Air Pollution from New Motor
Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel
Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements,'' 66 FR 5001-5193, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/highway-diesel/regs/2007-heavy-duty-highway.htm
, January 2001

and ``Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Nonroad Diesel
Engines and Fuel,'' 69 FR 38957-39273, http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr.htm
, June 29, 2004.

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

    In June 2006, EPA published a proposed NESHAP for stationary RICE
that either are located at area sources of HAP emissions or that have a
site rating of less than or equal to 500 BHP and are located at major
sources of HAP emissions.\26\ In that same action, EPA also proposed
NSPS for stationary spark ignition internal combustion engines. In
December 2007, EPA finalized the NSPS for spark ignition engines and
the NESHAP for new stationary RICE sources. EPA will be issuing a
proposed NESHAP for existing engines in 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ ``Standards of Performance for Stationary Spark Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollution for Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines,'' 71 FR 33803-33855, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.html,

June 12, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For new mobile source diesel engines, EPA has issued the Heavy-Duty
Highway Diesel Engine and Fuel Rule \27\ and the Clean Air Nonroad
Diesel Engine and Fuel Rule \28\ regulatory programs. Overall, the
substantial majority of diesel exhaust is emitted from mobile sources
rather than stationary sources. Engines meeting the emission standards
required by the Heavy-Duty Highway Diesel Engine and Fuel Rule achieve
a greater than 98 percent reduction in PM and NOX over
uncontrolled emission levels. This program, when fully phased in, will
provide annual emission reductions equivalent to removing the pollution
from more than 90 percent of today's trucks and buses, or about 13
million trucks and buses. We project that in 2030, when the current
heavy-duty vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty
vehicles that comply with these emission standards, this program will
reduce annual emissions of non-methane hydrocarbons by 115,000 tons, PM
by 109,000 tons, and NOX by 2.6 million tons. Similarly, the
nonroad program will reduce NOX and PM emissions from
nonroad diesel engines by more than 90 percent. Both rules will provide
a wide range of public health benefits. Additionally, EPA has recently
proposed regulations for locomotive and marine engines. These
regulatory programs will ultimately yield reductions of PM and
NOX from mobile sources as high as 90%, depending upon
engine category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See ``Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles:
Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel
Sulfur Control Requirements,'' 66 FR 5001-5193, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/highway-diesel/regs/2007-heavy-duty-highway.htm
, January 2001.

    \28\ See ``Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Nonroad
Diesel Engines and Fuel,'' 69 FR 38957-39273, http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr.htm
, June 29, 2004.

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

    EPA has also developed the National Clean Diesel Campaign, which
aims to reduce emissions from existing mobile source diesel engines
through innovative retrofit programs. Through the campaign, as of 2005
more than 300 clean diesel projects nationwide are resulting in
significant emission reductions (in lifetime tons) including: 110,000
NOX, 20,000 PM, 35,000 hydrocarbons and 25,000 carbon
monoxide (CO).\29\ To date, emissions from more than 200,000 diesel
vehicles have been reduced through these projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ For more information, see ``National Clean Diesel Campaign:
Innovative Strategies for Cleaner Air, 2005 Progress Report,'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA420-R-06-009, http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420r06009.pdf
, June 2006.

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

    In addition to these rulemakings, EPA is reviewing its ability to
take certain steps to further encourage emission reductions from
existing diesel engines, including:
    1. Publishing a control techniques guideline/alternative control
technology document for existing stationary diesel engines;
    2. Developing guidance pertaining to EPA review of federal actions
under the National Environmental Policy Act and CAA section 309
addressing the characterization and mitigation of emissions from new
and existing diesel engines;
    3. Encouraging emission controls for existing stationary diesel
engines through voluntary programs;
    4. Exploring methods of promoting the use of clean diesel engines
by entities in the federal government; and

    5. Publishing a white paper together with an analytical tool for
local areas and states to estimate health benefits of diesel emissions
reduction strategies.
    In addition, EPA, among others, is helping to fund the study of
differences in the health effects associated with PM from cleaner
burning diesel engines.

