[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46909-46922]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19092]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 80 and 1042

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0638; FRL-9999-22-OAR]
RIN 2060-AU30

Marine Diesel Engine Emission Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
amend the national marine diesel engine program to provide relief
provisions to address concerns associated with finding and installing
certified Tier 4 marine diesel engines in certain high-speed commercial
vessels. The proposed relief is in the form of additional lead time for
qualifying engines and vessels. EPA is also making a technical
correction to the diesel fuel regulations to allow fuel manufacturers
and distributors to make distillate diesel fuel that complies with the
global sulfur standard that applies internationally instead of the fuel
standards that otherwise apply to distillate diesel fuel in the United
States.

DATES:
    Comments: Written comments must be received by October 21, 2019.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the information
collection provisions are best assured of consideration if the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or
before October 7, 2019.
    Public Hearing: There will be a public hearing September 20, 2019,
in Bath, Maine. Inquire about arrangements for a public hearing using
the contact information in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

ADDRESSES:
    Public hearing. We will hold a public hearing September 20, 2019 at
the Maine Maritime Museum, 243 Washington Street, Bath, Maine 04530,
(207) 443-1316. The hearing will start at 9:30 a.m. local time and
continue until everyone has had a chance to speak.
    Public Participation: Public hearing: Hearing participants are
invited to notify EPA of interest in presenting testimony at the public
hearing; see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We encourage commenters
to provide a copy of oral testimony by email or in hard copy. EPA may
ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations but will
generally not respond to the presentations at the hearing. Written
statements and supporting information submitted during the comment
period will be considered with the same weight as oral comments and
supporting information presented at the public hearing.
    Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2018-0638, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0638. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. 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, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA
Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW, Room 3334, 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 (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-
1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Stout, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division (ASD), Environmental
Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Does this action apply to me?

    This action relates to marine diesel engines with rated power
between 600 and 1,400 kW intended for installation on vessels flagged
or registered in the United States, vessels that use those engines, and
companies that manufacture, repair, or rebuild those engines and
vessels. This action also relates to companies that produce and
distribute distillate diesel fuel.
    Proposed categories and entities that might be affected include the
following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of potentially
           Category            NAICS code \a\      affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.....................          333618  Marine engine
                                                manufacturing.
                                       336611  Shipbuilding and
                                                repairing.
                                       324110  Petroleum refineries
                                                (including importers).
                                       424710  Petroleum bulk stations
                                                and terminals.
                                       493190  Other warehousing and
                                                storage-bulk petroleum
                                                storage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely covered by these rules.
This table lists the types of entities that we are aware may be
regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the
table could also be regulated. To determine whether your activities are
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in the referenced regulations. You may direct
questions regarding the applicability of this action to the persons
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

I. Summary

    EPA's Final Rule for Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from
Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30
Liters per Cylinder adopted Tier 4 emission standards for commercial
marine diesel engines at or above 600 kW (73 FR 37096, June 30, 2008).
These standards, which were expected to require the use of
aftertreatment technology, phased in from 2014 to 2017, depending on
engine power.\1\ Some boat builders have informed EPA that there are no
certified Tier 4 engines with suitable performance characteristics for
the vessels they need to build, specifically for high-speed commercial
vessels that rely on engines with rated power between 600 and 1,400 kW
that have high power density. To address these concerns, EPA is
proposing to provide additional lead time for implementing the Tier 4
standards for engines used in certain high-speed vessels. We are also
proposing to streamline certification requirements to facilitate or
accelerate certification of Tier 4 marine engines with high power
density. Each of these elements is discussed in more detail in this
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For engines up to 1,000 kW, compliance could be delayed for
up to nine months, but no later than October 1, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is also amending the diesel fuel regulations to allow fuel
manufacturers and distributors to make distillate diesel fuel that
complies with the global sulfur standard that applies internationally
instead of the fuel standards that otherwise apply to distillate diesel
fuel in the United States.
    EPA adopted emission standards for marine diesel engines and sulfur
standards for marine fuels under Clean Air Act authority (42 U.S.C.
7401-7671q). The amendments under consideration in this rule are
covered by that same authority.

II. Regulatory Amendments To Allow for Distribution of Global Marine
Fuel

    In this action, we are proposing changes to the regulations at 40
CFR part 80, subpart I, to allow for distribution of distillate diesel
fuel that complies with the 0.50 percent (5,000 ppm) global sulfur
standard contained in Annex VI to the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL Annex VI). The United States
ratified MARPOL Annex VI and became a Party to this Protocol on October
8, 2009. MARPOL Annex VI requires marine vessels operating globally to
use fuel that meets the 0.50 percent sulfur standard starting January
1, 2020, rather than the current standard of 3.50 percent sulfur
(``global marine fuel''). For comparison, the MARPOL Annex VI standard
is 0.10 percent sulfur for fuel used in vessels operating in designated
Emission Control Areas (ECAs).\2\ As with ECA marine fuel, we need to
amend 40 CFR part 80 to allow distribution of global marine fuel in the
United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Designated Emission Control Areas for the United States
include the North American ECA and the U.S. Caribbean Sea ECA. More
specific descriptions may be found in EPA fact sheets: ``Designation
of North American Emission Control Area to Reduce Emissions from
Ships,'' EPA-420-F-10-015, March 2010, https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/designation-north-american-emission-control-area-marine; and ``Designation of Emission
Control Area to Reduce Emissions from Ships in the U.S. Caribbean,''
EPA-420-F-11-024, July 2011, https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/designation-us-caribbean-emission-control-area-marine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Until the 0.50 percent sulfur standard takes effect, global marine
fuel has consistently been residual fuel, not distillate fuel. Other
than ECA marine fuel, residual fuel is not subject to fuel sulfur
standards under 40 CFR part 80. As a result, it has been unnecessary to
adopt a provision allowing global marine fuel to exceed the ultra low-
sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel sulfur standards. However, due to the high
sulfur content of residual fuel, it will be common for global marine
fuel to be a distillate fuel starting in 2020.\3\ U.S. refiners intend
to supply product to meet the demand for global marine fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Distillate fuels are subject to fuel sulfur standards for
ULSD (15 ppm) and ECA marine fuel (1,000 ppm). In-use distillate
fuels sold in the United States generally have sulfur content that
is somewhat lower than these standards to accommodate regulatory
compliance margins. According to the most recent data reported by
the IMO Secretariat (MEPC 74/5/3, February 8, 2019), the average
sulfur content of marine distillate marine fuel in 2018 was about
700 ppm, with only 3.7% of samples exceeding 1,000 ppm. The average
sulfur content of marine residual fuel was about 26,000 ppm, with
about 82.5% of samples falling in the range of 20,000 ppm to 35,000
ppm. Only about 0.5% of residual fuel samples exceeded 35,000 ppm
and the rest of the samples, 17%, reported sulfur content less than
20,000 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing several regulatory changes to accommodate the
supply and distribution of distillate diesel fuel as global marine
fuel. We are proposing to exempt such fuel from the prohibition against
distributing distillate diesel fuel that exceeds the ULSD and ECA
marine fuel sulfur standards. This exemption includes several
conditions. (1) The fuel must not exceed 0.50 weight percent sulfur;
(2) fuel manufacturers must designate the fuel as global marine fuel;
(3) product transfer documents accompanying the fuel must identify it
as global marine fuel; (4) global marine fuel must be segregated from
other fuels that are subject to the diesel fuel standards in 40 CFR
part 80, subpart I; (5) the fuel may not be used in any vehicles,
engines, or equipment operating in the United States (including vessels
operating in an ECA or ECA-associated area); and (6) manufacturers and
distributors must meet conventional recordkeeping requirements. These
proposed changes incorporate the global sulfur standard under MARPOL
Annex VI and include compliance provisions that largely mirror what we
currently require for the manufacturers and distributors of home
heating oil, which is another class of distillate fuel not subject to
diesel fuel standards under 40 CFR part 80. These proposed provisions
create documentation oversight requirements that will help prevent
global marine fuel

from being diverted into markets that are subject to ULSD or ECA marine
standards.
    As noted above, the narrow set of amendments proposed in this rule
are intended to remove a potential regulatory obstacle to the sale in
the United States of marine fuel that meets MARPOL Annex VI global
sulfur cap of 5,000 ppm. Separate from this rule, we will be
considering broader questions about how best to implement the 2020
global marine fuel standard.

