Air pollution control; new motor vehicles and engines: Urban buses (1993 and earlier model years); retrofit/rebuild requirements; equipment certification Engine Control Systems Ltd.,
[Federal Register: January 29, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 19)]
[Notices]
[Page 4445-4448]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29ja98-70]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5956-2]
Retrofit/Rebuild Requirements for 1993 and Earlier Model Year Urban Buses; Approval of an Application for Certification of Equipment and Amendment to a Previously-Approved Certification
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of agency approval of an application for equipment certification.
SUMMARY: The Agency received a notification of intent to certify urban
[[Page 4446]]
bus retrofit/rebuild equipment for 4-stroke petroleum fueled diesel engines pursuant to 40 CFR part 85, subpart O from Engine Control Systems Ltd. (ECS). Pursuant to section 85.1407(a)(7), a June 16, 1997 Federal Register document summarized the notification and announced that the notification would be available for public review and comment, and initiated a 45-day period during which comments could be submitted. In the notice the Agency stated it would review this notification of intent to certify, as well as comments received, to determine whether the equipment should be certified.
This action also notified the public that ECS proposed to amend its' two-stroke engine certification. On January 6, 1997, EPA approved certification of the ECS retrofit kit which demonstrated a 25% reduction in PM for 1979 to 1993 Detroit Diesel Corporation (DDC) 2- stroke engines. On February 11, 1997, ECS requested that this certification be modified to also include 8V71N engines for model years 1973 to 1984.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency received an application dated October 31, 1996, from Engine Control Systems Ltd. with principal place of business at 165 Pony Drive, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada for certification of urban bus retrofit/rebuild equipment pursuant to 40 CFR sections 85.1401-85.1415. On June 16, 1997, EPA published notification that the application had been received and made the application available for public review and comment for a period of 45 days (62 FR 32602). EPA has completed its review of this application and the Director of the Engine Program & Compliance Division (EPCD) has determined that it meets the requirements for certification. Testing demonstrated that the equipment reduced particulate matter (PM) by 18% for petroleum fueled diesel Cummins L-10 engines and all other 4-stroke engines that were originally manufactured prior to and including 1993 engines and is certified for Program 2 only. It does not apply for operators utilizing Program 1 as ECS did not demonstrate the minimum 25% reduction in PM necessary for Program 1 certification.
In addition, EPA has completed its review of ECS' February 11, 1997 request to modify the certification approved by EPA on January 6, 1997 (62 FR 46) which demonstrated a 25% reduction in PM for 1979 to 1993 DDC 2-stroke engines to also include 8V71N engines for model years 1973 to 1984. EPA published notice of this amendment request and requested comments for a period on 45 days in the same notice cited above. EPA has completed its review of this request and the Director of EPCD approves the certification amendment to include the 8V71N model for model years 1973 to 1984 for both programs 1 and 2.
DATES: The date of this document, January 29, 1998, is the official certification date for both the application and the amendment approval.
ADDRESSES: The ECS applications, as well as other materials specifically relevant to them, are contained in Public Docket A-93-42 (Category XIV-A or XVI-A), entitled ``Certification of Urban Bus Retrofit/Rebuild Equipment.'' This docket is located in room M-1500, Waterside Mall (Ground Floor), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Docket items may be inspected from 8:00 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. As provided in 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged by the Agency for copying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Erb, Engine Compliance Programs Group, Engine Programs & Compliance Division (6403J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Telephone: (202) 233-9259.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
-
Background
On October 31, 1996 ECS applied for certification of a kit, for use on 4-cycle petroleum fueled diesel Cummins L-10 and all other 4-stroke petroleum fuel urban bus engines that were originally manufactured prior to and including the 1993 model year. The kit includes a diesel oxidation converter muffler (CM). The application was submitted under EPA's Urban Bus/Retrofit program under Program 2 only.‹SUP›1‹/SUP›
\1\ EPA promulgated the Retrofit/Rebuild Requirements for 1993 and Earlier Model Year Urban Buses on April 23, 1993 (58 FR 21359). This final rule established the provisions for an urban bus retrofit/rebuild program as required by section 219(d) of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990.
