1
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Parts
85,
86,
89,
90,
91,
92,
94,
1039,
1048,
1051,
1065,
and
1068
[
AMS­
FRL­
7803­
7]

RIN
2060­
AM35
Test
Procedures
for
Testing
Highway
and
Nonroad
Engines
and
Omnibus
Technical
Amendments
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
Final
Rulemaking.

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
revises
and
harmonizes
test
procedures
from
the
various
EPA
programs
for
controlling
engine
emissions.
It
does
not
change
emission
standards,
nor
is
it
intended
to
change
the
emission
reductions
expected
from
these
EPA
programs.
Rather,
it
amends
the
regulations
that
describe
laboratory
specifications
for
equipment
and
test
fuels,
instructions
for
preparing
engines
and
running
tests,
calculations
for
determining
final
emission
levels
from
measured
values,
and
instructions
for
running
emission
tests
using
portable
measurement
devices
outside
the
laboratory.
These
updated
testing
regulations
currently
apply
to
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines,
land­
based
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kilowatts,
and
recreational
vehicles.
The
revisions
in
this
final
rule
will
update
the
regulations
to
deal
more
effectively
with
the
more
stringent
standards
recently
promulgated
by
EPA
and
will
also
clarify
and
better
define
certain
elements
of
the
required
test
procedures.
In
particular,
the
amendments
better
specify
the
procedures
applicable
to
field
testing
under
the
regulations.

This
action
also
applies
the
updated
testing
regulations
to
highway
heavy­
duty
diesel
engine
regulations.
This
action
is
appropriate
because
EPA
has
historically
drafted
a
full
set
of
testing
specifications
for
each
vehicle
or
engine
category
subject
to
emission
standards
as
each
program
was
developed
over
the
past
three
decades.
This
patchwork
approach
has
led
to
some
variation
in
test
parameters
across
programs,
which
we
hope
to
address
by
adopting
a
common
set
of
test
requirements.
The
primary
goal
of
this
effort
is
to
create
unified
testing
requirements
for
all
engines,
which
when
implemented
will
streamline
laboratory
efforts
for
EPA
and
industry.

This
action
will
also
include
other
technical
changes
intended
to
clarify
and
better
define
requirements
for
several
different
EPA
engine
programs.
These
changes
are
relatively
minor
and
are
technical
in
scope.

DATES:
This
final
rule
is
effective
[
insert
date
60
days
after
publication
in
the
Federal
Register].

The
incorporation
by
reference
of
certain
publications
listed
in
this
regulation
is
approved
by
the
Director
of
the
Federal
Register
as
of
[
insert
date
60
days
after
publication
in
the
Federal
Register].
2
ADDRESSES:
EPA
has
established
a
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2004­
0017.
All
documents
in
the
docket
are
listed
in
the
EDOCKET
index
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Although
listed
in
the
index,
some
information
is
not
publicly
available,
i.
e.,
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
EDOCKET
or
in
hard
copy
at
the
Air
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
EPA/
DC,
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
The
Public
Reading
Room
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Public
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Air
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
1742.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Alan
Stout,
U.
S.
EPA,
Voice­
mail
(
734)
214­
4636;
E­
mail:
stout.
alan@
epa.
gov
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

A.
Regulated
Entities
This
action
affects
companies
that
manufacture
or
sell
engines.
Regulated
categories
and
entities
include:

Category
NAICS
Codesa
Examples
of
Potentially
Regulated
Entities
Industry
333618
Manufacturers
of
new
engines
aNorth
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)

This
list
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
regulated
by
this
action.
To
determine
whether
particular
activities
may
be
regulated
by
this
action,
you
should
carefully
examine
the
regulations.
You
may
direct
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
the
person
listed
in
"
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT."

B.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
Of
This
Document
and
Other
Related
Information
?
1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2004­
0017.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
Although
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
Documents
in
the
official
public
docket
are
listed
in
the
index
list
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EDOCKET.
Documents
may
be
available
either
electronically
or
in
hard
copy.
Electronic
documents
may
be
viewed
through
EDOCKET.
Hard
copy
documents
may
be
viewed
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC)
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
Docket
in
The
EPA
Docket
Center
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
3
the
Public
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744.

This
rule
relies
in
part
on
information
related
to
our
November
2002
final
rule,
which
can
be
found
in
Public
Docket
A­
2000­
01.
This
docket
is
incorporated
by
reference
into
the
docket
for
this
action,
OAR­
2004­
0017.

2.
Electronic
Access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
"
Federal
Register"
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/
Or
you
can
go
to
the
federal­
wide
eRulemaking
site
at
www.
regulations.
gov.

An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EDOCKET.
You
may
use
EDOCKET
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number.

Table
of
Contents
I.
Modified
Test
Procedures
for
Highway
and
Nonroad
Engines
A.
Incorporation
of
Nonroad
Test
Procedures
for
Heavy
Duty
Highway
Engines
B.
Revisions
to
Part
1065
II.
Technical
Amendments
A.
Standard­
Setting
Changes
that
Apply
to
Multiple
Categories
B.
Nonroad
general
compliance
provisions
(
40
CFR
part
1068)
C.
Land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
parts
89
and
1039)
D.
Marine
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
part
94)
E.
Small
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
90)
F.
Marine
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
91)
G.
Large
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
1048)
H.
Recreational
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
1051)
I.
Locomotives
(
40
CFR
part
92)
J.
Highway
engines
and
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
86)

III.
Public
Participation
IV.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
V.
Statutory
Provisions
and
Legal
Authority
1
For
an
overview
of
our
new
regulatory
organization,
refer
to
our
fact
sheet
entitled,
"
Plain­
Language
Format
of
Emission
Regulations
for
Nonroad
Engines,"
EPA420­
F­
02­
046,
September
2002,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
otaq/
largesi.
htm.

4
I.
Modified
Test
Procedures
for
Highway
and
Nonroad
Engines
A.
Incorporation
of
Nonroad
Test
Procedures
for
Heavy
Duty
Highway
Engines
As
part
of
our
initiative
to
update
the
content,
organization
and
writing
style
of
our
regulations,
we
are
revising
our
test
procedures.
1
We
have
grouped
all
of
our
engine
dynamometer
and
field
testing
test
procedures
into
one
part
entitled,
"
Part
1065:
Test
Procedures."
For
each
engine
or
vehicle
sector
for
which
we
have
recently
promulgated
standards
(
such
as
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines
or
recreational
vehicles),
we
identified
an
individual
part
as
the
standard­
setting
part
for
that
sector.
These
standard­
setting
parts
then
refer
to
one
common
set
of
test
procedures
in
part
1065.
We
intend
in
this
rule
to
continue
this
process
of
having
all
our
engine
programs
refer
to
a
common
set
of
procedures
by
applying
part
1065
to
all
heavy­
duty
highway
engines.

In
the
past,
each
engine
or
vehicle
sector
had
its
own
set
of
testing
procedures.
There
are
many
similarities
in
test
procedures
across
the
various
sectors.
However,
as
we
introduced
new
regulations
for
individual
sectors,
the
more
recent
regulations
featured
test
procedure
updates
and
improvements
that
the
other
sectors
did
not
have.
As
this
process
continued,
we
recognized
that
a
single
set
of
test
procedures
would
allow
for
improvements
to
occur
simultaneously
across
engine
and
vehicle
sectors.
A
single
set
of
test
procedures
is
easier
to
understand
than
trying
to
understand
many
different
sets
of
procedures,
and
it
is
easier
to
move
toward
international
test
procedure
harmonization
if
we
only
have
one
set
of
test
procedures.
We
note
that
procedures
that
are
particular
for
different
types
of
engines
or
vehicles,
for
example,
test
schedules
designed
to
reflect
the
conditions
expected
in
use
for
particular
types
of
vehicles
or
engines,
will
remain
separate
and
will
be
reflected
in
the
standard­
setting
parts
of
the
regulations.

In
addition
to
reorganizing
and
rewriting
the
test
procedures
for
improved
clarity,
we
are
making
a
variety
of
changes
to
improve
the
content
of
the
testing
specifications,
including
the
following:

!
Writing
specifications
and
calculations
in
international
units
!
Adding
procedures
by
which
manufacturers
can
demonstrate
that
alternate
test
procedures
are
equivalent
to
specified
procedures.

!
Including
specifications
for
new
measurement
technology
that
has
been
shown
to
be
equivalent
or
more
accurate
than
existing
technology;
procedures
that
improve
test
repeatability,
calculations
that
simplify
emissions
determination;
new
procedures
for
field
testing
engines,
and
a
more
comprehensive
set
of
definitions,
references,
and
symbols.