III. Background for Amendments Related to Emission Standards for Marine
Diesel Engines

    In 2008, EPA adopted Tier 3 and Tier 4 emission standards for new
marine diesel engines with per-cylinder displacement less than 30
liters (73 FR 37096, June 30, 2008). The Tier 3 standards were based on
engine manufacturers' capabilities to reduce particulate matter (PM)
and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions with recalibration
and other engine-based technologies. The Tier 4 standards were based on
the application of catalytic aftertreatment technology, including
selective catalytic reduction (SCR). These Tier 4 standards currently
apply to commercial marine diesel engines with rated power at or above
600 kW. The Tier 3 standards phased in for different engine sizes and
power ratings from 2009 to 2014. The Tier 4 phase-in schedule applied
these stringent standards starting in 2014 to engines at or above 2,000
kW, which are most prevalent on large workboats that are less sensitive
to engine size and weight concerns. The standards started to apply at
the start of model year 2017 for engines from 1,000 to 1,400 kW, and on
October 1, 2017 for engines from 600 kW to 999 kW. The schedule for
applying the Tier 4 standards was intended to give engine manufacturers
time to redesign and certify compliant engines, and to give boat
builders time to redesign their vessels to accommodate the Tier 4
engines, especially with respect to engine size and weight.
    The 600 kW threshold for applying the Tier 4 standards was intended
to avoid aftertreatment-based standards for small vessels used for
certain applications that were most likely to be designed for high-
speed operation with very compact engine installations. Most engines
above 600 kW provide power for various types of workboats and larger
passenger vessels whose performance is less dependent on the size and
weight of the engine. We were aware that there would be some high-speed
vessels with engines above 600 kW, but expected that engine
manufacturers would be able to certify 600-1,400 kW engines and vessel
manufacturers would be able to make the necessary vessel design changes
during the nine-year period between the final rule and the
implementation of the Tier 4 standards.
    In response to the proposal preceding the 2008 final rule, some
commenters recommended that the Tier 4 standards apply to engines as
small as 37 kW, since small land-based nonroad diesel engines were
subject to similar aftertreatment-based standards. Other commenters
advocated a vessel-based approach, for example exempting engines
installed on patrol boats and ferries from the Tier 4 standards.
However, engine manufacturers commented that a vessel-based approach
would be unworkable because they would then need to certify engines for
a range of vessel types. Several commenters affirmed the 600 kW
threshold as appropriate, and no commenters suggested a higher
threshold. As a result, EPA finalized the 600 kW threshold without
further limiting the Tier 4 standards to particular vessel types.
    One manufacturer has certified Tier 4 engines below 1,400 kW, and
there are no certified Tier 4 engines below 1,400 kW with a power
density greater than 35 kW per liter (total engine displacement).\4\
This contrasts with engines available under EPA's Tier 3 commercial
standards, which included several engine models with power densities
exceeding 35 kW/liter displacement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The discussion in this proposed rule is based on
certification information as of June 2019. The discussion does not
reflect new certifications in July 2019 or later. We encourage
individual engine manufacturers to submit comments describing engine
specifications for engine models that have certified or expect to
certify, and how these Tier 4 engine models may be suitable for
powering high-speed vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the course of the last year, EPA staff have had several
teleconferences and site visits to gather information and explore
options for addressing concerns related to engine availability and
meeting Tier 4 requirements.\5\ This has helped us to understand
constraints, capabilities, processes, and concerns for engine
manufacturers, vessel manufacturers, and others affected by the Tier 4
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Stakeholder Interactions in Anticipation of Proposing
Additional Lead Time for Tier 4 Compliance for High-Speed Marine
Vessels,'' EPA memorandum from Alan Stout to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-
0638, July 31, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has learned that manufacturers of vessels for certain high-
speed commercial applications continue to face important challenges
associated with the Tier 4 engine standards. These vessels have
performance needs for achieving substantial propulsion power from a
light-weight engine. In short, manufacturers have been looking for
engines with higher power density than those certified to Tier 4
standards. As engine manufacturers certify additional Tier 4 engines,
vessel manufacturers will need time to evaluate those engine options
and make changes to vessel designs to account for the changing engine
parameters and specifications.
    EPA is proposing to allow additional lead time to address these
concerns for high-speed vessels. This would allow engines installed on
these vessels to continue to meet the Tier 3 standards, which would
allow time for engine manufacturers to certify additional engine
models, and for vessel manufacturers to make the necessary adjustments
to their vessels.
    Note that the proposed provisions allowing additional lead time for
EPA's Tier 4 marine diesel engine standards are distinct from the
international engine emission standards that apply under Annex VI to
the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL Annex VI). The U.S. Coast Guard recently published a Work
Instruction explaining its intention to defer enforcement of MARPOL
Annex VI NOX standards for certain engines certified to EPA
Tier 3 standards as long as MARPOL-compliant engines continue to be
unavailable.\6\ That relief from emission standards is targeted at
engines not subject to EPA's Tier 4 standards, especially engines with
rated power between 130 and 600 kW. Because the domestic and
international emission standards are adopted under different statutory
authorities, and because the U.S. Coast Guard policy applies for
engines not subject to EPA's Tier 4 standards, this proposed rule
should have no bearing on the international standards. It is also the
case that U.S. vessels operating only domestically are not subject to
the standards adopted under MARPOL Annex VI (see 40 CFR 1043.10(a)(2)).
As a result, the high-speed commercial vessels that are the subject of
this proposed rule will not be subject to emission standards under
MARPOL Annex VI as long as they do not navigate in foreign waters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Exercise of Enforcement Discretion with regard to MARPOL
Annex VI Regulation <IP_ADDRESS>,'' USCG Office of Commercial Vessel
Compliance (CG-CVC) Mission Management System (MMS) Work
Instruction, CVC-WI-014(2), October 17, 2018.

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

IV. Technical Discussion for Amendments Related to Emission Standards
for Marine Diesel Engines

    As described above, EPA's Tier 4 marine diesel engine standards
apply to commercial engines at or above 600 kW. With one exception,
engine manufacturers have discontinued production of engine models
instead of certifying those engines to the Tier 4 standards. This has
prevented vessel manufacturers from being able to produce certain types
of high-speed vessels. Complying with current standards poses technical
and economic challenges for engine and vessel manufacturers. This also
has economic consequences for end users who are not able to purchase
vessels until they become available.

1. Boat Builder Challenges

    Manufacturers of certain high-speed vessels have described their
challenges with finding certified Tier 4 engines and with modifying
their vessel designs to accommodate Tier 4 engines once they become
available.\7\ This applies for lobster boats, pilot boats, and various
additional types of high-speed vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Stakeholder Interactions in Anticipation of Proposing
Additional Lead Time for Tier 4 Compliance for High-Speed Marine
Vessels,'' EPA memorandum from Alan Stout to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-
0638, July 31, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lobster Boats. When we adopted the Tier 4 standards in 2008, most
if not all lobster boats used engines below 600 kW. Targeted lobster
beds were typically located relatively close to shore. Lobster boats
navigating in these areas have size and performance requirements that
do not call for engines above 600 kW. Since 2008, however, it has
become common to navigate to lobster beds 40 miles or farther from
shore. The greater traveling distance necessitates more cargo space for
a greater catch, and more speed to complete a day's work in a
reasonable time. These factors caused a demand for larger vessels and
more engine power, which led boat builders to install engines above 600
kW in lobster boats. Prior to the Tier 4 standards taking effect in
2017, engines for these lobster boats were subject to Tier 3 standards
and thus required no aftertreatment technology. As a result, the
lobster-boat engines needed for high speed and ocean navigation could
fit into fiberglass hulls with minimal changes to fiberglass molds, or
vessel design generally.
    Lobster boat builders looking to continue to install engines above
600 kW that are now subject to Tier 4 standards need to prepare for
more fundamental changes to vessel design to account for the room
needed for additional emission control hardware, which raises other
design issues. For example, onboard lobster tanks need to remain
isolated from the reconfigured engine room and exhaust system to
maintain low water temperature. However, lobster boat builders are not
able to make substantial progress in redesigning their vessels until
they have certified or prototype Tier 4 engines available. Once those
engines are available, boat builders can undertake the anticipated
effort to work out specific design needs for installing the Tier 4
engines in each vessel, including any necessary sea trials. A memo to
the docket describes some of the challenges related to designing
lobster boats and other high-speed vessels with SCR-equipped
engines.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Technical Analysis for Amendments Related to Marine Diesel
Engine Emission Standards,'' EPA memorandum from Cheryl Caffrey to
Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0638, August 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pilot Boats. Commercial ports depend on pilot boats to transport
pilots to incoming ships (and from outgoing ships) several miles away
from the port to safely navigate the ships through the shipping
channels and within the port area. Vessel specifications are carefully
tailored to the specific needs of a given port, accounting for a wide
range of factors to ensure safe and effective operation under demanding
conditions. As described above for lobster boats, building a vessel
with a Tier 4 engine and its accompanying catalyst system requires
design changes to handle the engine's greater size and weight. Use of a
new Tier 4 engine and accompanying catalyst system requires a thorough
reassessment of vessel design to accomplish a proper balance between
vessel length and total propulsion power. For example, the vessel would
need engines with higher maximum power output if the vessel's length,
width, or depth increases to accommodate the new engine and the
accompanying catalyst system. One parameter that helps solve the design
challenge is the engine's power density. Increasing power density
allows for more power without increasing total engine weight, which
allows for increasing (or regaining) vessel speed. Tier 4 engines with
the appropriate power ratings for pilot boats are available, but there
are no ratings currently available with power density above 35 kW/liter
displacement. As a result, the available Tier 4 engines are too large
and heavy to allow vessels to meet performance specifications. As Tier
4 engines between 600 and 1,400 kW become available, manufacturers of
pilot boats can start to resolve these vessel design issues, but an
acceptable solution may depend on the availability of Tier 4 engines
that meet the need for higher power density.
    A complicating factor for pilot boats is other federal, state, or
local programs that impose speed restrictions on vessels for certain
vessel lengths. Specifically, pilot boats that operate in certain
coastal areas are subject to whale-strike avoidance rules that are
designed to protect migrating and calving right whales. In designated
areas off the coast of Georgia, for example, vessels 65 feet and longer
may not exceed an operating speed of 10 knots from November 1 to April
30 each year.\9\ The whale-strike avoidance rules increase the demand
for pilot boats that are less than 65 feet long. This additional
constraint further complicates the challenge to design vessels with
Tier 4 engines as the SCR emission control system takes up a
significant amount of already limited space. Here again, the use of
Tier 4 engines will require significant boat changes and more time is
needed to resolve these challenges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The whale-strike avoidance rule was originally adopted by
the National Marine Fisheries Service on October 10, 2008 (73 FR
60173). See 50 CFR part 224.105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other high-speed vessels. Other types of high-speed vessels may
need relief. For example, one boat builder wants to build a high-speed
research vessel for which there are no suitable Tier 4 engines
available. The intended vessel would have a fiberglass hull and is
otherwise similar to lobster boats, as described above. In addition, we
are aware that there are any number of additional applications of high-
speed vessels that may need Tier 4 propulsion engines above 600 kW with
high power density, such as law enforcement, fire-fighting, and charter
fishing. Section V describes provisions to allow for additional lead
time for engines and vessels meeting certain criteria focusing on high-
speed operation and the need for engines with high power density,
rather than naming certain types of vessels. We request comment on the
appropriateness of these proposed engine and vessel criteria to
properly target temporary relief from the Tier 4 standards for the
different types of high-speed vessels that are affected by the lack of
certified engines that are suitable for those vessels. We also request
comment on the annual numbers of each type of each vessel we should
expect to be covered by this rule.
    Hovercraft, while not conventional high-speed vessels, may also be
a more