D. What do we know about existing stationary diesel engines?

    EPA's knowledge about the types of and use of stationary diesel
engines consists primarily of certain general information. Based on the
number of hours of operation, existing stationary diesel engines are
considered either non-emergency or emergency. Generally, non-emergency
engines operate about 1,000 hours per year, though they can run more or
less than that. Non-emergency engines are engines that are used for
several purposes or applications such as: oil and gas industry,
including oil and gas extraction and transmission; agriculture (e.g.,
irrigation pumps); and generation of electricity in remote areas or for
purposes of meeting peak demand. Emergency engines operate on an
emergency or as-needed basis, including periodically for short periods
of time for testing purposes to ensure engine performance in the event
of an emergency. Applications for emergency engines include electric
power for emergency commercial and institutional needs. For example,
hospitals and any other facilities that require power in the event of a
power outage may use emergency engines. Emergency engines typically
operate an average of 50 hours per year.
    Based on (1) sales information from diesel engine manufacturers,
(2) data from the Power Systems Research Database and (3) estimates of
the stationary source fraction of the total engine sales, EPA estimates
that there are about 900,000 existing stationary compression ignition
(CI) or diesel engines in the U.S. (see Table 1). About 20% of the
engines (about 180,000) are considered non-emergency and about 80% are
considered emergency (about 720,000).
    Generally, diesel emissions from the engines reflected in Table 1
(and the other Tables in this notice) are largely uncontrolled at the
Federal level as EPA's emissions standards for stationary diesel
engines did not take effect until August 2004. Non-emergency engines
are estimated to emit 90% of total combined PM and NOX
emissions from all stationary diesel engines, while emergency engines
are estimated to emit 10% of total PM and NOX emissions.
Based on this information, we believe that a relatively small
percentage of the total number of stationary diesel engines operating
in the United States are emitting a significant amount of the HAPs from
stationary diesel engines overall.
    Of the non-emergency engines, about 36,000 non-emergency engines
rated 300 BHP or higher were built prior to 1996, which is about 21% of
all non-emergency engines (see Table 2). These 36,000 engines emit
about:
     57% of the total PM emissions from all stationary non-
emergency diesel engines (see Table 3); and
     59% of the total HAP emissions from all stationary non-
emergency diesel engines (see Table 4).

      Table 1.--Engine Manufacturers Association Estimates of Stationary Diesel Engines in Use in the U.S.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Engine ratings             <  1980       1980-1994     1995-2001     2002-2005      Totals      Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=50 and <100 BHP.............      26,200        62,759        49,919        22,521        161,399         17.9
>=100 and <175 BHP............      57,426        92,857        61,572        23,634        235,489         26.1
>=175 and <300 BHP............      27,198        63,991        57,739        40,877        189,805         21.1
>=300 and <600 BHP............      70,303        53,188        38,778        31,403        193,672         21.5
>=600 and <750 BHP............       8,562        12,664        10,743         8,648         40,617          4.5
>=750.........................       6,899        28,357        33,835        10,520         79,611          8.8
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals....................     196,588       313,816       252,586       137,603        900,593         99.9
    Percent...................          21.8          34.8          28.0          15.3  ...........  ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
 The Engine Manufacturers Association engine sales data that was used to help develop these numbers
  represent 70% of total U.S. engine sales.
 Assumes all 1999-2005 engines are currently in operation.
 Total percent does not equal 100 due to rounding.
Source: Engine Manufacturers Association.