!
Defining
calibration
and
accuracy
specifications
that
are
scaled
to
the
applicable
standard,
which
allows
us
to
adopt
a
single
specification
that
applies
to
a
wide
range
of
engine
sizes
and
applications.

Some
emission­
control
programs
already
rely
on
the
test
procedures
in
part
1065.
These
5
programs
regulate
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines,
recreational
vehicles,
and
nonroad
sparkignition
engines
over
19
kW.

We
are
adopting
the
lab­
testing
and
field­
testing
specifications
in
part
1065
for
all
heavy­
duty
highway
engines,
as
described
in
Section
II.
J.
These
procedures
replace
those
currently
published
in
subpart
N
in
40
CFR
part
86.
We
are
making
a
gradual
transition
from
the
part
86
procedures.
For
several
years,
manufacturers
will
be
able
to
optionally
use
the
part
1065
procedures.
By
the
2010
model
year,
part
1065
procedures
will
be
required
for
any
new
testing.
For
all
testing
completed
for
2009
and
earlier
model
years,
manufacturers
may
continue
to
rely
on
carryover
test
data
based
on
part
86
procedures
to
certify
engine
families
in
later
years.
In
addition,
other
subparts
in
part
86,
as
well
as
regulations
for
many
different
nonroad
engines
refer
to
the
test
procedures
in
part
86.
We
are
including
updated
references
for
all
these
other
programs
to
refer
instead
to
the
appropriate
cite
in
part
1065.

Part
1065
is
also
advantageous
for
in­
use
testing
because
it
specifies
the
same
procedures
for
all
common
parts
of
field
testing
and
laboratory
testing.
It
also
contains
new
provisions
that
help
ensure
that
engines
are
tested
in
a
laboratory
in
a
way
that
is
consistent
with
how
they
operate
in
use.
These
new
provisions
will
ensure
that
engine
dynamometer
lab
testing
and
field
testing
are
conducted
in
a
consistent
way.

In
the
future,
we
may
apply
the
test
procedures
specified
in
part
1065
to
other
types
of
engines,
so
we
encourage
companies
involved
in
producing
or
testing
other
engines
to
stay
informed
of
developments
related
to
these
test
procedures.
For
example,
we
expect
to
propose
in
the
near
future
new
regulations
for
locomotives,
marine
engines,
and
several
types
of
nonroad
SI
engines.
We
are
likely
to
consider
some
changes
to
part
1065
in
each
of
these
rulemakings.

B.
Revisions
to
Part
1065
Part
1065
was
originally
adopted
on
November
8,
2002
(
67
FR
68242),
and
was
initially
applicable
to
standards
regulating
large
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
and
recreational
vehicles
under
40
CFR
parts
1048
and
1051.
The
recent
rulemaking
adopting
emission
standards
for
nonroad
diesel
engines
has
also
made
part
1065
optional
for
Tier
2
and
Tier
3
standards
and
required
for
Tier
4
standards.
The
test
procedures
initially
adopted
in
part
1065
were
sufficient
to
conduct
testing,
but
in
this
final
rule
we
have
reorganized
these
procedures
and
added
content
to
make
various
improvements.
In
particular,
we
have
reorganized
part
1065
by
subparts
as
shown
below:

Subpart
A:
general
provisions;
global
information
on
applicability,
alternate
procedures,
units
of
measure,
etc.
Subpart
B:
equipment
specifications;
required
hardware
for
testing
Subpart
C:
measurement
instruments
Subpart
D:
calibration
and
verifications;
for
measurement
systems
Subpart
E:
engine
selection,
preparation,
and
maintenance
Subpart
F:
test
protocols;
step­
by­
step
sequences
for
laboratory
testing
and
test
validation.
Subpart
G:
calculations
and
required
information
6
Subpart
H:
fuels,
fluids,
and
analytical
gases
Subpart
I:
oxygenated
fuels;
special
test
procedures
Subpart
J:
field
testing
and
portable
emissions
measurement
systems
Subpart
K:
definitions,
references,
and
symbols
The
regulations
now
prescribe
scaled
specifications
for
test
equipment
and
measurement
instruments
by
parameters
such
as
engine
power,
engine
speed
and
the
emission
standards
to
which
an
engine
must
comply.
That
way
this
single
set
of
specifications
will
cover
the
full
range
of
engine
sizes
and
our
full
range
of
emission
standards.
Manufacturers
will
be
able
to
use
these
specifications
to
determine
what
range
of
engines
and
emission
standards
may
be
tested
using
a
given
laboratory
or
field
testing
system.

The
new
content
for
part
1065
is
mostly
a
combination
of
content
from
our
most
recent
updates
to
other
test
procedures
and
from
test
procedures
specified
by
the
International
Organization
for
Standardization
(
ISO).
In
some
cases,
however,
there
is
new
content
that
never
existed
in
previous
regulations.
This
new
content
addresses
very
recent
issues
such
as
measuring
very
low
concentrations
of
emissions,
using
new
measurement
technology,
using
portable
emissions
measurement
systems,
and
performing
field
testing.
A
full
description
of
the
changes
is
in
the
Technical
Support
Document
that
accompanies
this
final
rule
(
this
document
is
available
in
the
docket
for
this
rulemaking).

The
new
content
also
reflects
a
shift
in
our
approach
for
specifying
measurement
performance.
In
the
past
we
specified
numerous
calibration
accuracies
for
individual
measurement
instruments,
and
we
specified
some
verifications
for
individual
components,
such
as
NO
2
to
NO
converters.
We
have
shifted
our
focus
away
from
individual
instruments
and
toward
the
overall
performance
of
complete
measurement
systems.
We
did
this
for
several
reasons.
First,
some
of
what
we
specified
in
the
past
precluded
the
implementation
of
new
measurement
technologies.
These
new
technologies,
sometimes
called
"
smart
analyzers",
combine
signals
from
multiple
instruments
to
compensate
for
interferences
that
were
previously
tolerable
at
higher
emissions
levels.
These
analyzers
are
useful
for
detecting
low
concentrations
of
emissions.
They
are
also
useful
for
detecting
emissions
from
raw
exhaust,
which
can
contain
high
concentrations
of
interferences,
such
as
water
vapor.
This
is
particularly
important
for
field
testing,
which
will
most
likely
rely
upon
raw
exhaust
measurements.
Second,
this
new
"
systems
approach"
challenges
complete
measurement
systems
with
a
series
of
periodic
verifications,
which
we
feel
will
provide
a
more
robust
assurance
that
a
measurement
system
as
a
whole
is
operating
properly.
Third,
the
systems
approach
provides
a
direct
pathway
to
demonstrate
that
a
field
test
system
performs
similarly
to
a
laboratory
system.
This
is
explained
in
more
detail
in
item
10
below.
Finally,
we
feel
that
our
systems
approach
will
lead
to
a
more
efficient
way
of
assuring
measurement
performance
in
the
laboratory
and
in
the
field.
We
believe
that
this
efficiency
will
stem
from
less
frequent
individual
instrument
calibrations,
and
higher
confidence
that
a
complete
measurement
system
is
operating
properly.

We
have
organized
the
new
content
relating
to
measurement
systems
performance
into
subparts
C
and
D..
We
specify
measurement
instruments
in
subpart
C
and
calibrations
and
periodic
system
verifications
in
subpart
D.
These
two
subparts
apply
to
both
laboratory
and
field
7
testing.
We
have
organized
content
specific
to
running
a
laboratory
emissions
test
in
subpart
F,
and
we
separated
content
specific
to
field
testing
in
subpart
J.

In
subpart
C
we
specify
the
types
of
acceptable
instruments,
but
we
only
recommend
individual
instrument
performance.
We
provide
these
recommendations
as
guidance
for
procuring
new
instruments.
We
feel
that
the
periodic
verifications
that
we
require
in
subpart
D
will
sufficiently
evaluate
the
individual
instruments
as
part
of
their
respective
overall
measurement
systems.
In
subpart
F
we
specify
performance
validations
that
must
be
conducted
as
part
of
every
laboratory
test.
In
subpart
J
we
specify
similar
performance
validations
for
field
testing
that
must
be
conducted
as
part
of
every
field
test.
We
feel
that
the
periodic
verifications
in
subpart
D
and
the
validations
for
every
test
that
we
prescribed
in
subparts
F
and
J
ensure
that
complete
measurement
systems
are
operating
properly.

In
subpart
J
we
also
specify
an
additional
overall
verification
of
portable
emissions
measurement
systems
(
PEMS).
This
verification
is
a
comprehensive
comparison
of
a
PEMS
versus
a
laboratory
system,
and
it
may
take
several
days
of
laboratory
time
to
set
up,
run,
and
evaluate.
However,
we
only
require
that
this
particular
verification
must
be
performed
at
least
once
for
a
given
make,
model,
and
configuration
of
a
field
test
system.