challenging case for installing Tier 4 engines. Hovercraft devote
substantial engine power to create lift in addition to powering fan
blades for propulsion. These vessels are accordingly especially
sensitive to engine weight. Installing engines with high power density
is important to preserving hovercraft functionality. We request comment
and any supporting information and data related to the use of Tier 4
engines in hovercraft and on the potential need for relief from Tier 4
standards for engines in hovercraft.
2. Engine Manufacturer Challenges
    Tier 4 marine diesel engine standards can be met through
application of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology. SCR has
been in widespread use for many years with a very wide range of engines
and equipment applications. Adapting SCR systems to work with marine
engines requires some additional design and development effort to
produce catalyst systems that work properly and safely in a marine
environment. Hundreds of marine vessels currently operate with SCR
systems, most of which involved retrofitting engines with the
aftertreatment technology. This includes more than 50 newbuild
installations on U.S. vessels with certified Tier 4 engines that
include SCR. Engine manufacturers have also designed and certified some
engine models to Tier 4 standards using SCR technology. Some
manufacturers of other marine engine models are also in the process of
carrying out development programs for their engines using SCR
technology, in part because of EPA's Tier 4 standards, but also because
of the international Tier III NOX standard adopted by the
International Maritime Organization (IMO) under MARPOL Annex VI. This
``IMO Tier III NOX standard'' applies for vessels built in
2016 and later that operate in the North American and U.S. Caribbean
Sea Emission Control Areas.
    The IMO Tier III NOX standard was originally adopted in
2008 to apply starting in 2016 for any future ECAs, including ECAs
adopted for other countries. This would likely have led to widespread
development of SCR-equipped marine engines certified to the IMO Tier
III NOX standard. However, due to subsequent amendments, the
IMO Tier III NOX standard applies in 2016 only for the North
American and U.S. Caribbean Sea Emission Control Areas. The IMO Tier
III NOX standard does not apply for engines on vessels built
before 2021 when operating in the Baltic Sea and North Sea Emission
Control Areas. If other countries designate additional Emission Control
Areas, each one would have its own implementation date for the IMO Tier
III NOX standard. This amendment to the international
standard has delayed the schedule for developing SCR for marine engines
and certifying engines to meet those standards.
    The combination of EPA standards and international NOX
standards in the 2020-2021 time frame is expected to lead engine
manufacturers to continue to develop, certify, and build marine engines
with SCR. There are also European emission standards for inland
waterways that will require manufacturers to design engines with
aftertreatment technologies--SCR for meeting NOX standards
and diesel particulate filters for meeting particulate number
standards.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Regulation (EU) 2016/1628 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 14 September 2016 on requirements relating to gaseous
and particulate pollutant emission limits and type-approval for
internal combustion engines for non-road mobile machinery, amending
Regulations (EU) No. 1024/2012 and (EU) No 167/2013, and amending
and repealing Directive 97/68/EC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certifying to EPA standards requires some development and
demonstration that goes beyond what is required to meet the IMO Tier
III NOX standard. For example, manufacturers certifying
marine diesel engines to EPA standards must (1) meet PM, HC, and CO
standards and (2) demonstrate that engines will continue to meet
standards over the engine's defined regulatory useful life. As with
NOX control, these additional EPA requirements do not pose
insurmountable technical challenges, but they contribute to increasing
the cost of certifying engines.

V. Proposed Relief Related to Emission Standards for Marine Diesel
Engines

    To address the challenges described above, EPA is proposing
revisions to our marine diesel engine emission control program for
certain high-speed vessels and associated engines with rated power
between 600 and 1,400 kW. These changes are intended to allow more time
for engine manufacturers to certify additional engine models and for
vessel manufacturers to design and build products that comply with Tier
4 standards. We are also proposing to better align certification
requirements with the characteristics of these engines, especially as
it relates to demonstrating the durability of emission controls.

1. Adjusted Implementation Dates

    We are proposing to provide additional lead time for implementing
the Tier 4 standards for qualifying engines and vessels as described in
this section and summarized in Table 1. This additional time will allow
engine manufacturers to design and certify engines to the Tier 4
standards that are suitable for use in high-speed vessels. The
additional time will also allow vessel manufacturers to redesign their
vessels as needed to accommodate the Tier 4 technology.
    We are proposing that implementation of the Tier 4 standards for
qualifying engines and vessels would occur in two phases. The first
phase would set model year 2022 as the implementation deadline for
engines installed in a wide range of high-speed vessels. The second
phase would set model year 2024 as the implementation deadline for
engines installed in a narrower set of high-speed vessels that we
believe will require additional lead time.
    We are proposing to limit these revisions to qualifying high-speed
vessels and high power density engines for products that need
additional lead time. Applying relief more broadly would remove demand
for engines certified to Tier 4 standards, even if they would be
suitable for powering those vessels. We would then forego achievable
environmental benefits and could cause those engine and vessel
manufacturers that have already developed Tier 4 compliant engines and
vessels to be left at a competitive disadvantage.
    High-speed vessels may be characterized as planing vessels based on
a hull design that causes the vessel to rise up and experience lower
hydrodynamic drag (with a corresponding decrease in required propulsion
power) when operating at high speed. This contrasts with displacement
hulls, for which propulsion power continues to increase with increasing
vessel speed, and which do not experience the same design and
installation challenges. While this distinction is straightforward,
there is no generally accepted way to draw a clear line between the two
types of vessels. This is illustrated by ``semi-planing'' vessels,
which have operating characteristics that fall between planing and
displacement vessels. The proposed vessel speed criterion is based on
definitions used for ``high-speed craft'' by classification
societies.\11\ Each classification society uses its own definition, but
all follow the same