  Table 2.--Engine Manufacturers Association Estimates of Non-Emergency Stationary Diesel Engines in Use in the
                                                      U.S.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Engine ratings               <  1980     1980-1995    1996-2001    2002-2005      Totals      Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=50 and <100 BHP.................        4,978       14,145        7,264        4,279       30,666         17.9
>=100 and <175 BHP................       10,911       21,163        8,179        4,490       44,743         26.1
>=175 and <300 BHP................        5,168       14,700        8,429        7,767       36,064         21.1
>=300 and <600 BHP................       13,358       11,217        6,256        5,967       36,798         21.5
>=600 and <750 BHP................        1,627        2,644        1,804        1,643        7,718          4.5
>=750.............................        1,311        6,212        5,605        1,999       15,127          8.8
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals........................       37,353       70,081       37,537       26,145      171,116        100.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Engines  300 BHP and < 1996: 36,369 (21.3 of all non-emergency engines)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
 EPA is providing the 36,369 engine number because we are considering focusing for regulation on non-
  emergency diesel engines that were built before 1996 and that are rated greater than 300 BHP, although EPA is
  open to alternatives that commenters may propose. See Section III for a more detailed discussion of this
  issue.
Source: Engine Manufacturers Association.

     Table 3.--Engine Manufacturers Association Estimates of Percent PM Emissions From Non-Emergency Engines
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Engine ratings                    < 1980       1980-1995     1996-2001     2002-2005      Totals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=50 and <100 BHP.........................           1.3           2.4           0.7           0.3           4.7
>=100 and <175 BHP........................           5.0           6.5           1.3           0.4          13.2
>=175 and <300 BHP........................           4.1           7.8           1.8           0.6          14.3
>=300 and <600 BHP........................          20.1          11.3           2.5           0.9          34.8
>=600 and <750 BHP........................           3.7           4.0           1.1           0.4           9.2
>=750.....................................           4.4          13.9           5.0           0.7          24
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals................................          38.6          45.9          12.4           3.3         100.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Percent PM Emissions from non-emergency engines 300 BHP built prior to 1996: 57.4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
 The percent estimates are based on an Engine Manufacturers Association assumption that non-emergency
  engines operate about 2,000 hours/year. EPA in its rulemaking analyses assumes about 1,000 hours/year of
  operation for non-emergency engines. The 2,000 hours/year assumption is used here because we are using the
  most readily available information that the Engine Manufacturers Association has provided to EPA. However, EPA
  would not expect the percent estimates in this table to differ significantly under the 1,000 hours/year EPA
  assumption.
 Emissions estimates based on EPA AP-42 emission factors and recent mobile source emission factors:
  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch03/index.html.

 Total percent does not equal 100 due to rounding.
Source: Engine Manufacturers Association.

  Table 4.--U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Estimates of Percent HAP Emissions From Non-Emergency Engines
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Engine ratings                    < 1980       1980-1995     1996-2001     2002-2005      Totals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=50 and <100 BHP..........................           0.5           1.4           0.5           0.2          2.6
>=100 and <175 BHP.........................           2.5           4.9           1.1           0.5          9.1
>=175 and <300 BHP.........................           2.3           6.6           1.7           1.0         11.7
>=300 and <600 BHP.........................          17.4          14.6           2.4           2.3         36.7
>=600 and <750 BHP.........................           4.4           7.1           1.1           1.0         13.5
>=750......................................           2.7          12.7           9.3           1.7         26.4
                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals.................................          29.9          47.4          16.1           6.6        100.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Percent HAP Emissions from non-emergency engines 300 BHP built prior to 1996: 58.9.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
 Percent estimates based on assumption that non-emergency engines run about 1,000 hours/year. EPA in its
  rulemaking analyses assumes about 1,000 hours/year for non-emergency engines.
 HAP emissions estimates include: Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,
  naphthalene, and acrolein.
 Emissions estimates based on EPA AP-42 emission factors and recent mobile source emission factors:
  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch03/index.html.

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

III. Specific Issues on Which EPA Is Seeking Comment

    Although we have some limited information about larger, older
stationary diesel engines, we have a need for more detailed and current
data related to existing engines. We are issuing this ANPR to request
information that will help inform our efforts on how best to control
emissions from these engines. There are several issues that we need to
understand more fully in order to implement a program for existing
stationary diesel engines. In this section, we break down the specific
areas of interest for which we are requesting comment.

A. What particular subgroups of existing stationary diesel engines
should EPA focus on and how can EPA best find information on those
engines?