Below
is
a
brief
description
of
the
content
of
each
subpart,
highlighting
some
of
the
new
content.
We
also
highlight
the
more
significant
changes
from
the
regulatory
language
that
was
proposed
in
our
responses
to
public
comments.
See
the
TSD
for
a
more
complete
listing
of
the
changes
and
comments
to
our
proposed
part
1065.

1.
Subpart
A
General
Provisions
In
Subpart
A
we
identify
the
applicability
of
part
1065
and
describe
how
procedures
other
than
those
in
part
1065
may
be
used
to
comply
with
a
standard­
setting
part.
In
§
1065.10(
c)(
1),
we
specify
that
testing
must
be
conducted
in
a
way
that
represents
in­
use
engine
operation,
such
that
in
the
rare
case
where
provisions
in
part
1065
result
in
unrepresentative
testing,
other
procedures
would
be
used.
We
have
revised
the
proposed
regulatory
language
for
this
requirement
to
clarify
the
manufacturers'
requirements
and
the
process
that
we
would
use
to
make
changes
to
the
test
procedures
in
these
cases.

Other
information
in
this
subpart
includes
a
description
of
the
conventions
we
use
regarding
units
and
certain
measurements
and
we
discuss
recordkeeping.
We
also
provide
an
overview
of
how
emissions
and
other
information
are
used
to
determine
final
emission
results.
The
regulations
in
§
1065.15
include
a
figure
illustrating
the
different
ways
we
allow
brake­
specific
emissions
to
be
calculated.

In
this
same
subpart,
we
describe
how
continuous
and
batch
sampling
may
be
used
to
determine
total
emissions.
We
also
describe
the
two
ways
of
determining
total
work
that
we
approve.
Note
that
the
figure
indicates
our
default
procedures
and
those
procedures
that
require
additional
approval
before
we
will
allow
them.

2.
Subpart
B
Equipment
Specifications
8
Subpart
B
first
describes
engine
and
dynamometer
related
systems.
Many
of
these
specifications
are
scaled
to
an
engine's
size,
speed,
torque,
exhaust
flow
rate,
etc.
We
specify
the
use
of
in­
use
engine
subsystems
such
as
air
intake
systems
wherever
possible
in
order
to
best
represent
in­
use
operation
when
an
engine
is
tested
in
a
laboratory.

Subpart
B
also
describes
sampling
dilution
systems.
These
include
specifications
for
the
allowable
components,
materials,
pressures,
and
temperatures.
We
describe
how
to
sample
crankcase
emissions.
We
also
now
allow
limited
use
of
partial­
flow
dilution
for
PM
sampling.
Subpart
B
also
specifies
environmental
conditions
for
PM
filter
stabilization
and
weighing.
Although
these
provisions
mostly
come
from
our
recent
update
to
part
86,
subpart
N,
we
also
describe
some
new
aspects
in
detail.

The
regulations
in
§
1065.101
include
a
diagram
illustrating
all
the
available
equipment
for
measuring
emissions.

3.
Subpart
C
Measurement
Instruments
Subpart
C
specifies
the
requirements
for
the
measurement
instruments
used
for
testing.
In
subpart
C
we
recommend
accuracy,
repeatability,
noise,
and
response
time
specifications
for
individual
measurement
instruments,
but
note
that
we
require
that
overall
measurement
systems
meet
the
calibrations
and
verifications
Subpart
D.

In
some
cases
we
allow
new
instrument
types
to
be
used
where
we
previously
did
not
allow
them.
For
example,
we
now
allow
the
use
of
a
nonmethane
cutter
for
NMHC
measurement,
a
nondispersive
ultraviolet
analyzers
for
NO
x
measurement,
zirconia
sensors
for
O
2
measurement,
various
raw­
exhaust
flow
meters
for
laboratory
and
field
testing
measurement,
and
an
ultrasonic
flow
meter
for
CVS
systems.
We
had
proposed
to
also
allow
zirconia
sensors
for
NO
x
measurement,
but
we
are
not
finalizing
that
option
at
this
time
because
of
manufacturer
concerns
about
drift
and
sensor
response
to
NO
2
and
NH
3.

4.
Subpart
D
Calibrations
and
Verifications
Subpart
D
describes
what
we
mean
when
we
specify
accuracy,
repeatability
and
other
parameters
in
Subpart
C.
We
are
adopting
calibrations
and
verifications
that
scale
with
engine
size
and
with
the
emission
standards
to
which
an
engine
is
certified.
We
are
replacing
some
of
what
we
have
called
"
calibrations"
in
the
past
with
a
series
of
verifications,
such
as
a
linearity
verification,
which
essentially
verifies
the
calibration
of
an
instrument
without
specifying
how
the
instrument
must
be
initially
calibrated.
Because
new
instruments
have
built­
in
routines
that
linearize
signals
and
compensate
for
various
interferences,
our
existing
calibration
specifications
sometimes
conflicted
with
an
instrument
manufacturer's
instructions.
In
addition,
there
are
new
verifications
in
subpart
D
to
ensure
that
the
new
instruments
we
specify
in
Subpart
C
are
used
correctly.
The
most
significant
changes
in
this
subpart
from
the
proposal
are
that
we
split
the
language
for
continuous
gas
analyzer
verification
into
two
sections
(
§
§
1065.308
and
1065.309),
we
provide
more
detailed
descriptions
for
the
FID
O
2
interference
verifications
(
§
1065.362)
and
NMHC
cutter
setups
(
§
1065.365),
and
we
added
§
1065.395
for
inertial
PM
balance
verification.

5.
Subpart
E
Engine
Selection,
Preparation,
and
Maintenance
9
Subpart
E
describes
how
to
select,
prepare,
and
maintain
a
test
engine.
We
updated
these
provisions
to
include
both
gasoline
and
diesel
engines.
This
subpart
is
relatively
short,
and
we
did
not
make
many
changes
to
its
proposed
content.

6.
Subpart
F
Test
Protocols
Subpart
F
describes
the
step­
by­
step
protocols
for
engine
mapping,
test
cycle
generation,
test
cycle
validation,
pre­
test
preconditioning,
engine
starting,
emission
sampling,
and
post­
test
validations.
We
proposed
an
improved
way
to
map
and
generate
cycles
for
constant­
speed
engines
that
would
better
represent
in­
use
engine
operation.
We
have
modified
this
language
slightly
to
reflect
the
different
ways
in
which
constant­
speed
test
cycles
can
be
specified.
We
are
adopting
a
more
streamlined
set
of
test
cycle
and
validation
criteria.
We
allow
modest
corrections
for
drift
of
emission
analyzer
signals
within
a
certain
range.
We
are
also
adopting
a
recommended
procedure
for
weighing
PM
samples.
We
are
not
finalizing
our
proposed
procedure
to
correct
for
instrument
noise
because
after
receiving
many
comments,
we
now
acknowledge
that
the
procedure
is
not
robust
and
applicable
to
all
emissions.

7.
Subpart
G
Calculations
and
Required
Information
Subpart
G
includes
all
the
calculations
required
in
part
1065.
We
are
adopting
definitions
of
statistical
quantities
such
as
mean,
standard
deviation,
slope,
intercept,
t­
test,
F­
test,
etc.
By
defining
these
quantities
mathematically
we
intend
to
resolve
any
potential
mis­
communication
when
we
discuss
these
quantities
in
other
subparts.
We
have
written
all
calculations
for
calibrations
and
emission
calculations
in
international
units
to
comply
with
15
CFR
1170,
which
removes
the
voluntary
aspect
of
the
conversion
to
international
units
for
federal
agencies.
Furthermore,
Executive
Order
12770
(
56
FR
35801,
July
29,
1991)
reinforces
this
policy
by
providing
Presidential
authority
and
direction
for
the
use
of
the
metric
system
of
measurement
by
Federal
agencies
and
departments.
For
our
standards
that
are
not
completely
in
international
units
(
i.
e.,
grams/
horsepower­
hour,
grams/
mile),
we
specify
in
part
1065
the
correct
use
of
internationally
recognized
conversion
factors.

We
also
specify
emission
calculations
based
on
molar
quantities
for
flow
rates,
instead
of
volume
or
mass.
This
change
eliminates
the
frequent
confusion
caused
by
using
different
reference
points
for
standard
pressure
and
standard
temperature.
Instead
of
declaring
standard
densities
at
standard
pressure
and
standard
temperature
to
convert
volumetric
concentration
measurements
to
mass­
based
units,
we
declare
molar
masses
for
individual
elements
and
compounds.
Since
these
values
are
independent
of
all
other
parameters,
they
are
known
to
be
constant.