principles. We are proposing to limit relief to high-speed vessels that
have a maximum operating speed (in knots) at or above 3.0 [middot]
L1/2, where L is the vessel's waterline length, in feet.
This includes an upward adjustment of about 40 percent compared to
published definitions to draw a clearer line to identify high-speed
vessels. As an example, 45-foot vessels would need to have a maximum
speed of at least 23 knots to qualify for relief using the proposed
threshold. The vessels that have been the subject of requests for Tier
4 relief would qualify based on this proposed criterion for high-speed
vessels. Based on our engagement with marine stakeholders in the past
year, we believe vessels whose maximum speed is below the specified
threshold do not have the same sensitivity to engine size and weight
that should qualify them for relief from using Tier 4 engines. The
proposed vessel speed criterion applies equally to both proposed phases
of adjusted implementation dates for the Tier 4 standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Classification societies generally act on behalf of
national governments to oversee implementation of domestic and
international maritime standards for construction and operation of
ships. This typically includes inspections, surveys, and
certification. The International Association of Classification
Societies has twelve members (www.iacs.org.uk).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are other definitions of ``high-speed craft'' that are based
on a vessel's displaced volume rather than the length. A displacement-
based criterion would have the advantage of accounting for a vessel's
draft and beam in addition to the length for a more robust
characterization. On the other hand, since vessel length is much easier
to verify, there is a clear advantage to defining the criterion based
only on the length. We request comment on replacing the proposed vessel
speed criterion with an alternative that is 10 [middot]
d1/6, where d is the vessel's displaced volume corresponding
to the design waterline, in m\3\ or tonnes. The alternative criterion
would be largely equivalent to the proposed criterion, but would
involve a higher qualifying speed for wider vessels.
    Additionally, for both phases of the relief, we are proposing that
the relief apply only to vessels classified as uninspected vessels by
the U.S. Coast Guard.\12\ Coast Guard designates all vessels as either
inspected or uninspected. Inspected vessels carry freight-for-hire or
any hazardous or dangerous cargo. Towing and most passenger vessels are
also inspected. These ships are typically displacement vessels that
operate low in the water and use very large propulsion engines that do
not operate at high speeds. They are also typically custom-designed and
built, meaning vessel manufacturers can and have been able to
accommodate new-tier propulsion and auxiliary engines in new vessels in
a timely manner. As a result, these vessels do not require the proposed
adjusted implementation dates as they are currently being designed and
built with compliant engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Title 46, Chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast, uninspected vessels include recreational vessels not
engaged in trade, non-industrial fishing vessels, very small cargo
vessels (less than 15 gross tons), and miscellaneous vessels such as
pilot boats, patrol and other law-enforcement vessels, fire boats, and
research vessels, among others. Uninspected vessels are likely to be
considerably smaller than inspected vessels and operate at higher
speeds. Also, these vessels are often built on a common design platform
and may use fiberglass hulls that are seldom re-designed. This means
these boats are more likely to be designed to use only certain engines
with a very similar, small footprint, and there can be less flexibility
to rapidly incorporate new engine designs. Not all uninspected vessels
require the adjusted implementation dates proposed in this rule to
address their design constraints, but the contrast between different
vessel types makes clear that the adjusted implementation schedule for
the Tier 4 standards is appropriately focused on uninspected vessels.
    We are proposing to limit relief to propulsion engines of a certain
size on qualifying vessels. Specifically, we propose to limit the first
phase to propulsion engines with maximum power output up to 1,400 kW,
and power density of at least 35.0 kW per liter displacement. Category
1 engines have per-cylinder displacement below 7.0 liters. We are
proposing to additionally limit relief to vessels up to 65 feet in
length with total nameplate propulsion power at or below 2,800 kW (to
accommodate vessels with multiple propulsion engines). The combination
of the limit on maximum power for each engine with the limit on the
total nameplate propulsion power has the practical effect of limiting
relief to vessels with one or two propulsion engines. These criteria
are intended to ensure that relief from the Tier 4 standards is
provided to those engines and vessels that require additional lead
time. We believe vessels not meeting these criteria do not have the
same design challenges described in Section II in this preamble. For
example, vessels longer than 65 feet that are subject to whale-strike
avoidance rules need to operate at reduced speed and are therefore less
sensitive to size and weight constraints that apply for smaller
vessels. Some of these criteria may be redundant; however, we believe
it is best to include multiple parameters as a precaution to ensure
that the relief applies only to those engines and vessels that need
additional lead time.
    We propose to limit the second phase to vessels with a single
propulsion engine with maximum power output up to 1,000 kW and power
density of at least 40.0 kW per liter displacement, where the vessel is
made with a nonmetal hull and has a maximum length of 50 feet.
    We believe vessel manufacturers benefitting only from the first
phase can comply in model year 2022 using engines that we expect to be
certified to Tier 4 standards in 2019 or 2020. We therefore propose to
apply the model year 2022 implementation date for vessels with steel or
aluminum hulls, with vessel length between 50 and 65 feet, with twin-
engine configurations, and needing propulsion engines with power
ratings between 1,000 and 1,400 kW.
    In contrast, vessel manufacturers need additional time to redesign
fiberglass and other nonmetal vessels up to 50 feet long using 600-
1,000 kW engines certified to Tier 4 standards. Based on engine
manufacturers' current projections and project plans, certified engines
with the appropriate power and power density will be not be available
until the latter part of 2020 or 2021. Once suitable Tier 4 engines are
certified, vessel manufacturers will then need time to redesign their
vessels accordingly. We expect this to be a greater challenge for
fiberglass and other nonmetal vessels due to material-related
structural limitations, reliance on molds for construction, and reduced
flexibility in modifying vessel architecture. Nonmetal hulls may be
made with carbon fiber or wood instead of fiberglass.
    In summary, we are proposing to set revised Tier 4 implementation
dates for high power density propulsion engines in two phases based on
engine and vessel characteristics as noted in the following table:

       Table 1--Summary of Qualifying Criteria for Adjusted Tier 4
                          Implementation Dates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Criteria                    Phase 1             Phase 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessel speed (knots)............  >3.0 [middot]       >3.0 [middot]
                                   (feet)\1/2\.        (feet)\1/2\.
USCG vessel classification......  uninspected.......  uninspected.
Engine power density............  >35.0 kW/liter....  >40.0 kW/liter.
Engine power rating.............  <=1,400 kW........  <=1,000 kW.
Total vessel propulsion power...  <=2,800 kW........  <=1,000 kW.
Vessel length...................  <=65 feet.........  <=50 feet.
Vessel hull construction........  any...............  nonmetal.
Model years for continued use of  through 2021......  2022 and 2023.
 Tier 3 Engines.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Engine manufacturers are in the process of developing and
certifying Tier 4 engines with higher power density that would be
suitable for lobster boats, pilot boats, and other high-speed vessels.
We expect engine manufacturers and their distributors and dealers will
continue to provide support for vessel manufacturers as they modify
vessel designs to accommodate the Tier 4 engines. The additional lead
time associated with this proposed rule will allow vessel manufacturers
to reconfigure vessels, create new tooling, perform sea trials, and
start producing compliant vessels.
    For vessel manufacturers to benefit from the proposed relief,
engine manufacturers will need to certify engines to Tier 3 commercial
standards for installation in newly constructed vessels. Vessel
manufacturers may need these engines very soon after we finalize the
proposed provisions. This would generally involve restarting production
of engine configurations that were already certified to the Tier 3
commercial standards before 2017. Engine manufacturers may still be
producing these or substantially equivalent engine configurations as
certified Tier 3 recreational engines or as exempt replacement engines.
In most cases, engine manufacturers can resubmit information from their
earlier Tier 3 application for certification to cover the new
production. As with all EPA standards, we cannot compel engine
manufacturers to certify their engines as contemplated in this proposed
rule, but we expect that engine manufacturers will be responsive to
vessel manufacturer demand and that they will be ready and able to
provide certified engines. We therefore expect vessel manufacturers to
be able to buy the engines they need to continue production during the
transition period.
    The specified criteria clarify which engines and vessels qualify
for continuing to be subject to Tier 3 standards for the extended
transition before meeting the Tier 4 standards. If any engines or
vessels utilize these provisions to comply with Tier 3 standards
without meeting the specified criteria, we would expect to apply the
prohibitions of 40 CFR 1068.101(a)(1) for new engines and vessels
introduced into U.S. commerce based on those engines not being
certified to the Tier 4 standards.
    Hovercraft present a special case. While sales volumes of
hovercraft are very small, they may face the same constraints related
to availability of certified high power density engines and challenges
of redesigning vessels to accommodate Tier 4 engine technology. Because
they do not have a conventional waterline during operation, and maximum
speed is not governed by conventional hydrodynamic principles, the
criteria described above are not effective for qualifying hovercraft
for the proposed adjustment to Tier 4 implementation. As with the other
types of vessels, we expect engine development and certification to
move forward, including engines with more compact aftertreatment
systems. We accordingly request comment on the best approach for
applying Tier 4 standards for hovercraft in a time frame that allows
vessel manufacturers to address technical concerns associated with
designing the vessels with SCR-equipped engines. This might involve
treating hovercraft as a separate sub-category of vessels that qualify
for one or both phases of relief described above for conventional
vessels.