    Currently, EPA is considering focusing on non-emergency diesel
engines that were built before 1996 and that are rated greater than 300
BHP, although EPA is open to alternatives that commenters may propose
that are well supported with appropriate data. We are focusing on non-
emergency engines, because, while they represent only 20% of the total
number of stationary engines, they are responsible for a significant
amount of HAP emissions from stationary engines. EPA is considering
focusing on pre-1996 engines because, generally speaking, emissions
controls were not implemented in a significant way on nonroad diesel
engines until the 1996 engine model year. Thus, the pre-1996 engines
represent stationary engines that EPA believes are largely
uncontrolled. In addition, diesel retrofit controls are typically more
cost effective and technically feasible the larger the engine.\ 30\
When these three criteria are combined, it comprises a set of larger,
older non-emergency engines that represent the majority of PM and
toxics emissions from non-emergency engines as a whole (see Tables 3
and 4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ For more information, see ``The Cost-Effectiveness of
Heavy-Duty Diesel Retrofits and Other Mobile Source Emission
Reduction Projects and Programs,'' U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA420-B-07-006, http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/publications.htm,

May 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While we believe this is an appropriate set of engines to focus on,
we are requesting comment on whether there are other appropriate
categories of engines that should also be considered. For example,
should EPA consider requiring emission reductions for non-

emergency stationary diesel engines built in the late 1990s
(notwithstanding our estimates that total emissions from these engines
are lower). The list below further explores diesel control technologies
and associated emission reduction issues.
    Particular areas for categorization of engines on which we could
focus include:
     The model year of the engine, including engines built
since 1996 and remaining useful engine life for older engines;
     The type and size of engine, including engines rated less
than 300 BHP in size;
     The number of hours of operation and/or time profile
annually or over a shorter term;
     The applicable technologies, and corresponding emissions
reductions available, for given ages and sizes of engines;
     The duty cycle;
     The sector or use;
     The ability of engine owners and operators to access the
lower sulfur fuel necessary to ensure the proper performance of
pollution control devices;
     Ease of installation and cost effectiveness of emissions
reductions associated with controls on existing stationary diesel
engines, including newer, later model year engines; and
     Any other distinguishing characteristics commenters may
think important.

B. Where can EPA find better information about the location and numbers
of existing stationary engines, who owns and operates them and what
impact they are having (including hours of operation)?

    Above, EPA lays out the general information it has available on the
numbers of stationary diesel engines believed operating today. EPA
specifically estimates that there are approximately 36,000 non-
emergency, pre-1996 stationary diesel engines larger than 300 BHP. EPA
seeks comment on the accuracy of these numbers, as well as of the other
estimates in Tables 3 and 4. EPA is requesting any information that
informs its understanding of the number and distribution of these
stationary diesel engines and the group(s) that would be most affected
by any requirements to reduce emissions.
    We also lack detailed information on the location of these sources,
including their owners and operators. If EPA proposes standards based
on engine size and age criteria, then we would need detailed
information on the location or the owners and operators of these
sources.
    We are aware of the following information sources from which we
need information that we currently lack:
     State-managed permit databases;
     State-gathered information through surveys and other
means;
     Engine manufacturer and owner/operator and fuel industry
information such as fuel distribution/delivery records, and fuel
storage tank sales, repairs, and permits;
     Industry sectors that are major owners and operators of
diesel engines, including their trade associations such as the
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America and the American
Petroleum Institute; and
     Diesel control technology manufacturers.
    We would like to know if states have an accurate count of the
number of engines operating in the state, including their purpose and
hours of operation. If so, EPA is also interested in the source of the
information (e.g., a state permit database). We are also interested in
any small business impacts and other relevant information about the
owners and operators and number of hours that these engines operate.

C. What are appropriate and available technically-feasible, cost-
effective methods of controlling emissions from existing stationary
diesel engines?

