federal register - U.S. Government Printing Office

6388 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rulesstandards for the time period duringwhich certain state standards arepreempted beyond useful life, asdescribed later in this notice. Each ofthese two components of the proposedin-use testing program are discussed inmore detail in the following paragraphs.The first major component of theproposed in-use testing programincludes requirements that apply tomanufacturers and remanufacturers.EPA is proposing to requiremanufacturers and remanufacturers totest emissions from in-use locomotivespursuant to its authority under section208 of the Act. This provision applies tothe locomotive and locomotive engineemissions standards as provided insection 213(d). Section 208 requiresmanufacturers to submit informationand conduct tests that EPA mayreasonably require to determine whethersuch manufacturer is in compliancewith Title II of the Act and itsimplementing regulations, or tootherwise carry out the provisions ofTitle II. The proposed testing program isdesigned to minimize the burden onindustry, while providing a strongincentive for manufacturers andremanufacturers to build engines thatmeet standards beyond the certificationand production stages, when in actualuse.Under the proposed in-use testingscheme, manufacturers andremanufacturers will be required to testin-use locomotives from one enginefamily per year, using the full FTP. TheAgency is proposing one engine familyper year in order to limit the testingburden on manufacturers andremanufacturers. EPA will specify theengine family to be tested each year,with selection based on criteria such asproduction quantity, past emissionperformance (including performance inthe proposed railroad test program), andengine and emission control technology.All in-use testing is proposed to beperformed on locomotives, with noallowances for engine testing (except forengines used for repowering, and thenonly after locomotive testing has beenperformed). In order to limit the testingburden for small engine families, the inusetesting requirement would not applyto engine families with production ofless than ten locomotives per year,except where there is evidence of in-usefailures. EPA will providemanufacturers and remanufacturerssuitable advance notice about whichengine families are to be tested in anygiven year. EPA would have theauthority to waive this in-use testingrequirement for a given manufacturer orremanufacturer based on evidence ofconsistent in-use compliance. Thiswaiver would not be available for amanufacturer or remanufacturer that hasnot yet demonstrated the durability ofeach of its engine families (i.e., has oneor more engine families that have notbeen tested in-use), or if there isevidence, from railroad or other testing,that one of its engine families may notbe complying in-use. EPA expects thatafter this program has been in place forseveral years, the in-use testing burdenwill be much smaller, as long as in-usefailures were very infrequent.The Agency is proposing that alllocomotives tested under themanufacturer and remanufacturer in-usetesting program will have reached atleast 75 percent of their useful lives.While testing of locomotives will belimited to between 75 and 100 percentof their useful lives, actual repair in theevent of a determination ofnoncompliance under section 207(c) ofthe Act, however, would not be limitedby useful life. For example, compliancetesting of an engine family might belimited to 75 to 100 percent of its usefullife; however, any resulting remedyrepair would be required to be appliedto all locomotives of that family,regardless of whether the locomotiveshad exceeded their useful lives. This isconsistent with EPA’s recall policy foron-highway vehicles and engines andlarge compression-ignition nonroadengines. 15 Further, EPA proposes that itmay require that any remedy in theevent of a nonconformity extend tolocomotives of the same engine family,but different model years, that werecertified using the proposedcertification carry over provisions. Suchan extension of the remedy to othermodel years is proposed to be limited totwo model years before and one modelyear after the model year of thenonconforming engine family. Such aprovision would thus limit the liabilityin the event of a nonconformity to fourmodel years’ production.Under EPA’s proposed testingprogram, a manufacturer orremanufacturer would be required totest in-use locomotives from an enginefamily specified by EPA when thatfamily reached an appropriate age. TheAgency is proposing that an appropriateage to begin in-use testing would be 75percent of a locomotive’s useful life.EPA has chosen 75 percent of useful lifein order to balance the need toaccurately assess in-use emissionsperformance, which argues for testinglate in useful life, with the desire tomaximize the benefits of any remedialaction in the event of an in-use failure,15 See Center for Auto Safety v. EPA, 747 F.2d 1[D.C. Cir. 1984].which argues for testing earlier in usefullife. The in-use test program is intendedto assess in-use emissions deterioration,not production quality (which isassessed in the production line testingprogram). Thus, it is most appropriate totest later in a locomotive’s useful life,rather than earlier, to ensure that testresults reflect actual in-usedeterioration, which tends to increasewith age. However, testing too late maypresent two problems. First, the later inuseful life the testing is done, the moredifficult it may be to find wellmaintainedlocomotives to test, sincemany may be remanufactured before theend of useful life. Second, testingextremely late in useful life wouldminimize the benefits achieved fromany remedial action taken in the eventan in-use nonconformity is identified.Thus, EPA believes that testing at 75percent of useful life strikes a balancebetween these different issues. EPArequests comment on whether a lowerage or range (e.g., 50 to 75 percent ofuseful life) would be more appropriatefor such testing, including commenters’reasons for suggesting different ages.To achieve the Agency’s goal ofestablishing a strong enforcementprogram while minimizing the burdenon manufacturers, EPA is proposing asampling process for the selection oflocomotives for in-use testing which isdesigned to provide adequate data forthe Agency to use as a basis forcompliance decisions, while expeditingtesting of engine families found to emitbelow the standard. This proposedselection process to achieve this goal isdescribed in the following paragraphs.The number of locomotives of atargeted family to be tested by amanufacturer or remanufacturer wouldbe determined by the following method:1. A minimum of two locomotives peryear for the specified family after itreaches the minimum age specified,provided that no locomotive fails anystandard. For each failing locomotive,two more locomotives would be testedup to a maximum of 10 locomotivestested.2. If the following conditions are met,only one locomotive per family per yearmust be tested: (1) The engine familyhas been previously tested under step 1above; (2) the engine family has notchanged significantly from thepreviously tested family (i.e., has beencertified using carryover emission data);and (3) EPA has not informed themanufacturer of an emission concernwith that family. If that locomotive failsfor any pollutant, testing must beconducted as outlined in step 1 above,up to a maximum of ten locomotives.