2. Relief Through Waivers for Qualifying Engines and Vessels

    The proposed two-phase approach to adjust Tier 4 implementation for
qualifying engines and vessels would apply without any separate EPA
approval process. For qualifying engines and vessels, the Tier 3 engine
certification requirements would continue to apply for the specified
period.
    We are additionally proposing a waiver process starting in 2024 for
vessels meeting the Phase 2 specifications described in Table 1. We
believe this provision may be needed if engine certification does not
proceed as expected to provide available engines certified to Tier 4
standards with performance characteristics that are appropriate for the
subject high-speed vessels.
    Starting with model year 2024, manufacturers of vessels meeting the
Phase 2 qualifications described in Table 1 would have the option to
request in writing that EPA approve an exemption from the Tier 4
standards for vessels meeting the Phase 2 qualifications described in
Table 1. EPA would evaluate these requests based on the availability of
suitable certified Tier 4 engines at the time of the request for the
intended vessel design. EPA could approve requests covering multiple
vessels, but any approval would apply for a limited duration. As
proposed, the waiver authority does not expire, so it allows
manufacturers of qualifying vessels to avoid installing Tier 4 engines
until suitable certified Tier 4 engine models become available.
    Enforcement would apply as described in Section IV.1 in this
preamble for new engines or vessels introduced into U.S. commerce under
these waiver provisions without meeting the specified criteria.
    We are aware that implementing standards in the context of waiver
provisions raises concerns about inconsistencies within the industry
and unintended consequences. Waiver provisions introduce a measure of
uncertainty for planning and include a risk that some manufacturers
will use the waiver provisions to gain a competitive advantage over
other manufacturers who do not qualify for a waiver (or who choose not
to request a waiver). Waiver provisions also create an administrative
burden for both vessel manufacturers and EPA.
    Considering these challenges related to waivers, we request comment
on an alternative approach of simply adjusting the Tier 4 compliance
deadlines further for the second phase of proposed relief (as
summarized in Table 1). That alternative approach might involve setting
the new start for Tier 4 at model

year 2028. This would allow additional time for engine manufacturers to
certify engines between 600 and 1,000 kW to Tier 4 standards, and for
vessel manufacturers to address installation challenges for the Tier 4
engines and technologies. A disadvantage of such a long-term adjustment
to the Tier 4 implementation schedule is that engine manufacturers
would have less incentive to certify the targeted engines because
vessel manufacturers would not be required to buy and install them in
qualifying vessels for many years.
    We therefore request comment on the need for including waiver
provisions for Tier 4 relief beyond model year 2024. We further request
comment on the alternative of simply allowing more time, and what the
advantages and disadvantages may be for such an approach. Finally, we
request comment on the possibility of relying only on the hardship
exemption provisions in 40 CFR 1068.255 to address concerns for Tier 4
relief beyond 2024.

3. Adjusted Requirements for Certifying Engines

    As described above, there are no high power density engines
currently certified to Tier 4 standards. We have heard that several
engine manufacturers have plans to certify Tier 4 engines within the
next few years. The biggest factor driving these engine product
development and certification decisions is the expected sales volumes
that would allow for recovering the investment in upgrading the
engines. The coming standards for inland waterways in Europe and for
European Emission Control Areas under MARPOL Annex VI are expected to
contribute to demand for increasing sales volumes in a way that would
support decisions to certify Tier 4 engines.
    Based on conversations with engine manufacturers, we expect these
market forces to be sufficient to supply the needed engines to support
building compliant vessels with Tier 4 engines according to the revised
schedule described above. Even so, we are proposing to revise engine
certification requirements to reduce the costs and time needed for
engine manufacturers to certify engines with high power density to Tier
4 standards. These proposed provisions are intended to help accelerate
the market entry of Tier 4 marine engines with high power density.
a. Temporary Provision for Assigned Deterioration Factors
    We are proposing a temporary provision allowing engine
manufacturers to certify specific engines to Tier 4 standards based on
assigned deterioration factors. Engine manufacturers rely on
deterioration factors so they can test a new engine and adjust the test
results mathematically to represent emission levels at full useful
life. The regulations currently allow assigned deterioration factors
only for small-volume engine manufacturers and post-manufacture
marinizers. Assigned deterioration factors would reduce the cost and
time to certify to Tier 4 standards, which would accelerate the
schedule for certifying, and may lead manufacturers to make a decision
to pursue Tier 4 certification in light of the expected low sales
volumes for recovering the associated development costs.
    To target the engines needed for high-speed vessels, we are
proposing to allow assigned deterioration factors for 600-1,000 kW
engines with power density above 35.0 kW/liter displacement through
model year 2025, and for 1,000-1,400 kW engines with power density
above 40.0 kW/liter displacement through model year 2023. These dates
are set to apply for the first two years after the Tier 4 standards
start to apply on the adjusted schedule, with the expectation that
engine manufacturers could accumulate information on the durability
characteristics of engines for those two model years before needing to
develop family-specific deterioration factors.
    There are currently no certified Tier 4 engines between 600 and
1,000 kW that are approaching 35.0 kW/liter displacement, so we believe
it is appropriate for this power range to rely on the 35.0 kW/liter
threshold that was used to set standards for Tier 3 commercial engines.
In contrast, in the 1,000-1,400 kW range, there is already one
certified Tier 4 engine that is close to 35.0 kW/liter displacement. We
want to avoid creating relief for new certifications that would provide
a competitive advantage over engines that are already certified using
established procedures for durability testing. The higher power density
threshold of 40.0 kW/liter displacement for 1,000-1,400 kW engines
provides that buffer relative to engines already certified to Tier 4
standards.
    We have reviewed available data to support proposing default values
for assigned deterioration factors. The proposed deterioration factors
are multiplicative values of 1.1 for NOX and 1.4 for HC and
CO, and an additive value of 0.003 g/kW-hr for PM.\13\ Where an
individual engine manufacturer has existing data available, for
example, from certified land-based versions of their marine engines,
EPA would consider that information, consistent with 40 CFR
1042.245(b), and may adjust the value of one or more default assigned
deterioration factors accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ ``Technical Analysis for Amendments Related to Marine
Diesel Engine Emission Standards,'' EPA memorandum from Cheryl
Caffrey to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0638, August 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Engine manufacturers would need to certify using family-specific
deterioration factors in the first model year after the assigned
deterioration factors are no longer available. This could be based on a
conventional durability demonstration based on emission measurements
before and after an extended period of service accumulation in the
laboratory. It could alternatively be based on laboratory measurements
after engines accumulate service hours when installed in vessels.
Either of these approaches is permissible under current regulations
(see 40 CFR 1042.245(c)). This approach would provide engine
manufacturers with significant flexibility to determine deterioration
factors. Test plans should be submitted to EPA in advance for review
and approval. We would be ready to work through any testing or
measurement issues as manufacturers work toward the goal of collecting
robust information for determining appropriate deterioration factors.
    We request comment on expanding the provisions for durability
demonstrations to include both service accumulation and emission
measurements with engines installed in vessels. We have procedures in
place in 40 CFR part 1065, subpart J, to describe how to perform in-
field measurements, but we would need to work out how to control engine
operation to mimic the certification duty cycles, among other things.
Concerns about removing engines for laboratory measurement are
especially pronounced for larger engines. For many engines, it may be
preferable to rely on laboratory measurements after service
accumulation in a vessel, but waiving the requirement to measure
emissions halfway through the service accumulation period.
b. Reduced Regulatory Useful Life for Light Commercial Engines
    There are currently no engines certified to Tier 4 standards with
power density above 35 kW per liter displacement. Engine manufacturers
have expressed concerns about meeting the Tier 4 standards for a
regulatory useful life of 10,000 hours. We

acknowledge that higher engine power ratings generally come from higher
intake air pressures and greater fuel flow into the engine, which can
cause some engine and aftertreatment components to wear out sooner.
Engines with lower power density are designed for continuous operation
for very long periods with minimal downtime. Engines with high power
density are inherently lighter weight and have a shorter time before
scheduled rebuilding. Under our current regulations, commercial marine
engines are generally subject to the same regulatory useful life
regardless of the power density. However, the performance demands
associated with high power density make it more difficult to
demonstrate that engines with aftertreatment technology will meet Tier
4 standards over the full regulatory useful life.
    We are proposing to address this concern with an interim provision
to establish a shorter regulatory useful life for commercial engines
with very high power densities. The current regulatory useful life for
these engines is 10,000 hours. We are specifically proposing to apply a
new ``light commercial'' useful life of 5,000 hours for engines
certified to the Tier 4 standards with power density above 50.0 kW/
liter displacement. The 50.0 kW/liter threshold corresponds to power
densities for engines certified to recreational engine standards.
Commercial engine ratings can achieve power density consistent with
engines used in recreational vessels. However, in contrast to
recreational vessels, these light commercial vessels do not have
operational characteristics that limit engine hours to very low levels.
The proposed shorter useful life of 5,000 hours reflects the effects of
high power density on engine durability in the context of vessels that
have operational characteristics based on their commercial
applications. We request comment and supporting information and data on
the threshold for creating a sub-category of light commercial engines,
and on the value of the useful life that should apply for certifying
those engines. Any comments on the value of the useful life should
include consideration of the recommended rebuild intervals for specific
power densities.
    These engines would also qualify for EPA-assigned deterioration
factors as described above. Since the useful life decreases from 10,000
hours to 5,000 hours for qualifying engines, we would expect to adjust
the values of assigned deterioration factors correspondingly. For
example, the value of the deterioration factor for NOX would
decrease from 1.1 to 1.05; the value of the deterioration factor for HC
and CO would decrease from 1.4 to 1.2; and the value of the
deterioration factor for PM would decrease from 0.003 to 0.0015 g/kW-
hr.
    We are not proposing a sunset date for this interim provision for a
shorter useful life, but we expect in the future to consider whether we
should discontinue it after a satisfactory transition to Tier 4
standards for these engines, or whether we should continue to apply it
indefinitely.
c. Engine Duty Cycle for Certification Testing
    EPA's emission standards for marine diesel engines have always
relied on the ``E3'' duty cycle specified by the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) for engines installed in
commercial vessels with fixed-pitch propellers. This duty cycle
includes four steady-state operating modes ranging from 25 to 100
percent of rated power, with the highest weighting for emissions at the
higher-power modes. This weighting allows for calculating a composite
emission test result to represent typical in-use operation. In
contrast, the ISO E5 duty cycle, which applies for engines installed in
recreational vessels, adds an idle mode and shifts the weighting for
the other modes to place greater emphasis on low- and mid-power
operation. The ISO E5 duty cycle was designed to apply for all vessels
under 24 meters (78.7 feet) in length. The ISO duty cycles were perhaps
developed with the simplifying assumption that vessels under 24 meters
were high-speed planing vessels, and vessels longer than 24 meters were
displacement vessels with corresponding extended operation at high
engine loads. In previous rulemakings we chose instead to differentiate
cycles only based on recreational vs. commercial installations to
simplify certification for engine manufacturers. Engines may be
installed in many different sizes and types of vessels, so we decided
to apply the ISO E3 duty cycle for all commercial installations. Table
2 illustrates the speed and power settings for the ISO E3 and E5 duty
cycles.