The CM functions as a catalytic converter and a muffler. It takes the place of the original muffler in the engine exhaust system. Through testing in accordance with the Federal Test Procedure for heavy-duty diesel engines, ECS documented that emissions of particulate matter (PM) were reduced by 19% with the candidate equipment installed on the test engine. The CM is certified for use with Program 2 to provide an 18% reduction relative to the original engine configuration. Additionally, the equipment is certified to provide an 18% reduction on engines equipped with certified rebuild kits that do not include a converter muffler. This equipment is certified to the PM emission levels as specified in Table A. below.
Table A.--ECS Retrofit/Rebuild Certification Levels for Cummins Engines \2\
Retrofit PM Control
New engine
level with Engine family
parts list
Manufacture dates
PM level
Retrofit PM level with CM
CM and (CPL)
Cummins kit
343B.................................
780 11/20/85 to 12/31/87................
0.58 0.48................................
0.28 343B.................................
781 11/20/85 to 12/31/87................
.59 .48.................................
.28 343C.................................
0774 11/20/85 to 12/31/89................
.46 .38.................................
.28 343C.................................
0777 11/20/85 to 12/31/89................
.61 .50.................................
.28 343C.................................
0996 12/04/87 to 08/19/88................
.61 .50.................................
.28 343C.................................
1226 07/26/88 to 12/31/90................
.50 .41.................................
.28 343F.................................
1226 07/12/90 to 08/26/92................
.45 .37.................................
.28 343F.................................
1441 12/18/90 to 12/31/92................
.46 .38.................................
.28 343F.................................
1622 04/24/92 to 12/31/92................
.46 .38.................................
.28 343F.................................
1624 04/24/92 to 12/31/92................
.45 .37.................................
.28
[[Page 4447]]
Other 4-stroke engines............... ........... 1985 to 1993........................ ........... 18% reduction from original PM
N/A levels.
\2\ The New Engine PM certification levels are based on the certification level or the average test audit result for each engine family. It is noted
that for engine family 343F, although the PM standard for 1991 and 1992 was 0.25 g/bhp-hr and the NO‹INF›X standard was 5.0 g/bhp-hr, Cummins certified the 1226, 1441, 1622, and 1624 CPLs to a Federal Emission Limit (FEL) of 0.49 g/bhp-hr PM and 5.6 g/bhp-hr NO‹INF›X under the averaging, banking and trading program.
Urban bus operators who choose to comply with Program 2 and use the ECS equipment will use the PM emission value from Table A when calculating their average fleet PM level.
In addition, EPA has completed its review of ECS' February 11, 1997 request to amend the kit approved by EPA on January 6, 1997 (62 FR 46) which demonstrated a 25% reduction in PM for 1979 to 1993 DDC 2-stroke engines to also include 8V71N engines for model years 1973 to 1984. The certification covers those engines that are rebuilt to original specifications or in-use engines that are not rebuilt at the time the CM is installed provided the engine meets specified oil consumption limits. This certification does not trigger any new rebuild requirements for applicable engines because the requirement to use equipment certified to achieve at least a 25% reduction has already been triggered for the 8V71N engines. The PM certification levels are provided in Table B. below.
Table B.--ECS Retrofit/Rebuild Certification Levels For DDC 8V71N Models
PM level
Model with
DDC engine model
year converter Code/family muffler
8V71N........................... 1973-84 0.38 All.
-
Summary and Analysis of Comments
EPA received comments from one party on the ECS application during the comment period. The Chicago Transit Authority commented on the backpressure shown in the data for the 4-stroke kit noting the increase by 4.7% (from 2.36'' Hg to 2.47'' Hg with a new catalytic converter. The CTA expressed concerns about the increase in backpressure restriction of the engine and the negative effects, as the catalytic converter accumulates mileage in service. The CTA also commented that the fuel consumption increased from 0.397 lb/bhp-hr in the baseline engine test to 0.403 lb/bhp-hr in the test with the catalyst by 1.51%. It was noted by CTA that if the increase in fuel consumption in a 4- stroke Cummins engine also applies to the 2-stroke DDC engine, CTA will incur an additional expense of approximately $122,766 based on it's operation of 1,115 buses with DDC 6V92TA diesel engines. CTA also commented that the catalytic converter should be tested for structural durability to ensure it will hold up in service and that in the absence of a durability test structural failure of the catalytic muffler should be covered for 150,000 miles with no time limitation.