We
have
added
some
detail
to
the
calculations
relative
to
the
proposed
calculations
to
make
them
clearer.
We
also
made
changes
in
response
to
comments
from
manufacturers.

8.
Subpart
H
Fuels,
Fluids,
and
Analytical
Gases
Subpart
H
specifies
test
fuels,
lubricating
oils
and
coolants,
and
analytical
gases
for
testing.
We
are
eliminating
the
Cetane
Index
specification
for
all
diesel
fuels,
because
the
existing
specification
for
Cetane
Number
sufficiently
determines
the
cetane
levels
of
diesel
test
fuels.
We
are
not
identifying
any
detailed
specification
for
service
accumulation
fuel.
Instead,
we
specify
10
that
service
accumulation
fuel
may
be
a
test
fuel
or
a
commercially
available
in­
use
fuel.
This
helps
ensure
that
testing
is
representative
of
in­
use
engine
operation.
We
are
adding
a
list
of
ASTM
specifications
for
in­
use
fuels
as
examples
of
appropriate
service
accumulation
fuels.
Compared
to
the
proposed
regulatory
language,
we
have
clarified
that
§
1065.10(
c)(
1)
does
not
require
test
fuels
to
be
more
representative
than
the
specified
test
fuels.
We
have
also
added
an
allowance
to
use
similar
test
fuels
that
do
not
meet
all
of
the
specifications,
provided
they
do
not
compromise
the
manufacturer's
ability
to
demonstrate
compliance.

We
proposed
purity
specifications
for
analytical
gases
that
scale
with
the
standards
that
an
engine
must
meet.
In
the
final
regulations,
we
have
clarified
the
requirement
to
use
good
engineering
judgment
to
maintain
the
stability
of
these
gases,
and
have
tightened
the
purity
specification
for
FID
fuel
in
response
to
comment.

9.
Subpart
I
Oxygenated
Fuels
Subpart
I
describes
special
procedures
for
measuring
certain
hydrocarbons
whenever
oxygenated
fuels
are
used.
We
updated
the
calculations
for
these
procedures
in
Subpart
G.
We
have
made
some
revisions
to
the
proposed
text
to
make
it
consistent
the
original
content
of
the
comparable
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
86.
We
have
also
added
an
allowance
to
use
the
California
NMOG
test
procedures
to
measure
alcohols
and
carbonyls.

10.
Subpart
J
Field
Testing
and
Portable
Emissions
Measurement
Systems
We
are
adopting
a
wide
range
of
changes
to
Subpart
J
Field
Testing.
Field­
testing
equipment
and
measurement
instruments
must
generally
meet
the
same
specifications
and
verifications
that
laboratory
instruments
must
meet,
according
to
subparts
B,
C,
and
D.
However,
for
field
testing
instruments,
we
specify
certain
allowable
deviations
from
laboratory
specifications.
In
addition
to
meeting
many
of
the
laboratory
system
requirements,
a
field­
test
system
meet
an
overall
verification
relative
to
a
laboratory
measurement.
This
verification
involves
repeating
a
duty
cycle
several
times.
The
duty
cycle
itself
must
have
several
individual
field­
test
intervals
(
e.
g.,
NTE
events)
against
which
the
field
test
system
is
compared
to
the
laboratory
system.
This
is
a
comprehensive
verification
of
the
field
test
system.
We
are
also
adopting
a
procedure
for
preparing
and
conducting
a
field
test,
and
we
are
adopting
additional
drift
and
noise
allowances
for
emission
analyzers.
Given
the
evolving
state
of
portable
emission
measurement
technology,
the
field­
testing
procedures
provide
for
a
number
of
known
measurement
techniques.

11.
Subpart
K
Definitions,
References,
and
Symbols
In
Subpart
K
we
are
adopting
new
and
revised
definitions
of
terms
frequently
used
in
part
1065.
For
example
we
have
revised
our
definitions
of
"
brake
power",
"
constant­
speed
engine",
and
"
aftertreatment"
to
provide
more
clarity,
and
we
have
added
new
definitions
for
things
such
as
"
300
series
stainless
steel",
"
barometric
pressure",
and
"
operator
demand".
There
are
new
definitions
such
as
"
duty
cycle"
and
"
test
interval"
to
distinguish
the
difference
between
a
single
interval
over
which
brake­
specific
emissions
are
calculated
and
the
complete
cycle
over
which
emissions
are
evaluated
in
a
laboratory.
We
also
present
a
thorough
and
consistent
set
of
symbols,
abbreviations,
and
acronyms.
11
II.
Technical
Amendments
A.
Standard­
Setting
Changes
that
Apply
to
Multiple
Categories
1.
Definitions
We
are
revising
several
definitions
that
apply
over
more
than
one
part
of
our
regulations.
These
changes
are
designed
to
harmonize
our
regulations.

We
are
changing
the
definition
of
Marine
engine
and
Marine
vessel
to
harmonize
our
approach
to
amphibious
vehicles
and
clarify
other
issues.
We
have
treated
amphibious
vehicles
differently
whether
they
had
a
diesel
engine
or
a
spark­
ignition
engine.
We
are
harmonizing
our
treatment
of
amphibious
vehicles
by
consistently
treating
these
as
land­
based
products.
We
are
also
adding
a
provision
defining
amphibious
vehicles
are
those
that
are
designed
primarily
for
operation
on
land
to
clarify
that
we
don't
consider
hovercraft
to
be
amphibious
vehicles.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
additional
information
related
to
these
definitions.
In
particular,
note
that
we
describe
our
interpretation
of
what
it
means
for
an
engine
to
be
"
installed
in
a
marine
vessel."
Manufacturers
have
raised
several
questions
related
to
this
issue,
especially
as
it
relates
to
portable
engines
installed
on
barges.

2.
Penalties
The
Clean
Air
Act
specifies
maximum
penalty
amounts
corresponding
to
each
prohibited
Act.
These
maximum
penalty
amounts
are
periodically
adjusted
for
inflation,
based
on
the
provisions
of
the
Debt
Collection
Improvement
Act.
These
maximum
penalties
have
been
updated
under
40
CFR
part
19.
The
new
maximum
penalties
are
$
32,500
for
introducing
noncompliant
engines
into
commerce
and
for
manufacturers
guilty
of
tampering,
and
$
2,750
for
non­
manufacturers
guilty
of
tampering.
In
addition,
the
maximum
penalty
we
can
recover
using
administrative
procedures
is
$
270,000.
We
are
extending
these
revised
penalties
into
each
of
our
emission­
control
programs.

3.
Deterioration
Factors
for
HC+
NOx
Standards
Manufacturers
requested
that
we
allow
them
to
calculate
a
single
deterioration
factor
for
engines
that
are
subject
to
combined
HC+
NOx
emission
standards,
rather
than
calculating
separate
deterioration
factors
for
each
pollutant.
We
proposed
for
some
engines
to
clarify
that
separate
deterioration
factors
were
appropriate.
In
the
case
of
spark­
ignition
engines,
it
is
especially
true
that
changing
carburetor
calibrations
and
other
things
affecting
air­
fuel
ratios
have
a
direct
inverse
relationship
on
HC
and
NOx
emissions.
Where
deterioration
factors
are
based
on
service
accumulation
through
the
entire
useful
life,
we
believe
it
is
therefore
appropriate
to
base
deterioration
factors
for
spark­
ignition
engines
subject
to
HC+
NOx
emission
standards
on
a
single
deterioration
factor
for
the
combined
pollutants.
However,
if
deteriortion
factors
are
based
on
service
accumulation
over
less
than
the
full
useful
life,
we
want
to
avoid
the
situation
where
a
manufacturer
is
extrapolating
values
that
presume
further
improvement
in
the
emission
levels
of
any
particular
pollutant.
For
such
testing,
we
therefore
specify
that
separate
deterioration
factors
12
for
each
pollutant
are
appropriate.
We
are
making
a
related,
additional
change
to
clarify
that
manufacturers
must
include
both
low­
hour
and
deteriorated
emission
measurements
for
each
pollutant,
even
if
the
regulations
allow
for
a
single
deterioration
factor
for
HC+
NOx
emissions
together.
Compression­
ignition
engines
have
different
wear
mechanisms
and
generally
have
much
longer
useful­
life
values,
so
it
is
not
clear
that
this
approach
to
allowing
combined
deterioration
factor
is
appropriate
for
these
engines.
We
may
further
consider
applying
this
change
to
compression­
ignition
engines
in
a
future
rulemaking.