                       Table 2--Speed and Power Settings for the ISO E3 and E5 Duty Cycles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Percent of
             Mode No.                       Engine speed           maximum test    E3 weighting    E5 weighting
                                                                       power          factors         factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................................  Maximum test speed...........             100            0.20            0.08
2................................  91%..........................              75            0.50            0.13
3................................  80%..........................              50            0.15            0.17
4................................  63%..........................              25            0.15            0.32
5................................  Warm idle....................               0  ..............            0.30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Focusing on engines with high power density brings us back to the
question of duty cycles. Based on our knowledge and discussions with
marine industry stakeholders, we expect that anyone operating a
commercial engine with high power density will not be operating the
vessel predominantly at or near full power. Operating engines with high
power density for prolonged periods at or near full power would lead to
a much shorter engine life. Engine manufacturers often describe engines
with low power density at ``continuous ratings'' and engines with high
power density as ``intermittent ratings.'' We would expect operators of
vessels with high power density engines to spend the most time at idle
and low-power or mid-power operation, with occasional use at full
power.\14\ In short, it appears that engines with high power density
would be best represented by operation over the ISO E5 duty cycle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ ``Technical Analysis for Amendments Related to Marine
Diesel Engine Emission Standards,'' EPA memorandum from Cheryl
Caffrey to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0638, August 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This observation applies most directly to engines with power
density above

50.0 kW/liter displacement, where the engine's maximum power output
leads to an expectation for shorter operating life (as described
above). It applies, though to a lesser degree for engines with power
density between 35.0 and 50.0 kW/liter displacement.
    Measuring emission levels over a different duty cycle would yield
different results, though it is not clear for a given engine
calibration whether one cycle or the other would have higher emission
levels. Perhaps more importantly, manufacturers would be able to adjust
calibrations to fine-tune emission controls to work most effectively
over the cycle that is most appropriate for a certain application.
    We are considering amendments to adjust duty-cycle testing
requirements for marine diesel engines. We would generally want to
avoid changing the stringency of standards for engines that are already
certified using existing test procedures. On the other hand, as noted
above, there are no certified Tier 4 engines with power density above
35 kW/liter displacement. This same dynamic applies for engines below
600 kW, so we are also considering whether and how to adjust specified
duty cycles for commercial engines with high power density that
continue to be subject to Tier 3 standards.
    In particular, we request comment on specifying the ISO E5 duty
cycle for all commercial engines with power density above 35.0 kW/liter
displacement. This could be instead of the ISO E3 duty cycle, or we
could give manufacturers the option to select one cycle, or we could
specify that manufacturers must meet standards using both cycles.
Comments should address whether any recommended approach should apply
differently for engines above or below 600 kW. Comments should also
address whether any recommended approach should apply differently for
engines at different levels of power density. We could, for example,
make testing with the ISO E5 duty cycle optional for engines between
35.0 and 45.0 kW/liter displacement, and mandatory for engines above
45.0 kW/liter displacement.

VI. Economic and Environmental Impacts

1. Marine Diesel Engine Standards

    We prepared an analysis of the economic, inventory, and human
health and welfare impacts of this proposal using the inventory and
cost estimation methods used to support our 2008 Final Rule and a
simplified health benefits estimation method.\15\ The results of that
analysis are set out in Table 3 and summarized below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See ``Assessment Analysis: Proposed Marine CI Tier 4
Rule,'' EPA memorandum from Jean Marie Revelt, to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-
2018-0638, August 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to costs, this proposal imposes no additional economic
costs above those included in our 2008 rulemaking. Instead, we estimate
that this proposal would result in cost reduction of about $5.4
million, using a behavioral modeling approach, or $5.8 million, using a
full-cost pass-through approach (2018$). These are the estimated cost
reductions from installing less expensive Tier 3 engines in new vessels
during the relief period (2019 through 2023) and the associated
operating cost reductions during the 13-year lifetime of those engines
(2019 through 2035).
    With respect to emission inventory impacts, the proposed amendment
rule would change the implementation date of the Tier 4 standards for
qualifying engines and vessels from 2017 to 2024, which would delay the
emission and air quality benefits of those standards. The estimated
annual increase in NOX and PM10 \16\ emissions
associated with the proposed relief is about 108 and 2.3 short tons,
respectively, in 2019, when both sets of engines are affected,
decreasing to 37 and 1 ton, respectively, in 2022 and 2023, when only
those engines 600 kW to 1,000 kW are affected. The lifetime inventory
increase is estimated to be about 5,098 tons of NOX and 107
tons of PM10, assuming a 13-year lifetime. This represents
less than one-tenth of one percent of the national annual emissions for
these pollutants from commercial Category 1 marine diesel engines
(i.e., engines below 7.0 liters per cylinder displacement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Consistent with the 2008 Rule, this inventory analysis is
for PM10. In the 2008 rule, PM2.5 was
estimated at 97% of PM10.

                                                    Table 3--Estimated Impacts on Emissions and Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             NOX increase    PM10 increase
                                               Affected        per year        per year                                                   Operating cost
                   Year                       engines per    (short tons)    (short tons)        Compliance cost reduction (2005$) *         reduction
                                                 year                                                                                (2005$)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019......................................              25           108.1             2.3  $456,000 to $531,000........................         $36,000
2020......................................              25           216.3             4.6  $456,000 to $531,000........................          72,000
2021......................................              25           324.4             6.8  $353,000 to $417,000........................         108,000
2022......................................              21           361.0             7.6  $302,000 to $359,000........................         138,240
2023......................................              21           397.6             8.4  $302,000 to $359,000........................         168,480
2024......................................               0           397.6             8.4  0...........................................         168,480
                                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lifetime Impacts (sum of 2019-2035).......             117           5,098             107                      $4.1 to $4.4 million.
                                                                                ($5.4 to $5.8 million 2018$)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Costs were modeled in 2005$; lifetime impacts were converted in the final step of the analysis. Lower value of costs impacts estimated with a
  behavioral modeling approach, upper value estimated with a full-cost pass-through modeling approach. See ``Assessment Analysis: Proposed Marine CI
  Tier 4 Rule,'' EPA memorandum from Jean Marie Revelt, to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0638 for details.

    Finally, with respect to human health and welfare benefits, the
forgone emissions reductions described above would also be associated
with forgone improvements in human health. Using reduced form health
benefit per ton values,\17\ we estimate that the annual
PM2.5-related forgone benefits do not exceed a high-end
estimate of $4.0 million in any given year (2015$). The total present
value of the stream of forgone benefits over the years 2019 through
2035 range from $13 million to $41 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ PM2.5-related health benefits are estimated by
applying sector-specific (C1/C2 marine vessel engine) benefit per
ton values for NOX and directly-emitted PM2.5
using a source apportionment approach that has been used past EPA
analyses. See: Wolfe, P., Davidson, K. Fulcher, C., Fann, N.,
Zawacki, M., Baker, K.R. (2018). Monetized health benefits
attributable to mobile source emission reductions across the United
States in 2025. STOTEN, 650 (2019) 2490-2498, September.

