[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 140 (Friday, July 19, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37738-37741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18387]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5540-3]
Retrofit/Rebuild Requirements for 1993 and Earlier Model Year
Urban Buses; Approval of a Notification of Intent To Certify Equipment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Agency Certification of Equipment for the Urban Bus
Retrofit/Rebuild Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Agency received a notification of intent to certify
equipment signed January 2, 1996, from the Detroit Diesel Corporation
(DDC) with principal place of business at 13400 Outer Drive, West;
Detroit, Michigan, 48239, for certification of urban bus retrofit/
rebuild equipment pursuant to 40 CFR Sections 85.1401-85.1415. The
equipment is applicable to Detroit Diesel Corporation's (DDC)
petroleum-fueled 6V92TA model engines having Detroit Diesel Electronic
Control (DDEC II) fuel injection. Certification is restricted to 1988
through 1990 model year engines. On April 17, 1996, EPA published a
notice in the Federal Register that the notification had been received
and made the notification available for public review and comment for a
period of 45 days (61 FR 16739). EPA has completed its review of this
notification, and the comments received, and the Director of the Engine
Programs and Compliance Division has determined that it meets all the
requirements for certification. Accordingly, EPA has approved the
certification of this equipment effective June 28, 1996. (EPA provided
a letter to DDC on this date stating Director of the Engine Programs
and Compliance Division had granted certification.)
The certified equipment provides 25 percent or greater reduction in
exhaust emissions of particulate matter (PM) for the engines for which
it is certified (see below), and meets the requirements of the urban
bus retrofit/rebuild program for certification. Therefore, as discussed
below, this equipment may be used by operators choosing compliance
program 2 and operators choosing compliance program 1 unless rebuild
equipment is certified to trigger the 0.10 g/bhp-hr standard for these
engines under the urban bus retrofit/rebuild program.
EPA anticipated reviewing the cost information supplied by DDC to
determine whether it complied with the life cycle cost requirements. In
general, equipment certified as meeting both the emissions requirements
and cost requirements can be considered by EPA when revising the post-
rebuild PM levels to be used by transit operators choosing to comply
with Option 2 (the averaging program). However, equipment has already
been certified for these engines as meeting both the emissions
requirements and cost requirements of the regulations (i.e. the 25
percent PM reduction standard has already been triggered for these
engines). Two current equipment certifications (Engelhard Corporation
(60 FR 28402, May 31, 1995), and Johnson Matthey (61 FR 16773, April
17, 1996)) are certified to the same PM level as the DDC equipment
certified today. Because the DDC rebuild equipment will not have a
lower certification level than the equipment already certified, EPA
sees no program benefit for basing certification on the basis of
meeting life cycle costs.
The DDC notification, as well as other materials specifically
relevant to it, are contained in Public Docket A-93-42, category XII,
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.
DATES: The effective date of certification is June 28, 1996, which is
the date on which the Director of the Engine Programs and Compliance
Division notified DDC in writing that certification was approved.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Stricker, Engine Programs and
Compliance Division (6303J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401
M St. SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Telephone: (202) 233-9322.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
By a notification of intent to certify signed January 2, 1996,
Detroit Diesel Corporation (DDC) applied for certification of equipment
applicable to its 1988 through 1990 model year 6V92TA model urban bus
engines
[[Page 37739]]
having Detroit Diesel Electronic Control (DDEC II) fuel injection. The
equipment to be certified, referred to as an upgrade kit, is basically
later model-year components (such as turbocharger, blower, fuel
injectors, and cylinder kits) which replace the original parts on the
engine.
All parts of the certified equipment are contained in two basic
types of kits. One of each basic type of kit is required for the
rebuild of an engine. Three combinations of the two basic types of kits
are certified--the specific combination to be used with a particular
engine depends upon the direction of engine rotation, orientation of
the engine block, and engine power level. One basic type of kit
includes a gasket kit, cylinder kit, and remanufactured fuel injectors.
The other basic type of kit includes remanufactured parts, including
camshafts, blower assembly, turbocharger, and cylinder head assemblies.
In addition, the kit includes an updated computer program for the
engine's computer.
The DDC upgrade kit is intended for use on 1988 through 1990 model
year 6V92TA model urban bus engines having Detroit Diesel Electronic
Control (DDEC II) fuel injection. The 1988 through 1990 6V92TA DDEC II
models were originally manufactured to either a 253 horsepower (hp)
configuration or a 277 hp configuration. Use of today's certified
upgrade kit will result in a 277 hp engine configuration, regardless of
the engine configuration of the original engine. DDC did not attempt to
certify the 253 hp version of the 1991 engine configuration. To ensure
that transit operators only upgrade their engines to the 277 hp engine
configuration, DDC will only provide the computer program (or, as DDC
refers to it, the certification word code) for the 1991 model year 277
hp engine configuration.