4.
Emission
Warranty
Related
to
Extended
Service
Contracts
Manufacturers
objected
to
our
proposal
to
apply
emission­
related
warranty
requirements
to
components
for
which
a
consumer
pays
for
an
extended
performance
warranty.
We
agree
with
the
point
raised
by
the
manufacturers
that
these
service
contracts
do
not
necessarily
imply
that
the
part
should
last
longer,
but
rather
that
the
manufacturer
(
or
a
third­
party
provider)
has
made
a
calculation
regarding
the
financial
and
customer
service
benefits
of
offering
contracts
that
provide
free
or
reduced­
cost
coverage
for
certain
components
after
collecting
an
up­
front
charge.
We
will
remove
this
provision
across
all
engine
categories.

5.
Exemption
for
Staged
Assembly
Some
manufacturers
pointed
out
that
they
were
facing
difficulties
with
production
processes
that
required
them
to
ship
a
nearly
completed
engines
to
one
or
more
different
facilities
for
final
assembly.
Without
an
exemption,
this
would
violate
the
applicable
prohibited
acts,
since
it
involves
the
introduction
into
commerce
an
engine
that
is
not
in
its
certified
configuration.
To
address
this
concern,
we
have
adopted
an
exemption
that
allows
manufacturers
to
assemble
engines
at
multiple
facilities,
as
long
as
they
maintain
control
of
the
engines
at
all
times
before
final
assembly.
Manufacturers
would
need
to
request
approval
for
such
an
arrangement.
EPA
approval
may
be
conditioned
on
the
manufacturer
taking
reasonable
additional
steps
to
ensure
that
engines
end
up
in
their
certified
configuration.
This
exemption
applies
to
all
the
engine
categories
that
are
subject
to
40
CFR
part
1068
(
as
described
in
the
next
section),
and
to
locomotives
and
marine
diesel
engines.

B.
Nonroad
general
compliance
provisions
(
40
CFR
part
1068)

In
addition
to
the
changing
test
procedures
described
above,
we
are
making
various
changes
to
the
general
compliance
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1068,
which
currently
applies
to
land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines,
recreational
vehicles,
and
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kW.
We
encourage
manufacturers
of
other
engines
to
take
note
of
these
changes,
since
we
intend
eventually
to
apply
the
provisions
of
part
1068
to
all
engines
subject
to
EPA
emission
standards.

There
was
extensive
comment
related
to
the
existing
provisions
in
§
1068.260
related
to
the
exemption
that
allows
engine
manufacturers
to
arrange
for
shipment
of
aftertreatment
devices
separately
from
engines
that
are
intended
to
rely
on
aftertreatment.
Commenters
suggested
that
13
we
relax
some
of
the
provisions
that
were
intended
to
prevent
noncompliance.
We
continue
to
believe
the
provisions
adopted
in
§
1068.260
are
appropriate
for
nonroad
engines.
The
more
extensive
oversight
and
control
mechanisms
are
important
to
ensuring
that
engines
are
assembled
correctly,
since
there
are
so
many
possible
equipment
manufacturers
and
so
many
different
business
relationships
among
companies.
Given
that
we
are
requiring
engine
manufacturers
to
include
the
cost
of
aftertreatment
components
in
the
price
of
the
engine,
we
believe
it
is
implicitly
clear
that
the
engine
manufacturer
is
responsible
for
shipping
costs,
so
we
have
removed
the
proposal
to
restate
that
in
the
regulations.
We
are
making
three
other
adjustments
to
the
proposal.
First,
we
are
removing
the
requirement
for
engine
manufacturers
to
arrange
for
direct
shipment
of
aftertreatment
components
from
the
supplier
to
the
equipment
manufacturer,
since
a
third
party
may
appropriately
be
involved
to
produce
system
assemblies
for
integration
into
equipment.
Second,
we
are
adding
a
paragraph
to
clarify
that
integrated
manufacturers
can
meet
their
auditing
requirements
by
maintaining
a
database
for
matching
up
engines
with
the
appropriate
aftertreatment
components.
Third,
we
are
adopting
the
staged­
assembly
exemption,
as
described
above,
which
would
streamline
the
production
process
for
integrated
engine
and
equipment
manufacturers
and
address
a
wide
range
of
production
scenarios
in
addition
to
separate
shipment
of
aftertreatment
components.

The
changes
to
part
1068
include
several
other
minor
adjustments
and
corrections.
These
changes
are
described
in
the
Technical
Support
Document.

C.
Land­
based
nonroad
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
parts
89
and
1039)

We
recently
adopted
a
new
tier
of
emission
standards
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
codifying
these
standards
in
40
CFR
part
1039.
This
rulemaking
led
us
to
make
several
regulatory
changes
to
the
existing
tiers
of
standards
for
these
engines
in
40
CFR
part
89.
In
cases
where
we
discovered
the
need
for
changes
after
publishing
the
proposed
rule,
but
we
did
not
make
those
changes
to
part
89
in
the
final
rule
out
of
concern
that
the
public
had
not
had
an
opportunity
for
comment.
Similarly,
we
are
adopting
some
adjustments
to
part
1039,
based
on
information
that
surfaced
late
in
that
rulemaking.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
a
complete
discussion
of
the
rulemaking
changes
for
these
engines.

We
proposed
to
add
a
constraint
for
averaging,
banking,
and
trading
to
prevent
manufacturers
from
including
credits
earned
in
California
or
another
state
if
there
would
ever
be
a
situation
in
which
manufacturers
would
be
making
engines
with
lower
emissions
to
meet
more
stringent
state
standards
or
to
earn
emission
credits
under
the
state
program.
In
the
case
of
nonroad
diesel
engines,
California
has
adopted
our
Tier
4
standards
without
an
emission­
credit
program
that
does
not
involve
California­
specific
credit
calculations.
The
proposed
provision
would
therefore
have
no
effect
for
the
foreseeable
future.
We
have
decided
not
to
adopt
the
proposed
provision,
but
expect
to
pursue
this
if
California
adopts
more
stringent
standards
or
creates
a
California­
specific
emission­
credit
program
for
these
engines
(
see
40
CFR
1051.701(
d)(
4)).
14
D.
Marine
diesel
engines
(
40
CFR
part
94)

We
are
making
several
changes
to
our
marine
diesel
engine
program,
in
40
CFR
part
94.
These
changes
are
intended
to
clarify
several
aspects
of
the
program.
These
changes
are
described
in
detail
in
the
Technical
Support
Document.
This
discussion
also
elaborates
on
our
interpretation
of
various
provisions.
For
example,
we
describe
how
to
determine
which
standards
apply
to
amphibious
vehicles
and
hovercraft.
We
also
explain
how
we
interpret
the
term
"
marine
diesel
engine"
with
respect
to
auxiliary
applications
in
which
it
may
not
be
clear
whether
the
engine
is
"
installed"
on
the
vessel
or
not.

E.
Small
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
90)

We
are
adding
a
new
§
90.913
to
better
define
the
responsibilities
for
manufacturers
choosing
to
certify
their
engines
below
19
kW
to
the
emission
standards
for
Large
SI
engines
in
40
CFR
part
1048.
We
are
also
revising
§
90.1
to
cross­
reference
provisions
in
parts
86,
1048,
and
1051
that
allow
highway
motorcycle
engines
and
nonroad
engines
above
19
kW
to
meet
the
requirements
in
part
90
under
certain
conditions.

We
are
making
several
amendments
to
the
test
procedures,
such
as
improving
calculations
for
humidity
corrections,
adding
clarifying
language,
and
adjusting
reporting
provisions.
We
are
also
updating
current
references
to
test
procedures
in
40
CFR
part
86
by
pointing
instead
to
40
CFR
part
1065.
In
addition,
we
are
making
a
variety
of
minor
corrections
and
clarifications.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
a
discussion
of
all
these
changes.

F.
Marine
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
91)

We
are
adopting
only
minimal
changes
for
Marine
SI
engines
in
40
CFR
part
91.
These
changes
are
primarily
to
update
current
references
to
test
procedures
in
40
CFR
part
86
by
pointing
instead
to
40
CFR
part
1065.
We
are
also
updating
various
definitions,
as
described
in
Section
II.
A.
Manufacturers
raised
some
issues
in
the
comment
period
that
resulted
in
further
minor
corrections
and
adjustments
for
the
final
rule.
We
also
corrected
equations
for
typographical
errors.