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

    Reduced form tools, by their nature, are subject to
uncertainty.\18\ In addition to the uncertainties present across the
entire emissions-to-impact pathway, it is important to note that the
monetized benefit per ton estimates used here reflect the geographic
patterns of the underlying emissions and air quality modeling
assumptions. They do not necessarily reflect the conditions of the
policy scenario in which they are applied, which can lead to an over-
or underestimate of benefits. For this analysis, as mentioned in
discussion above, the forgone benefits may be overstated in a location
like Maine, since there will be some transport of emissions offshore or
to areas external to the United States with different population and
geographic characteristics. However, for this analysis, this
uncertainty is acceptable for characterizing a range of potential
impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See EPA (2018). Technical Support Document: Estimating the
Benefit per Ton of Reducing PM2.5 Precursors from 17
Sectors. Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Research Triangle Park, February.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Global Marine Fuel

    A new global marine fuel standard of 0.50 percent (5,000 ppm)
sulfur adopted into MARPOL Annex VI by the International Maritime
Organization will go into effect on January 1, 2020 (``global marine
fuel''). The U.S. refining industry has shared that they are well
positioned to supply fuel meeting this new IMO standard.\19\ However,
they have also informed us that existing provisions in our diesel fuel
regulations may lead to confusion as to their ability to distribute
fuel in the United States that meets the 2020 standard for global
marine fuel. We are therefore proposing changes to our regulatory text
to clarify that U.S. refiners can confidently distribute global marine
fuel up to the 5,000 ppm sulfur limit, which will facilitate smooth
implementation of the 2020 global marine fuel standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See, for example, the website for the Coalition for
American Energy Security at https://americanenergysecurity.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To be clear, EPA is not proposing to adopt new marine fuel sulfur
limits in this rule. The purpose of the proposed fuel program changes,
as explained in Section II, is to modify a historical regulatory
provision that may now have the unintended consequence of limiting
flexibility for the distribution and sale in the United States of
marine fuel that meets the sulfur limits for global marine fuel.
Because there is no change to the fuel sulfur limits on fuels used in
the United States, the proposed change is not expected to have an
impact on U.S. air quality. However, by providing additional
flexibility, the proposed change may reduce the costs of U.S. fuel
suppliers providing global marine fuel that meets the MARPOL Annex VI
global sulfur cap of 5,000 ppm, as explained below.
    Under the regulations at 40 CFR part 80, marine distillate fuel
with a T90 value below 700 [deg]F is either Nonroad, Locomotive or
Marine (NRLM) diesel fuel, limited to 15 ppm sulfur, or ECA marine
fuel, limited to 1,000 ppm sulfur and can be used or made available for
use only in engines on Category 3 vessels.\20\ To comply with the 5,000
ppm global marine fuel standard, ship owners and operators can purchase
residual fuels, distillate fuels, or mixtures of the two that fall
below the 5,000 ppm cap.\21\ EPA's existing regulations did not
contemplate the potential for a distillate fuel being produced and
distributed in the United States above 1,000 ppm, and therefore, to
enhance the enforcement of our domestic fuel requirements, EPA's
existing regulations preclude the distribution of higher sulfur
distillate fuel in the United States. This limitation now hinders the
ability of U.S. refiners to supply global marine fuel to the world
market, as 1,000 ppm or lower distillate fuel may not be cost
competitive with other 5,000 ppm sulfur options available. Ship owners
and operators would likely choose to buy 5,000 ppm residual fuel or
purchase their fuel in other countries rather than incur the additional
cost of buying distillate marine fuel with less than 1,000 ppm sulfur
in the United States. Rather than lose market share or absorb the price
differential, we expect U.S. fuel providers to find ways within our
regulations to supply the global marine fuel market, such as exporting
higher sulfur distillate fuels and blending or using those fuels
outside the United States; however, the inefficiency caused by our
current limitation on distributing distillate fuel above 1,000 ppm will
make it harder for U.S. fuel providers to competitively supply global
marine fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ T90 refers to the point in a distillation process at which
90 percent of the fuel has evaporated.
    \21\ Under 40 CFR, residual fuel is a petroleum fuel that can
only be used in diesel engines if it is preheated before injection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA does not have foreknowledge of the extent to which ship owners
and operators would choose to use 5,000 ppm distillate fuel instead of
residual fuel or distillate-residual fuel blends and cannot predict the
extent to which ship owners and operators will be bunkering their
vessels in the United States under the new global marine fuel standard.
However, we can say with confidence that removing the restriction on
the distribution of distillate fuel between 1,000 ppm and 5,000 ppm in
the United States will provide greater flexibility for supplying the
global marine fuel market and could therefore nominally reduce fuel
costs. U.S. refiners have also requested that EPA make this regulatory
change to provide clearly defined regulations that will provide a level
playing field for all potential U.S. suppliers. Such clarity will aid
them in finalizing their fuel supply and distribution plans.
    We request comment on the extent to which this regulatory change
might adjust U.S. fuel suppliers' decisions and actions to supply the
global marine fuel market, the extent to which this action might help
with overall global marine fuel supply, and what the associated costs,
cost savings and other effects might be. We are interested in
information that will shed light on measuring how behaviors may change
relative to the U.S. baseline production plans (with no regulatory
change), and what that baseline may be. For instance, would the
relevant baseline be: (1) Distribution of distillate fuel with 1000 ppm
sulfur limits in the U.S. for sale as a global marine fuel; (2)
distribution of residual fuel with 5000 ppm sulfur limits in the U.S.
for sale as a global marine fuel; (3) some combination of both
approaches; or (4) some other approach? Such information would be used
to assess the potential additional flexibility for U.S. fuel suppliers
and the ships that use this fuel and the associated cost savings.
Specifically, we request comment on the amount of 5,000 ppm distillate
fuel that would be sold in the United States for use into the global
marine fuel market with the proposed amendment, including price
projections and other market specific information. While we recognize
that the effects of the global 2020 IMO Standards are not attributable
to this rule, we would be interested in further information related to
this transition where such information is relevant for assessing the
impacts of this proposed action on U.S. fuel suppliers.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory
action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this rule can be found
in EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with
this action.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document
that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2602.01. You can
find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly
summarized here. OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities related to marine diesel engine emission standards in 40 CFR
part 1042 under OMB control number 2060-0287.
    Information collection is limited to manufacturers of qualifying
high-speed vessels requesting a waiver from the Tier 4 standards after
the standards restart in model year 2024. We are adopting this as a
precaution, in case engine certification and further technology
development for installing Tier 4 engines does not allow for complying
with standards in 2024. We will protect confidential business
information as described in 40 CFR part 2.
    Respondents/affected entities: Manufacturers of high-speed vessels.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Response is required to get
EPA's approval for a waiver from Tier 4 standards.
    Estimated number of respondents: 0.
    Frequency of response: There are no recurring responses.
    Total estimated burden: 0 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $0 per year, including $0 per year in
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments
to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60
days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than October 7,
2019. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final
rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This proposed rule is expected to provide
regulatory flexibility to small owners and operators of U.S. vessels.
We have therefore concluded that this action will have no adverse
regulatory impact for any directly regulated small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local, or tribal governments.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This proposed rule will be implemented at the
Federal level and affects owners and operators of U.S. vessels. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866. This
action's assessment of the environmental impact of the rule contained
in Section V shows that the rule will have a very small impact, which
will not have a disproportionate effect on children's health.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Section V describes how we expect this
rule to have a small overall environmental impact.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations, and Low-Income Populations

    EPA believes this action does not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations,
low-income populations or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Due to the small
environmental impact, this proposed regulatory flexibility will not
have a disproportionate adverse effect on minority populations, low-
income populations, or indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 80

    Environmental protection, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Greenhouse
gases, Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 1042

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Imports,
Labeling, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels,
Warranties.

    Dated: August 26, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth above, EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR parts
80 and 1042 as follows:

PART 80--REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7542, 7545, and 7601(a).

0
2. Section 80.2 is amended by adding paragraph (aa) to read as follows:

Sec.  80.2   Definitions.

* * * * *
    (aa) Global marine fuel means diesel fuel, distillate fuel, or
residual fuel used, intended for use, or made available for use in
steamships or Category 3 marine vessels while the vessels are operating
in international waters or in any waters outside the boundaries of an
ECA. Global marine fuel is subject to the provisions of MARPOL Annex
VI.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 80.501 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (a)(6) and (7)
as paragraphs (a)(7) and (8), and adding a new paragraph (a)(6) to read
as follows:

Sec.  80.501   What fuel is subject to the provisions of this subpart?

    (a) * * *
    (6) Distillate global marine fuel.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 80.590 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (a) introductory text and adding paragraph (a)(7)(viii) to
read as follows:

Sec.  80.590   What are the product transfer document requirements for
motor vehicle diesel fuel, NRLM diesel fuel, heating oil, global marine
fuel, ECA marine fuel, and other distillates?

    (a) This paragraph (a) applies on each occasion that any person
transfers custody or title to MVNRLM diesel fuel, heating oil, global
marine fuel, or ECA marine fuel (including distillates used or intended
to be used as MVNRLM diesel fuel, heating oil, global marine fuel, or
ECA marine fuel) except when such fuel is dispensed into motor vehicles
or nonroad equipment, locomotives, marine diesel engines or steamships
or Category 3 vessels. Note that 40 CFR part 1043 specifies
requirements for documenting fuel transfers to certain marine vessels.
For all fuel transfers subject to this paragraph (a), the transferor
must provide to the transferee documents which include the following
information:
* * * * *
    (7) * * *
    (viii) Global marine fuel. ``For use only in steamships or Category
3 marine vessels outside of an Emission Control Area (ECA), consistent
with MARPOL Annex VI.''
* * * * *
0
5. Section 80.598 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(G) and
(b)(8)(iii) to read as follows:

Sec.  80.598   What are the designation requirements for refiners,
importers, and distributors?