In accordance with 40 CFR 85.1406, and consistent with the
discussion in the preamble to final rule (58 FR 21359, April 23, 1993),
DDC based its certification demonstration on existing new engine
certification data. The baseline test data are from a 1988 6V92TA DDEC
II engine (253 hp) tested in DDC's 1989 new engine certification
program. Test data for the upgraded engine configuration are from a
1991 6V92TA DDEC II engine (277 hp), tested in DDC's 1991 new engine
certification program. Emission test data supplied by DDC in its
notification are shown below in Table A.
Table A.--Emission Test Data (g/bhp-hr)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline Upgrade
1988 1991
Gaseous and particulate emissions 6V92TA 6V92TA
DDEC II DDEC II
(253 hp) (277 hp)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HC................................................ 0.66 0.43
CO................................................ 1.44 1.85
NOX............................................... 8.19 4.77
PM................................................ 0.315 0.218
Smoke emissions:
Accel........................................... 3.3% 5.4%
Lug............................................. 1.8% 0.9%
Peak............................................ 4.7% 10.6%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although baseline test data are only provided for the 253 hp engine
configuration, and not the 277 hp engine configuration, EPA believes
that the 1988 through 1990 models with the 277 hp engine configuration
will still achieve at least a 25 percent reduction in PM with the
upgrade kit installed. DDC provided test data from engine development
testing which show the 1988 through 1990 277 hp engine configuration
emits 0.319 g/bhphr, essentially equal to the 0.315 g/bhphr level shown
by the 253 hp baseline engine.
In addition to demonstrating reductions in PM exhaust emissions,
the data indicate that applicable engines with the certified equipment
installed will comply with the federal 1988 model year emission
standards for hydrocarbon (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of
nitrogen (NOX), and smoke emissions.
DDC is certifying this equipment to a PM emission level of 0.23 g/
bhp-hr for the 1988 through 1990 model year upgrade. The certification
level represents a 27 percent reduction in PM from the 1988 baseline
configuration. The certification levels for this equipment in the urban
bus program are indicated below in Table B, and apply only to the model
numbers listed.
Table B.--Retrofit/Rebuild PM Certification Levels For DDC Equipment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification
Engine model Model year Model No. level (g/bhp-
hr)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8067-7B27
8067-7B28
8067-7B21
8067-7B22
6V92TA.......................... 1988-1990 8067-3B21 0.23
DDEC II......................... 8067-3B22
8067-7B23
8067-7B24
8067-4B23
8067-4B25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DDC submitted life cycle cost information in its application for
certification and indicated that this equipment would meet the life
cycle cost requirements ($2,000 in 1992 dollars) for all urban bus
operators. The suggested list price of the kit was stated to be
$6,581.81, compared to $6,966.27 for a standard rebuild. DDC also
calculated a $1,440 fuel penalty, resulting from a fuel economy
decrease of approximately 4.7 percent with the upgrade kit installed.
As discussed in the Summary section above, EPA had anticipated
reviewing the cost information supplied by DDC to determine whether it
complied with the life cycle cost requirements of the regulations (that
is, whether the equipment would be available for less than the life
cycle cost limit of $2,000 (in 1992 dollars) incremental to a standard
rebuild). However, because equipment has already been certified for
these engines as meeting both the emissions requirements and cost
requirements of the regulations (i.e., the
[[Page 37740]]
25 percent PM reduction standard has already been triggered for these
engines), EPA sees no program benefit for basing certification on the
basis of complying with life cycle cost requirements, and therefore,
has not reviewed the cost information supplied by DDC.
Section IV below discusses operator requirements and
responsibilities, including use of the DDC equipment to meet program
requirements.
II. Summary and Analysis of Comments
EPA received comments from two parties on this DDC notification:
Johnson Matthey (JMI) and students of Florida International University
(FIU).
Johnson Matthey, a manufacturer of exhaust system aftertreatment
devices, has comments in two general areas: cost and compliance.
Regarding costs associated with use of the DDC equipment, JMI believes
that the DDC equipment does not meet the life cycle cost requirements
of the regulations. JMI believes the fuel economy penalty calculated by
DDC does not accurately reflect typical transit operator fuel costs. In
addition, JMI believes that most transit operators do not use strictly
original equipment (OE) parts to rebuild their engines. JMI comments
that use of less expensive non-OE parts is typical, and would make the
cost of a standard rebuild less expensive than the cost provided by
DDC. In addition, JMI comments that transit operators typically rebuild
or recondition certain components in-house, for a cost less than the
cost provided by DDC.
Finally, JMI comments that certain fleets are not properly
installing certified equipment. Specifically, JMI states that although
some fleets are purchasing certified engine upgrade kits, they are
rebuilding certain parts rather than the using the appropriate part
contained in the upgrade kit. JMI asks whether such engines are in a
certified configuration, how EPA ensures the product is used properly,
and what method of traceability is in place for the components of a
certified kit.