G.
Large
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
(
40
CFR
part
1048)

We
adopted
emission
standards
for
nonroad
spark­
ignition
engines
over
19
kW
in
November
2002
(
67
FR
68242).
The
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
1048
were
our
first
attempt
to
draft
emission­
control
regulations
in
plain­
language
format.
In
the
recent
final
rule
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
we
went
through
a
similar
process,
including
extensive
interaction
with
a
different
set
of
manufacturers.
This
process
led
us
adopt
regulatory
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1039
that
differ
somewhat
from
those
in
part
1048.
Since
the
process
of
meeting
standards,
applying
for
certificates,
and
complying
with
other
emission­
related
requirements
has
a
lot
of
commonality
across
programs,
we
have
a
strong
interest
in
adopting
consistent
provisions
and
uniform
terminology
where
possible.
As
a
result,
we
are
making
extensive
changes
in
part
1048
to
align
with
the
regulations
in
part
1039.
15
For
discussion
of
these
changes,
see
the
Technical
Support
Document.

H.
Recreational
vehicles
(
40
CFR
part
1051)

We
adopted
emission
standards
for
recreational
vehicles
in
November
2002
(
67
FR
68242).
The
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
1051
were
our
first
attempt
to
draft
emission­
control
regulations
in
plain­
language
format.
In
the
recent
final
rule
for
nonroad
diesel
engines,
we
went
through
a
similar
process,
including
extensive
interaction
with
a
different
set
of
manufacturers.
This
process
led
us
to
adopt
regulatory
provisions
in
40
CFR
part
1039
that
differ
from
those
in
part
1051.
Since
the
process
of
meeting
standards,
applying
for
certificates,
and
complying
with
other
emission­
related
requirements
has
a
lot
of
commonality
across
programs,
we
have
a
strong
interest
in
adopting
consistent
provisions
and
uniform
terminology
as
much
as
possible.
As
a
result,
we
are
making
extensive
changes
in
part
1051
to
align
with
the
regulations
in
part
1039.
These
provisions
are
all
discussed
in
more
detail
in
the
Technical
Support
Document.

We
proposed
to
add
a
constraint
for
averaging,
banking,
and
trading
to
prevent
manufacturers
from
including
credits
earned
in
California
or
another
state
if
there
would
ever
be
a
situation
in
which
manufacturers
would
be
making
engines
with
lower
emissions
to
meet
more
stringent
state
standards
or
to
earn
emission
credits
under
the
state
program.
We
are
adopting
this
provision
in
the
final
rule
to
require
exclusion
of
California
sales
from
federal
ABT
calculations
if
a
company
is
subject
to
more
stringent
state
standards,
or
if
a
company
generates
or
uses
emissions
credits
to
show
that
it
meets
California
standards.
This
provision
is
necessary
to
prevent
double­
counting
of
emission
credits.
In
the
case
of
recreational
vehicles,
California
adopted
emission
standards
that
predate
the
EPA
rulemaking.
The
California
emission
standards
are
based
on
a
similar
technology
assessment,
but
are
in
a
different
form.
For
example,
California
specifies
different
numerical
standards
that
apply
to
hydrocarbon
emissions
only,
while
EPA's
standards
apply
to
HC+
NOx
emissions.
Given
the
difficulty
in
comparing
these
two
sets
of
standards,
we
are
making
the
judgment
that,
for
the
purposes
of
ABT
calculations,
California's
current
exhaust
emission
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
EPA
standards.
Under
the
current
requirements,
companies
would
therefore
exclude
their
California
products
from
federal
ABT
calculations
only
if
those
products
generate
or
use
emission
credits
under
the
California
program.
If
California
adopts
new
standards
for
recreational
vehicles,
we
will
again
make
a
judgment
regarding
the
relative
stringency
of
the
two
programs
for
ABT
purposes.

I.
Locomotives
(
40
CFR
part
92)

We
proposed
a
variety
of
changes
for
our
locomotive
regulations
in
40
CFR
part
92
to
correct
various
technical
references
and
typographical
errors.
We
are
finalizing
those
changes.
We
are
also
finalizing
other
changes
in
response
to
comments.
The
large
majority
of
the
comments
received
regarding
locomotives
came
from
the
Engine
Manufacturers
Association
(
EMA).
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
additional
information.
In
addition
to
the
changes
being
finalized,
we
are
also
publishing
the
following
clarifications
in
response
to
public
comments.

EMA
asked
that
remanufacturers
be
allowed
to
limit
the
practice
of
not
replacing
every
power
assembly
with
remanufactured
power
assemblies
at
the
time
of
engine
remanufacture.
16
Remanufacturers
already
can
limit
this
practice
just
as
original
manufacturers
limit
the
parts
that
are
used
in
their
locomotives.
In
fact,
remanufacturers
would
be
expected
to
limit
this
practice
to
only
those
cases
in
which
they
can
be
certain
that
the
previously
used
power
assembly
will
not
cause
an
engine
to
exceed
an
emission
standard.
By
allowing
an
engine
to
be
remanufactured
under
its
certificate,
the
remanufacturer
is
assuming
responsibility
for
the
emission
performance
of
that
remanufactured
engine.
We
define
remanufactured
locomotives
to
be
"
new",
and
the
certificate
holder
has
the
same
responsibilities
as
the
manufacturer
of
a
freshly
manufactured
locomotive.
The
remanufacturer
is
thus
expected
to
maintain
some
degree
of
control
over
the
remanufacturing
process
to
ensure
that
the
remanufactured
locomotive.
For
example,
the
remanufacturer
might
limit
the
certificate
to
only
those
engines
remanufactured
by
installers
that
been
properly
trained.
It
must
be
noted,
however,
that
while
certificate
holders
have
responsibility
for
the
emission
performance
of
locomotives
remanufactured
under
their
certificates,
40
CFR
92.209
also
assigns
responsibility
to
others
involved
in
the
remanufacturing
process.

EMA
asked
that
EPA
not
use
the
term
"
offer
for
sale"
in
the
prohibited
acts
(
40
CFR
92.1103).
They
are
concerned
that
this
would
be
problematic
because
locomotives
are
generally
manufactured
only
after
a
sales
agreement
has
been
completed.
The
manufacturer
offers
to
manufacture
and
sell
a
locomotive
at
least
several
months
before
it
actually
has
obtained
a
certificate
of
conformity
for
the
locomotive.
Given
this
confusion,
we
are
clarifying
that
EPA
does
not
interpret
the
phrase
"
offer
to
sell"
to
apply
to
products
that
have
not
yet
been
manufactured
(
or
remanufactured,
as
applicable).

EMA
asked
that
EPA
exempt
replacement
engines
as
we
do
in
other
nonroad
engine
programs.
However,
such
exemption
is
not
necessary
with
locomotives.
Long
after
the
manufacturer
has
stopped
manufacturing
brand
new
engines,
that
manufacturer
(
along
with
other
remanufacturers)
will
be
certifying
remanufacturing
systems.
Thus,
we
believe
that
the
cases
in
which
a
brand
new
engine
will
be
needed
will
be
rare.
Nevertheless,
we
are
finalizing
a
regulatory
change
in
40
CFR
92.204
to
explicitly
allow
manufacturers
to
include
freshly
manufactured
locomotive
engines
in
the
same
engine
family
as
remanufactured
locomotives.
We
believe
that
this
will
resolve
the
issue,
since
manufacturers
would
merely
need
to
certify
a
remanufacturing
system
for
each
engine
it
manufactures.

Finally,
we
are
adopting
a
provision
that
will
allow
manufacturers
to
certify
locomotives
that
have
total
power
less
than
750
kW.
This
provision
will
allow
manufacturers
of
hybrid
locomotives
to
certify
under
40
CFR
part
92.
EMA
commented
that
if
we
do
this,
we
should
specify
test
procedures
and
duty­
cycle
weightings
for
such
hybrids.
We
agree
that
this
would
be
appropriate
in
the
long
term,
but
do
not
believe
that
this
rulemaking
would
be
the
proper
place
for
such
provisions.
Instead,
we
expect
to
rely
on
the
testing
and
calculation
flexibility
of
40
CFR
92.207
and
92.132(
e)
to
certify
hybrids
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.

J.
Highway
engines
and
vehicles
(
40
CFR
parts
85
and
86)

Most
of
the
changes
we
are
adopting
in
parts
85
and
86
apply
uniquely
to
different
types
of
vehicles
or
engines.
We
are,
however,
adopting
changes
to
the
program
for
Independent
2
"
Guidance
Regarding
Test
Procedures
for
Heavy­
Duty
On­
Highway
and
Non­
Road
Engines,
"
December
3,
2002.

17
Commercial
Importers
that
affect
all
the
different
applications.
The
Technical
Support
Document
describes
how
we
are
limiting
the
importation
of
products
where
the
applicable
standards
are
based
on
the
year
of
original
production.
We
continue
to
allow
unlimited
importation
of
products
where
the
applicable
standards
are
based
on
the
year
of
modification.

The
following
paragraphs
provide
an
overview
of
the
changes
for
each
type
of
engine
or
vehicle.
See
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
a
more
detailed
discussion
of
these
changes.