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (G) Exempt distillate fuels such as global marine fuels under Sec.
80.605, fuels that are covered by a national security exemption under
Sec.  80.606, fuels that are used for purposes of research and
development pursuant to Sec.  80.607, and fuels used in the U.S.
Territories pursuant to Sec.  80.608 (including additional identifying
information).
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (8) * * *
    (iii) Exempt distillate fuels such as global marine fuels under
Sec.  80.605, fuels that are covered by a national security exemption
under Sec.  80.606, fuels that are used for purposes of research and
development pursuant to Sec.  80.607, and fuels used in the U.S.
Territories pursuant to Sec.  80.608 (including additional identifying
information).
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec.  80.602 by revising the section heading and paragraphs
(a) and (b)(4)(i) to read as follows:

Sec.  80.602   What records must be kept by entities in the NRLM diesel
fuel, ECA marine fuel, global marine fuel, and diesel fuel additive
production, importation, and distribution systems?

    (a) Records that must be kept by parties in the NRLM diesel fuel,
ECA marine fuel, global marine fuel and diesel fuel additive
production, importation, and distribution systems. Beginning June 1,
2007, or June 1, 2006, if that is the first period credits are
generated under Sec.  80.535, any person who produces, imports, sells,
offers for sale, dispenses, distributes, supplies, offers for supply,
stores, or transports nonroad, locomotive or marine diesel fuel, or ECA
marine fuel (beginning June 1, 2014) subject to the provisions of this
subpart, must keep all the records specified in this paragraph (a).
These recordkeeping requirements for global marine fuel start January
1, 2020.
    (1) The applicable product transfer documents required under
Sec. Sec.  80.590 and 80.591.
    (2) For any sampling and testing for sulfur content for a batch of
NRLM diesel fuel produced or imported and subject to the 15 ppm sulfur
standard or any sampling and testing for sulfur content of any fuel
subject to the provisions of this subpart as part of a quality
assurance testing program, and any sampling and testing for cetane
index, aromatics content, marker solvent yellow 124 content or dye
solvent red 164 content of NRLM diesel fuel, ECA marine fuel, NRLM
diesel fuel additives or heating oil:
    (i) The location, date, time and storage tank or truck
identification for each sample collected;
    (ii) The name and title of the person who collected the sample and
the person who performed the testing; and
    (iii) The results of the tests for sulfur content (including, where
applicable, the test results with and without application of the
adjustment factor under Sec.  80.580(d)), for cetane index or aromatics
content, dye solvent red 164, marker solvent yellow 124 (as
applicable), and the volume of product in the storage tank or container
from which the sample was taken.
    (3) The actions the party has taken, if any, to stop the sale or
distribution of any NRLM diesel fuel, global marine fuel, or ECA marine
fuel found not to be in compliance with the sulfur standards specified
in this subpart, and the actions the party has taken, if any, to
identify the cause of any noncompliance and prevent future instances of
noncompliance.
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) NRLM diesel fuel, NR diesel fuel, LM diesel fuel, global marine
fuel, ECA marine fuel, or heating oil, as applicable.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 80.605 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  80.605   Global marine fuel exemption.

    (a) The standards of this subpart I do not apply to global marine
fuel that is produced, imported, sold, offered for sale, supplied,
offered for supply, stored, dispensed, or transported for use in
steamships or Category 3 marine vessels when operating outside of ECA
boundaries.
    (b) The exempt fuel must meet all the following conditions:
    (1) It must not exceed 0.50 weight percent sulfur (5.0[middot]10\3\
ppm).

    (2) It must be accompanied by product transfer documents as
required under Sec.  80.590.
    (3) It must be designated as specified under Sec.  80.598.
    (4) It must be segregated from non-exempt fuel at all points in the
distribution system.
    (5) It may not be used in any vehicles, engines, or equipment other
than those referred to in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Fuel not meeting the conditions specified in paragraph (b) of
this section is subject to the standards, requirements, and
prohibitions that apply for MVNRLM diesel fuel. Similarly, any person
who produces, imports, sells, offers for sale, supplies, offers for
supply, stores, dispenses, or transports global marine fuel without
meeting the recordkeeping requirements under Sec.  80.602 may not claim
the fuel is exempt from the standards, requirements, and prohibitions
that apply for MVNRLM diesel fuel.

PART 1042--CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE MARINE
COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES AND VESSELS

0
8. The authority citation for part 1042 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

0
9. Section 1042.145 is amended by adding paragraphs (k) through (o) to
read as follows:

Sec.  1042.145   Interim provisions.

* * * * *
    (k) Adjusted implementation dates for Tier 4 standards. Engines and
vessels may qualify for delaying the Tier 4 standards specified in
Sec.  1042.101 as follows:
    (1) The delay is limited to model year 2021 and earlier engines and
vessels that meet all the following characteristics:
    (i) Category 1 propulsion engines with specific power density above
35.0 kW/liter, up to maximum engine power of 1,400 kW.
    (ii) Vessels have total propulsion power at or below 2,800 kW.
    (iii) Vessel length is at or below 65 feet.
    (iv) Vessels qualify as uninspected vessels under 46 CFR 2.01-7.
    (v) Vessels have a maximum speed (in knots) at or above 3.0
 L1/2, where L is the vessel's waterline length, in
feet.
    (2) The delay also applies for model years 2022 and 2023 for
engines and vessels that meet all the following characteristics:
    (i) Category 1 propulsion engines with specific power density above
40.0 kW/liter, up to maximum engine power of 1,000 kW.
    (ii) Vessels have total propulsion power at or below 1,000 kW.
    (iii) Vessel length is at or below 50 feet.
    (iv) Vessels qualify as uninspected vessels under 46 CFR 2.01-7.
    (v) Vessels have a maximum speed (in knots) at or above 3.0
 L1/2, where L is the vessel's waterline length, in
feet.
    (vi) Vessels have fiberglass or other nonmetal hulls.
    (3) Affected engines must instead be certified to the appropriate
Tier 3 emission standards specified in Sec.  1042.101. Engine
manufacturers may include engine configurations with maximum engine
power below 600 kW in the same engine family even if the power density
is below the value specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this
section.
    (4) If you introduce an engine into U.S. commerce under this
section, you must meet the labeling requirements in Sec.  1042.135, but
add the following statement instead of the compliance statement in
Sec.  1042.135(c)(10):
    THIS MARINE ENGINE COMPLIES WITH U.S. EPA TIER 3 EMISSION STANDARDS
UNDER 40 CFR 1042.145(k). ANY OTHER INSTALLATION OR USE OF THIS ENGINE
MAY BE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW SUBJECT TO CIVIL PENALTY.
    (l) [Reserved]
    (m) Tier 4 waiver. Starting in model year 2024, vessel
manufacturers may request an exemption from the Tier 4 standards as
follows:
    (1) The subject vessels and engines must meet the qualifications of
paragraph (k)(2) of this section.
    (2) Vessel manufacturers must send a written request for the
exemption to the Designated Compliance Officer. The request must
describe efforts taken to identify available engines certified to the
Tier 4 standards and design efforts for installing engines in the
subject vessels. The request must also identify the number of vessels
needing exempt engines. We will approve exemption requests
demonstrating that there is no suitable engine certified to the Tier 4
standards and that engine and vessel manufacturers will meet all the
terms and conditions that apply.
    (3) Engine manufacturers may ship exempt engines under this
paragraph (m) only after receiving a written request from a vessel
manufacturer who has received our approval to build a specific number
of vessels. The prohibitions in Sec.  1068.101(a)(1) do not apply to a
new engine that is subject to Tier 4 standards, subject to the
following conditions:
    (i) The engine meets the appropriate Tier 3 emission standards in
Sec.  1042.101 consistent with the provisions specified in Sec.
1068.265 of this chapter.
    (ii) The engine is installed on a vessel consistent with the
conditions of this paragraph (m).
    (iii) The engine meets the labeling requirements in Sec.  1042.135,
with the following statement instead of the compliance statement in
Sec.  1042.135(c)(10):
    THIS MARINE ENGINE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH CURRENT U.S. EPA EMISSION
STANDARDS UNDER 40 CFR 1042.145(m). ANY OTHER INSTALLATION OR USE OF
THIS ENGINE MAY BE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW SUBJECT TO CIVIL PENALTY.
    (n) Assigned deterioration factors. Engine manufacturers may use
assigned deterioration factors for certifying Tier 4 engines with
maximum power up to 1,400 kW, as follows:
    (1) For engine families that have at least one configuration with
maximum engine power at or below 1,400 kW and power density above 40.0
kW/liter, you may use assigned deterioration factors through model year
2023.
    (2) For engine families that have at least one configuration with
maximum engine power at or below 1,000 kW and power density above 35.0
kW/liter, you may use assigned deterioration factors through model year
2025.
    (3) The assigned deterioration factors are multiplicative values of
1.1 for NOX and 1.4 for HC and CO, and an additive value of
0.003 g/kW-hr for PM, unless we approve your request to use different
values. We will approve your proposed values if you demonstrate that
they better represent your engines based on data from similar engines
you have certified.
    (o) Useful life for light-commercial engines. Commercial Category 1
engines at or above 600 kW with power density above 50.0 kW/liter are
subject to the exhaust emission standards of this part over a full
useful life of 10 years or 5,000 hours of operation instead of the
useful-life values specified in Sec.  1042.101(e).

[FR Doc. 2019-19092 Filed 9-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P