EPA appreciates the effort put forth by JMI to provide comments
regarding this equipment. As discussed above, the Agency believes that
there is no need to evaluate the life cycle cost data nor to respond at
this time to comments concerning life cycle costs because the
requirement to reduce PM by 25 percent has been triggered for
applicable engines with the certification on May 31, 1995, of an
exhaust catalyst manufactured by the Engelhard Corporation (60 FR
47170). Certification of this DDC equipment on the basis of meeting
life cycle cost requirements would not influence EPA's revision of
post-rebuild PM levels in mid-1996, because the 0.23 g/bhphr
certification level of the DDC equipment is equal to the certification
level of both the Engelhard catalyst and the Johnson Matthey catalyst
(61 FR 16773, April 17, 1996). Thus, EPA sees no programmatic benefit,
at this time, to basing certification on compliance with the life cycle
cost requirements.
Regarding JMI's comments on improper installation of certified
equipment, EPA notes that equipment manufacturers must supply
instructions for proper installation of certified equipment. Transit
operators who improperly install, or fail to install, certified
equipment, may not be in compliance with either of the two compliance
programs. EPA has authority to conduct, and plans to conduct, transit
operator audits to determine whether transit operators are complying
with program regulations.
Regarding traceability of certified parts, equipment manufacturers
are required to provide part numbers in their notification of intent to
certify, that will assist EPA in determining whether a transit operator
has used appropriate parts on an engine.
Comments from FIU, in general, support the need to reduce PM in
urban areas, however, FIU has provided comments that, in general,
appear relevant to the promulgation of the original retrofit
regulations, rather than to this particular certification. FIU
mistakenly comments that this DDC certification would affect all pre-94
model year urban buses, noting that approximately 35,000 of these buses
exist. In addition, FIU implies in their comments that, as a result of
this certification, rebuilds of affected engines will cost $8,000 over
the cost of a standard rebuild. Finally, FIU comments that students of
the university, based on an informal survey, support the certification
of the DDC equipment.
Although the retrofit program, in general, may affect as many as
35,000 or more buses of 1993 and earlier model year, this particular
certification applies only to 1988 through 1990 model year DDC 6V92TA
DDEC II engines, less than 20 percent of the total urban bus fleet.
Regarding FIU's discussion of the cost of a rebuild using the DDC
equipment, the Agency is not analyzing costs related to this equipment.
Further, the $8,000 cost FIU associated with this equipment would be
substantially higher than what the Agency would expect from an engine
upgrade kit. FIU appears to have confused the $7,940 life cycle cost
(in 1992 dollars) associated with the 0.10 g/bhphr PM standard as the
cost for the DDC equipment. While certain comments provided by the
students of FIU are not entirely appropriate or consistent with program
background and intricacies, the Agency appreciates the review of and
support for the urban bus program and DDC's notification that the
students have provided.
III. Certification Approval
The Agency has reviewed this notification, along with comments
received from interested parties, and finds that the equipment
described in this notification of intent to certify:
(1) reduces particulate matter exhaust emissions by at least 25
percent, without causing the applicable engine families to exceed other
exhaust emissions standards;
(2) will not cause an unreasonable risk to the public health,
welfare or safety;
(3) will not result in any additional range of parameter
adjustability; and
(4) with the exception of the life cycle cost requirements of
85.1403(b)(2)(ii), meets other requirements necessary for certification
under the Retrofit/Rebuild Requirements for 1993 and Earlier Model Year
Urban Buses (40 CFR Sections 85.1401 through 85.1415).
The Agency hereby certifies this equipment for use in the urban bus
retrofit/rebuild program as discussed below in Section IV.
IV. Operator Requirements and Responsibilities
In a Federal Register notice dated May 31, 1995 (60 FR 28402), the
Agency certified an exhaust catalyst manufactured by the Engelhard
Corporation, as a trigger of program requirements. For urban bus
operators affected by this program and electing to comply with program
1 requirements, that certification means that rebuilds and replacements
of model year 1988 through 1990 6V92TA DDEC IIs (and all other engines
for which that catalyst is applicable) performed 6 months or more after
that date of certification, must be performed with equipment certified
to reduce PM emissions by 25 percent or more. The certified DDC
equipment may be used immediately by urban bus operators who have
chosen to comply with either program 1 or program 2, as follows.
Today's Federal Register notice certifies the above-described DDC
equipment, when properly applied, as meeting the requirement to reduce
PM by 25 percent. Urban bus operators who choose to comply with program
1 may use the certified DDC equipment until
[[Page 37741]]
equipment is certified which triggers the 0.10 g/bhphr standard for the
1988 through 1990 6V92TA DDEC II engines.
Operators that have chosen to comply with program 2 may use the
certified DDC equipment, as discussed in the above paragraph, along
with the respective PM certification level from Table B when
calculating their average fleet PM level.
As stated in the program regulations (40 CFR 85.1401 through
85.1415), operators should maintain records for each engine in their
fleet to demonstrate that they are in compliance with the requirements
beginning on 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.
Richard Wilson,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 96-18387 Filed 7-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