1.
Light­
duty
vehicles
For
light­
duty
vehicles,
we
are
adopting
a
variety
of
clarifications
and
corrections,
especially
related
to
test
procedures.

2.
Highway
motorcycles
For
highway
motorcycles,
we
are
correcting
fuel
specifications,
clarifying
the
requirements
related
to
engine
labels,
fixing
the
provisions
related
to
using
nonroad
certificates
for
highway
motorcycles
below
50
cc
(
consistent
with
similar
changes
in
other
programs),
and
making
a
variety
of
other
minor
corrections.

3.
Heavy­
duty
highway
engines
As
discussed
above,
we
are
adopting
the
lab­
testing
and
field­
testing
specifications
in
part
1065
for
heavy­
duty
highway
engines,
including
both
diesel
and
Otto­
cycle
engines.
These
procedures
replace
those
currently
published
in
40
CFR
part
86,
subpart
N.

We
proposed
to
complete
the
migration
of
heavy­
duty
highway
test
procedures
to
part
1065
by
the
2008
model
year.
Manufacturers
pointed
out
that
it
would
be
most
appropriate
to
move
this
date
back
to
2010
to
correspond
with
the
implementation
of
the
new
emission
standards
in
that
year.
We
agree
that
it
would
be
appropriate
to
make
this
transition
over
several
model
years
to
fully
migrate
to
part
1065,
no
later
than
model
year
2010.
Manufacturers
do
not
need
to
conduct
new
testing
if
they
are
able
to
use
carryover
data,
but
any
new
testing
for
2010
and
later
model
years
must
be
done
using
the
part
1065
procedures.
Migrating
heavy­
duty
highway
engines
to
the
part
1065
procedures
allows
us
to
include
all
the
testing­
related
improvements
in
the
HD2007
rule,
including
those
we
have
adopted
through
guidance.
2
In
addition,
part
1065
incorporates
revisions
based
on
updated
procedures
for
sampling
low
concentrations
of
PM.

Another
question
was
raised
about
how
EPA
should
conduct
testing
during
this
transition
stage.
We
intend
to
incorporate
near­
term
upgrades
that
would
make
our
testing
facilities
capable
of
meeting
the
requirements
in
part
1065.
Most
of
the
testing
methods
in
part
1065
result
in
better
measurements
and
should
therefore
not
pose
problems,
even
if
manufacturers
based
their
certification
on
the
test
procedures
specified
in
part
86.
Three
exceptions
to
this
include
the
steps
18
for
mapping
an
engine,
denormalizing
test
cycles,
and
evaluating
cycle­
validation
criteria.
Changing
the
specified
procedure
for
these
three
items
would
involve
different
engine
operation
that
could
cause
an
engine
to
have
higher
or
lower
emission
levels.
For
all
other
parameters,
the
new
procedures
would
be
equivalent,
or
would
give
more
accurate
or
more
precise
results.
We
are
therefore
specifying
that
we
will
follow
the
manufacturer's
procedures
for
these
three
items
related
to
engine
operation,
but
will
otherwise
consider
our
tests
valid
if
we
use
procedures
from
either
part
86
or
part
1065,
regardless
of
the
procedures
used
by
the
manufacturer.

EMA
responded
to
our
request
for
comment
related
to
a
provision
that
would
allow
engine
manufacturers
to
ship
certified
engines
without
applicable
aftertreatment
components,
while
providing
for
separate
shipment
of
those
components
to
equipment
manufacturers.
EMA
commented
that
such
a
provision
would
be
appropriate,
and
that
it
should
be
set
up
to
require
either
that
the
component
cost
be
included
in
the
price
of
the
engine,
or
auditing
requirements
for
engine
manufacturers,
but
not
both,
since
the
equipment
manufacturer
has
enough
incentive
to
make
the
final
installation
without
additional
oversight.
We
agree
with
manufacturers
that
these
more
flexible
arrangements
are
appropriate
for
the
prevailing
business
relationships
for
heavy­
duty
highway
engines.
There
are
far
fewer
manufacturers
producing
heavy­
duty
trucks
and
buses
than
nonroad
equipment.
Engine
manufacturers
are
therefore
expected
to
be
able
to
maintain
control
with
an
approach
that
requires
them
either
to
include
the
price
of
the
aftertreatment
in
the
engine
price
or
to
conduct
periodic
audits
of
vehicle
manufacturers,
but
not
both.
In
the
periodic
audit
we
require
manufacturers
to
confirm
the
number
of
aftertreatment
component
shipped
is
sufficient
for
the
applicable
vehicle
production.
This
confirmation
is
intended
to
show
that
the
vehicle
manufacturers
have
purchasing
and
manufacturing
processes
in
place
to
ensure
that
they
are
ordering
and
receiving
enough
aftertreatment
components
and
that
each
vehicles
is
equipped
with
the
correct
components.
To
reduce
the
risk
of
noncompliance
where
the
engine
and
aftertreatment
components
are
not
priced
together,
we
require
that
engine
manufacturers
have
a
written
confirmation
that
the
vehicle
manufacturer
has
ordered
the
appropriate
aftertreatment
before
shipping
engines
without
the
otherwise
required
aftertreatment
components.

We
are
adopting
a
test­
related
provision
that
was
described
in
the
proposal.
We
requested
comment
on
approaches
to
address
the
concern
that
some
engines
experience
significant
overspeed
excursions
when
following
the
proposed
approach
to
defining
maximum
test
speed
and
denormalizing
duty
cycles.
As
described
in
the
Technical
Support
Document,
we
are
finalizing
a
provision
to
define
maximum
test
speed
at
the
highest
speed
point
at
which
engines
are
expected
to
operate
in
use.

III.
Public
Participation
In
the
proposed
rule,
we
invited
public
participation
in
a
public
hearing,
a
public
workshop,
and
a
comment
period
for
written
comments.
No
one
responded
to
indicate
in
interest
in
the
public
hearing,
but
we
held
the
public
workshop
to
talk
through
a
wide
range
of
issues.
We
also
received
written
comments
from
about
20
organizations,
mostly
representing
manufacturers.
This
section
highlights
several
principle
issues
raised
by
commenters.
The
Final
Technical
Support
Document
addresses
the
full
range
of
comments.
19
IV.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
the
Agency
must
determine
whether
the
regulatory
action
is
"
significant"
and
therefore
subject
to
review
by
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
and
the
requirements
of
this
Executive
Order.
The
Executive
Order
defines
a
"
significant
regulatory
action"
as
any
regulatory
action
that
is
likely
to
result
in
a
rule
that
may:
°
Have
an
annual
effect
on
the
economy
of
$
100
million
or
more
or
adversely
affect
in
a
material
way
the
economy,
a
sector
of
the
economy,
productivity,
competition,
jobs,
the
environment,
public
health
or
safety,
or
State,
Local,
or
Tribal
governments
or
communities;
°
Create
a
serious
inconsistency
or
otherwise
interfere
with
an
action
taken
or
planned
by
another
agency;
°
Materially
alter
the
budgetary
impact
of
entitlements,
grants,
user
fees,
or
loan
programs,
or
the
rights
and
obligations
of
recipients
thereof;
or
°
Raise
novel
legal
or
policy
issues
arising
out
of
legal
mandates,
the
President's
priorities,
or
the
principles
set
forth
in
the
Executive
Order.

Because
the
rule
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs,
it
is
not
a
significant
regulatory
action
and
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
Executive
Order
12866.
Any
new
costs
associated
with
this
rule
will
be
minimal.
In
addition,
some
of
the
changes
will
substantially
reduce
the
burden
associated
with
testing,
as
described
in
the
Regulatory
Support
Document.

B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
This
rule
does
not
include
any
new
collection
requirements,
as
it
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs.

C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
The
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
generally
requires
an
agency
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
of
any
rule
subject
to
notice
and
comment
rulemaking
requirements
under
the
Administrative
Procedure
Act
or
any
other
statute
unless
the
agency
certifies
that
the
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
Small
entities
include
small
businesses,
small
organizations,
and
small
governmental
jurisdictions.

For
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
this
final
rule
on
small
entities,
a
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(
1)
A
small
business
as
defined
by
the
Small
Business
Administration
(
SBA)
by
category
of
business
using
North
America
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
and
codified
at
13
CFR
121.201;
(
2)
a
small
governmental
jurisdiction
that
is
a
government
of
a
city,
county,
town,
school
district
or
special
district
with
a
population
of
less
than
50,000;
and
(
3)
a
small
organization
that
is
any
not­
for­
profit
enterprise
which
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.