    EPA seeks information on control technologies and other methods for
reducing diesel HAP emissions from existing stationary diesel engines,
particularly for non-emergency, pre-1996 engines that are rated greater
than 300 BHP. These methods include, but are not limited to, one or
more of the following:
     Retrofitting with diesel particulate filters, including
both actively and passively regenerated filters;
     Retrofitting with partial flow filters;
     Retrofitting with oxidation catalysts;
     Retrofitting with closed crankcase ventilation systems;
     Engine recalibration or fuel system upgrade;
     Replacement with new, state-of-the-art engines;
     Use of low sulfur diesel (500 parts per million (ppm)) or
ULSD (15 ppm) fuel;
     Use of fuel substitution systems using natural gas;
     Use of biodiesel; and
     Management practices.
    EPA understands that there may be limitations, both economic and
technical, to certain control methods and solicits engine emissions
testing data, cost data and other information to inform our approach to
these issues. For example, EPA would like clarification on the
following:
     The extent to which low sulfur and ULSD fuel may be
problematic in certain older engines due to fuel system seal leakage
and how this problem has been addressed through fuel additives and/or
modifications to mobile source engines;
     Potential for the malfunction of diesel retrofit devices
on older engines (e.g., diesel particulate filters), the engine
conditions that lead to this problem, and appropriate precautions to
avoid malfunction;
     Technical feasibility of controls for short use periods
(e.g., need for controls to warm up in order to be effective, the need
for these engines to start immediately without mechanical
complications);
     Cost-effectiveness of controls on existing engines (i.e.,
emissions reductions relative to cost and hours operated);
     Cost, availability and emissions related to fuel
substitution systems using natural gas;
     The equipment and operating costs (and any challenges,
including safety issues) associated with known control technologies;
     Engine size limitations beyond which a control technology
may become infeasible and for what reason; and
     Any other technical and economic feasibility issues that
would affect the control of emissions reductions from older, larger and
smaller diesel engines.

D. To what degree do state and local governments regulate emissions
from stationary diesel engines?

    EPA requests comment on the extent to which state and local
governments have issued regulations to reduce emissions from stationary
diesel engines of all sizes, particularly the larger, older engines.
EPA is aware, for example, that the States of California \31\ and
Wisconsin \32\ have issued rules that mandate reductions of particulate
emissions from existing stationary diesel engines. EPA is interested in
information about other state and local governments that have issued

regulations controlling emissions from existing stationary diesel
engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ For more information on the California rule, see:
``Airborne toxic control measure for stationary compression ignition
engines,'' section 93115, title 17, California Code of Regulations,
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/ag/documents/finalatcm.pdf.

    \32\ For more information on the Wisconsin rule, see: ``Fuel,
control and compliance requirements for compression ignition
internal combustion engines combusting fuel oil,'' section NR
445.09, http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code/nr/nr445.pdf.

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

E. What are appropriate methods of ensuring compliance with such
requirements, including recordkeeping and testing issues?

    Given the large population of stationary diesel engines and our
lack of information on the location and owners and operators of these
engines, EPA requests comment on effective methods to ensure compliance
with any emission reduction requirements. EPA also requests comment on
the extent to which the owners and operators of these engines are small
businesses and on what the appropriate regulatory compliance
requirements should be for those entities. EPA is especially interested
in ways to minimize the monitoring burden to individual owners and
operators, while maintaining an appropriate level of environmental
protection.

IV. How EPA Intends To Proceed Following Publication of This Notice

    Following the closing of the comment period for this notice, EPA
will summarize and analyze the comments received. The summary and
analysis will be used to help develop and inform the notice of proposed
rulemaking that will follow this notice.

 V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
this action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, EPA
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under EO 12866 and any changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been documented in the docket for this action.
Generally, because this action is ``advanced'' in nature and does not,
therefore, propose any requirements on any entities, the various
administrative requirements EPA must address in the rulemaking process
are not applicable. When EPA issues a notice of proposed rulemaking
that contains proposed emissions standards for stationary diesel
engines, EPA will address those requirements.

Lists of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air toxics.

    Dated: January 16, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-1118 Filed 1-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P