In regard to concerns expressed relative to the backpressure concern, ECS indicates in a letter to EPA dated September 17, 1997, that it designs its catalyst units to provide backpressure comparable to the original muffler. The test catalyst utilized the minimum catalyst volume in what ECS termed the poorest flowpath that could be used for Cummins L10 engines according to ECS. ECS reported that all tests to date have shown that the converter muffler designs maintain exhaust system backpressure under the maximum level recommended by Cummins (3 inches of Mercury). The catalyst used by ECS for exhaust testing had been degreened, that is, put in place on an exhaust system for 100 hours under steady state conditions to more closely represent the performance of an in-use catalyst.
With regard to comments on fuel consumption, the CTA noted that if the 1.51% increase in fuel consumption seen in the 4-stroke testing were applicable to the 2-stroke engines, CTA would incur additional fuel expenses for a large number of engines in its fleet. Since the certification being discussed herein relative the 4-stroke application and the testing performed on the 4-stroke engine is relevant only to the 4-stroke application, the discussion of the application of the 4- stroke catalyst and its application and effects on fuel economy on a 2- stroke engine would not be pertinent. Therefore, this comment does not address the 4-stroke application. Further, since the 4-stroke application being reviewed herein is for certification under Program 2 only, operators are not required to purchase this equipment as it is not trigger technology. Any decision by an operator to purchase this equipment can be made by an operator based on individual fleet composition and evaluation of the costs associated with available compliance options.
With regard to CTA's concern that the catalytic converter should be tested for structural durability to ensure it will hold up in service and that in the absence of the durability test structural failure of the catalytic muffler should be covered for 150,000 miles with no time limitation, the regulations at section 85.1409(a) require that the certifier shall warrant the retrofit/rebuild equipment will not cause an urban bus engine to exceed emission requirements for a period of 150,000 miles from when the equipment is installed. Section 85.1409(b) requires that the certifier shall replace all defective parts, free of charge for a period of 100,000 miles from when the equipment is installed. There is no time limitation on the time the warranties are in effect. In addition, there is no requirement in the regulations that the certifier shall provide durability data on the equipment. As discussed in the preamble to the final rule (58 FR page 21379, April 21, 1993) EPA decided not to require durability testing for this program. Any change to the warranty requirements can be made only through a regulatory amendment process which is beyond the scope of the certification decision being made in this document.
With regard to the ECS request to amend the previously certified kit to include the DDC 8V71N, CTA commented on engine exhaust backpressure restriction and structural durability of the catalytic converter. Again, in the absence of a durability test, CTA recommended that the structural failure of the catalytic converter muffler should be covered for 150,000 miles with no time limitation.
ECS has stated that it designs the systems to include a larger catalyst
[[Page 4448]]
volume which results in lower particulate mass flow through each individual substrate cell and a greater catalyst volume to ensure the substrate remains free from excessive carbon build up. According to ECS, this ensures that the converter muffler exhaust backpressure will remain within acceptable levels throughout the normal life. With regard to the request to perform durability testing and to require that the converter muffler should be warranted for 150,000 miles, please refer to the discussion of these concerns in the section above.
-
Certification Approval
The Agency has reviewed this application, along with comments received from interested parties, and finds that this equipment reduces particulate matter emissions without causing urban bus engines to fail to meet other applicable Federal emission requirements. Additionally, EPA finds that installation of this equipment will not cause or contribute to an unreasonable risk to the public health, welfare or safety, or result in any additional range of parameter adjustability or accessibility to adjustment than that of the engine manufacturer's emission related part. The application meets the requirements for certification under the Retrofit/Rebuild Requirements for 1993 and Earlier Model Year Urban Buses (40 CFR sections 85.1401 and 85.1415). Thus, the Agency hereby approves the certification of this equipment.
-
Operator Requirements and Responsibilities
With regard to the 4-stroke kit, for operators who have chosen to comply with Program 2, this equipment is immediately available for use and those who use this certified kit may claim the PM emissions reduction as stated in Table A when calculating their Fleet Level Attained. With regard to the 2-stroke amendment for the previously certified kit, the kit may be used to meet the requirements of both Programs 1 and 2 for the 8V71N engine family for model years 1973-84.
As stated in the regulations, operators should maintain records for each engine in their fleet to demonstrate that they are in compliance with the requirements, beginning January 1, 1995. These records include purchase records, receipts, and part numbers for the parts and components used in the rebuilding of urban bus engines.
Dated: January 20, 1998. Richard D. Wilson, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 98-2211Filed1-28-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