After
considering
the
economic
impacts
of
this
final
rule
on
small
entities,
I
certify
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
The
small
entities
directly
regulated
by
this
rule
are
small
businesses
that
produce
nonroad
engines.
We
have
determined
that
no
small
entities
will
experience
more
than
incidental
costs
as
a
result
of
20
this
rule.
This
rule
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs.
This
rule,
therefore,
does
not
require
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis.

Although
this
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities,
EPA
nonetheless
has
tried
to
reduce
the
impact
of
this
rule
on
small
entities.
For
example,
most
of
the
changes
clarify
existing
requirements,
which
will
reduce
the
time
needed
to
comply,
and
added
flexibility,
which
may
allow
for
a
simpler
effort
to
comply.

D.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA),
Public
Law.
104­
4,
establishes
requirements
for
federal
agencies
to
assess
the
effects
of
their
regulatory
actions
on
state,
local,
and
tribal
governments
and
the
private
sector.
Under
section
202
of
the
UMRA,
EPA
generally
must
prepare
a
written
statement,
including
a
cost­
benefit
analysis,
for
proposed
and
final
rules
with
"
federal
mandates"
that
may
result
in
expenditures
to
state,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
to
the
private
sector,
of
$
100
million
or
more
in
any
one
year.
Before
promulgating
an
EPA
rule
for
which
a
written
statement
is
needed,
section
205
of
the
UMRA
generally
requires
EPA
to
identify
and
consider
a
reasonable
number
of
regulatory
alternatives
and
adopt
the
least
costly,
most
cost­
effective,
or
least
burdensome
alternative
that
achieves
the
objectives
of
the
rule.
The
provisions
of
section
205
do
not
apply
when
they
are
inconsistent
with
applicable
law.
Moreover,
section
205
allows
EPA
to
adopt
an
alternative
other
than
the
least
costly,
most
cost­
effective,
or
least
burdensome
alternative
if
the
Administrator
publishes
with
the
final
rule
an
explanation
of
why
that
alternative
was
not
adopted.

Before
EPA
establishes
any
regulatory
requirements
that
may
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments,
including
tribal
governments,
it
must
have
developed
under
section
203
of
the
UMRA
a
small
government
agency
plan.
The
plan
must
provide
for
notifying
potentially
affected
small
governments,
enabling
officials
of
affected
small
governments
to
have
meaningful
and
timely
input
in
the
development
of
EPA
regulatory
proposals
with
significant
federal
intergovernmental
mandates,
and
informing,
educating,
and
advising
small
governments
on
compliance
with
the
regulatory
requirements.

This
rule
contains
no
federal
mandates
for
state,
local,
or
tribal
governments
as
defined
by
the
provisions
of
Title
II
of
the
UMRA.
The
rule
imposes
no
enforceable
duties
on
any
of
these
governmental
entities.
Nothing
in
the
rule
significantly
or
uniquely
affects
small
governments.
We
have
determined
that
this
rule
contains
no
federal
mandates
that
may
result
in
expenditures
of
more
than
$
100
million
to
the
private
sector
in
any
single
year.
This
rule
merely
revises
the
measurement
methods
and
makes
a
variety
of
technical
amendments
to
existing
programs.
The
requirements
of
UMRA
therefore
do
not
apply
to
this
action.

E.
Executive
Order
13132:
Federalism
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
"
Federalism"
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
"
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications."
"
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications"
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
21
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."

Under
Section
6
of
Executive
Order
13132,
EPA
may
not
issue
a
regulation
that
has
federalism
implications,
that
imposes
substantial
direct
compliance
costs,
and
that
is
not
required
by
statute,
unless
the
Federal
government
provides
the
funds
necessary
to
pay
the
direct
compliance
costs
incurred
by
State
and
local
governments,
or
EPA
consults
with
State
and
local
officials
early
in
the
process
of
developing
the
proposed
regulation.
EPA
also
may
not
issue
a
regulation
that
has
federalism
implications
and
that
preempts
State
law,
unless
the
Agency
consults
with
State
and
local
officials
early
in
the
process
of
developing
the
proposed
regulation.

Section
4
of
the
Executive
Order
contains
additional
requirements
for
rules
that
preempt
State
or
local
law,
even
if
those
rules
do
not
have
federalism
implications
(
i.
e.,
the
rules
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).
Those
requirements
include
providing
all
affected
State
and
local
officials
notice
and
an
opportunity
for
appropriate
participation
in
the
development
of
the
regulation.
If
the
preemption
is
not
based
on
express
or
implied
statutory
authority,
EPA
also
must
consult,
to
the
extent
practicable,
with
appropriate
State
and
local
officials
regarding
the
conflict
between
State
law
and
Federally
protected
interests
within
the
agency's
area
of
regulatory
responsibility.

This
rule
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,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132.

F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
With
Indian
Tribal
Governments
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
"
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments"
(
65
FR
67249,
November
6,
2000),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
"
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
tribal
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
tribal
implications."

This
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
This
rule
will
be
implemented
at
the
Federal
level
and
impose
compliance
costs
only
on
engine
manufacturers
and
ship
builders.
Tribal
governments
will
be
affected
only
to
the
extent
they
purchase
and
use
equipment
with
regulated
engines.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

G.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
and
Safety
Risks
Executive
Order
13045,
"
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks"
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997)
applies
to
any
rule
that
(
1)
is
determined
to
be
"
economically
significant"
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866,
and
(
2)
concerns
an
22
environmental
health
or
safety
risk
that
EPA
has
reason
to
believe
may
have
a
disproportionate
effect
on
children.
If
the
regulatory
action
meets
both
criteria,
Section
5­
501
of
the
Order
directs
the
Agency
to
evaluate
the
environmental
health
or
safety
effects
of
the
planned
rule
on
children,
and
explain
why
the
planned
regulation
is
preferable
to
other
potentially
effective
and
reasonably
feasible
alternatives
considered
by
the
Agency.

This
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
Executive
Order
because
it
does
not
involve
decisions
on
environmental
health
or
safety
risks
that
may
disproportionately
affect
children.

H.
Executive
Order
13211:
Actions
that
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
This
rule
is
not
a
"
significant
energy
action"
as
defined
in
Executive
Order
13211,
"
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use"
(
66
FR
28355
(
May
22,
2001)),
because
it
is
not
likely
to
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
supply,
distribution,
or
use
of
energy.

I.
National
Technology
Transfer
Advancement
Act
Section
12(
d)
of
the
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
("
NTTAA"),
Public
Law
104­
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note)
directs
EPA
to
use
voluntary
consensus
standards
in
its
regulatory
activities
unless
doing
so
would
be
inconsistent
with
applicable
law
or
otherwise
impractical.
Voluntary
consensus
standards
are
technical
standards
(
e.
g.,
materials
specifications,
test
methods,
sampling
procedures,
and
business
practices)
that
are
developed
or
adopted
by
voluntary
consensus
standards
bodies.
NTTAA
directs
EPA
to
provide
Congress,
through
OMB,
explanations
when
the
Agency
decides
not
to
use
available
and
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards.

This
rule
involves
technical
standards.
The
International
Organization
for
Standardization
(
ISO)
has
a
voluntary
consensus
standard
that
can
be
used
to
test
engines.
However,
the
test
procedures
in
this
final
rule
reflect
a
level
of
development
that
goes
substantially
beyond
the
ISO
or
other
published
procedures.
The
procedures
incorporate
new
specifications
for
transient
emission
measurements,
measuring
PM
emissions
at
very
low
levels,
measuring
emissions
using
field­
testing
procedures.
The
procedures
we
adopt
in
this
rule
will
form
the
working
template
for
ISO
and
national
and
state
governments
to
define
test
procedures
for
measuring
engine
emissions.
As
such,
we
have
worked
extensively
with
the
representatives
of
other
governments,
testing
organizations,
and
the
affected
industries.

V.
Statutory
Provisions
and
Legal
Authority
Statutory
authority
for
the
engine
controls
adopted
in
this
rule
is
in
42
U.
S.
C.
7401
­
7671q.

List
of
Subjects
40
CFR
Part
85
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research,
Warranties.
23
40
CFR
Part
86
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Labeling,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

40
CFR
Part
89
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research,
Vessels,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
90
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
91
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
Requirements,
Warranties
40
CFR
Part
92
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Labeling,
Railroads,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Warranties
40
CFR
Part
94
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Incorporation
by
reference,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Vessels,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
1039,
1048,
and
1051
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Incorporation
by
reference,
Labeling,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Warranties.

40
CFR
Part
1065
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Incorporation
by
reference,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Research.
24
40
CFR
Part
1068
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Imports,
Motor
vehicle
pollution,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Warranties.

Dated:

___________________________________
Steven
Johnson,
Administrator.
