federal register - U.S. Government Printing Office

Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules6381to require that all Tier 0 locomotives beequipped with MW-hr meters, thusresulting in a single useful lifedefinition (MW-hrs) for Tier 0locomotives, and a single category ofcredits for Tier 0 locomotives.The leadtime the Agency is proposingfor compliance with today’s emissionsstandards is intended to allow all enginefamilies to be able to comply. EPArecognizes that some engine familiesmay be able to comply prior to theeffective date of the proposed standards.However, EPA expects that theseproposed regulations will be finalized inDecember of 1997, by which time themanufacturers are expected to havefinalized their 1998 and 1999production plans. Thus, the Agencydoes not believe it would be practical torequire a phase-in of the proposedstandards prior to 2000 across the entireindustry, but would like to encouragethe early introduction of cleanerlocomotives. Thus, EPA is proposing toallow manufacturers andremanufacturers to begin bankingcredits for locomotives and locomotiveengines as early as one year prior to theeffective date of the standard, (i.e., the1999 model year). EPA is proposingthat, for early banking, manufacturersand remanufacturers could receive NO Xand/or PM emission credits for enginescertified to FELs below the NO X and/orPM standards which take effect in 2000.The NO X and PM credits would becalculated based on the differencebetween the FEL and the correspondingemission standard for the appropriateduty-cycle. The Agency requestscomment on whether it should furtherencourage the early introduction ofcleaner locomotives and locomotiveengines by giving credits for earlycertification in excess of what would begenerated relative to the applicablestandards. For example, should alocomotive which is certified as meetingthe Tier I standards in 1999 be givencredit relative to the Tier 0 standards,given that it would otherwise not haveto meet any standards initially, and onlythe Tier 0 standards at remanufacture?EPA recognizes that credits generatedearly could be used in later years andthat there may be little net benefit in thelong term from such an approach, butnonetheless sees a benefit inencouraging earlier emissionsreductions.Consistent with the current ABTprogram for nonroad engines over 37kW, credits are proposed to have a threeyear lifetime with no annualdiscounting. The Agency requestscomment on the proposed three yearcredit life, as well as an infinite creditlife. The Agency also requests commenton the proposal that credits not bediscounted with time, as well as annualdiscounting rates of up to 20 percent.Participation in the proposedlocomotive ABT program would bevoluntary. For those manufacturers andremanufacturers who choose to utilizethe program, compliance forparticipating engine families would beevaluated in two ways. First,compliance of individual enginefamilies with their FELs would bedetermined and enforced in the samemanner as compliance with theemission standards in the absence of anaveraging, banking and trading program.Each engine family must certify to theFEL (or FELs, as applicable), and theFEL would be treated as the emissionlimit for certification, production-lineand in-use testing for each engine in thefamily. Second, the final number ofcredits available to the manufacturer orremanufacturer at the end of a modelyear after considering themanufacturer’s or remanufacturer’s useof credits from averaging, banking andtrading must be greater than or equal tozero.When credits are generated andtraded in the same model year, EPAproposes to make both buyers andsellers of credits potentially liable forany credit shortfalls, except in caseswhere fraud is involved. This provisionis consistent with other mobile sourceABT programs. The certificates of bothparties issued for locomotives andlocomotive engines involved in theviolating trading transaction could bevoided ab initio (i.e., back to date ofissue) if the engine family or familiesexceed emission standards as a result ofa credit shortfall.The integrity of the proposedlocomotive averaging, banking andtrading program depends on accuraterecordkeeping and reporting bymanufacturers and remanufacturers, andeffective tracking and auditing by EPA.Failure of a manufacturer orremanufacturer to maintain the requiredrecords would result in the certificatesfor the affected engine family or familiesbeing voided retroactively. Violations ofreporting requirements could result in amanufacturer or remanufacturer beingsubject to civil penalties as authorizedby sections 213 and 205 of the Clean AirAct.EPA requests comment on all aspectsof the proposed averaging, banking andtrading program. Specific comment isrequested as to whether the programshould be limited to just NO X and PM,as proposed, or whether the otherregulated pollutants should be included.Also, the Agency requests comment onthe various restrictions (averaging sets,etc.) proposed for this program.C. Compliance AssuranceSection 213(d) of the Clean Air Act,which applies to EPA’s proposedemissions standards for locomotives,provides that such standards ‘‘shall beenforced in the same manner asstandards prescribed under section(202)’’ of the Act (applicable to newmotor vehicles and new motor vehicleengines). This provision also grants EPAdiscretion to revise the regulationsimplementing certification, in-usetesting and recall if appropriate forlocomotives and other nonroad vehiclesand engines. EPA uses severalmechanisms to enforce its motor vehicleemissions standards, includingcertification, production line testing, inusetesting and recall. This sectioncovers the various aspects of theseproposed compliance programs forlocomotives. A discussion of theproposed definition of locomotiveengine family is presented first,followed by discussions of the threemain compliance programs(certification, production line testingand in-use testing).C.1. Engine Family DefinitionEPA defines engine family for allother mobile sources as a group ofengines expected to have similaremissions characteristics throughouttheir useful lives. The engine familyconcept facilitates more efficientcertification of engines or vehicles byallowing those with similar emissionscharacteristics to be grouped together,thus reducing testing costs. In definingengine family for locomotives andlocomotive engines, the Agency soughtto balance the economic advantage of abroad definition that would minimizetesting and certification costs, and theenvironmental advantage of a narrowdefinition that would better assure thatthe testing of an engine family wouldaccurately represent all engines in thatfamily. The Agency is proposing todefine engine family for locomotivesusing many of the same parameterswhich are currently used to define onhighwayand nonroad engine families.These parameters include aspects ofboth the physical design of the engine(e.g., combustion chamberconfiguration, cylinder bore and stroke)as well as operating characteristics (e.g.,fuel injection pressure and rate,turbocharger and inlet air coolingcharacteristics). A complete list of theparameters is included in section 92.010of the proposed regulations.While the proposed locomotiveengine family definition uses many of