DB Error: 1153 - Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

replace into fedregorigdata (url, contents, filedate) values ('http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-7999.htm', '[Federal Register: May 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 88)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 25097-25352] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06my08-15] [[Page 25097]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Part II Environmental Protection Agency ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 CFR Parts 9, 85, et al. Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters per Cylinder; Final Rule [[Page 25098]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 9, 85, 86, 89, 92, 94, 1033, 1039, 1042, 1065, and 1068 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190; FRL-8545-3] RIN 2060-AM06 Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters per Cylinder AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: EPA is adopting a comprehensive program to dramatically reduce pollution from locomotives and marine diesel engines. The controls will apply to all types of locomotives, including line-haul, switch, and passenger, and all types of marine diesel engines below 30 liters per cylinder displacement, including commercial and recreational, propulsion and auxiliary. The near-term emission standards for newly- built engines will phase in starting in 2009. The near-term program also includes new emission limits for existing locomotives and marine diesel engines that apply when they are remanufactured, and take effect as soon as certified remanufacture systems are available, as early as 2008. The long-term emissions standards for newly-built locomotives and marine diesel engines are based on the application of high-efficiency catalytic aftertreatment technology. These standards begin to take effect in 2015 for locomotives and in 2014 for marine diesel engines. We estimate particulate matter (PM) reductions of 90 percent and nitrogen oxides (NOX>) reductions of 80 percent from engines meeting these standards, compared to engines meeting the current standards. We project that by 2030, this program will reduce annual emissions of NOX> and PM by 800,000 and 27,000 tons, respectively. EPA projects these reductions will annually prevent up to 1,100 PM-related premature deaths, 280 ozone-related premature deaths, 120,000 lost work days, 120,000 school day absences, and 1.1 million minor restricted- activity days. The annual monetized health benefits of this rule in 2030 will range from $9.2 billion to $11 billion, assuming a 3 percent discount rate, or between $8.4 billion to $10 billion, assuming a 7% discount rate. The estimated annual social cost of the program in 2030 is projected to be $740 million, significantly less than the estimated benefits. DATES: This rule is effective on July 7, 2008. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this regulation is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0190. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov> web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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 through www.regulations.gov> or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 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: John Mueller, U.S. EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division (ASD), Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4275; fax number: (734) 214-4816; e-mail address: Mueller.John@epa.gov,> or Assessment and Standards Division Hotline; telephone number: (734) 214-4636. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Does This Action Apply to Me? Locomotives Entities potentially affected by this action are those that manufacture, remanufacture or import locomotives or locomotive engines; and those that own or operate locomotives. Regulated categories and entities include: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Examples of potentially Category NAICS code \\1\\ affected entities ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Industry.............. 333618, 336510 Manufacturers, remanufacturers and importers of locomotives and locomotive engines. Industry.............. 482110, 482111, Railroad owners and 482112 operators. Industry.............. 488210 Engine repair and maintenance. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your company is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 92.1, 1033.1, 1065.1, and 1068.1. If you have questions, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT> section. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\1\\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marine Engines and Vessels Entities potentially affected by this action are companies and persons that manufacture, sell, or import into the United States new marine compression-ignition engines, companies and persons that rebuild or maintain these engines, companies and persons that make vessels that use such engines, and the owners/operators of such vessels. Affected categories and entities include: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Examples of potentially Category NAICS code \\1\\ affected entities ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Industry.............. 333618 Manufacturers of new marine diesel engines. Industry.............. 33661 and 346611 Ship and boat building; ship building and repairing. [[Page 25099]] Industry.............. 811310 Engine repair, remanufacture, and maintenance. Industry.............. 483 Water transportation, freight and passenger. Industry.............. 487210 and Sightseeing Transportation, Water. Industry.............. 4883 Support Activities for Water Transportation. Industry.............. 1141 Fishing. Industry.............. 336612 Boat building (watercraft not built in shipyards and typically of the type suitable or intended for personal use). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your company is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 94.1, 1042.1, 1065.1, and 1068.1. If you have questions, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT> section. Outline of This Preamble I. Overview A. What Is EPA Finalizing and How Does It Differ From the Proposal? B. Why Is EPA Taking This Action? II. Air Quality and Health Impacts A. Overview B. Public Health Impacts C. Environmental Impacts D. Other Criteria Pollutants Affected by This Final Rule E. Emissions from Locomotive and Marine Diesel Engines III. Emission Standards A. What Locomotives and Marine Engines Are Covered? B. What Standards Are We Adopting? C. Are the Standards Feasible? IV. Certification and Compliance Program A. Issues Common to Locomotives and Marine Engines B. Compliance Issues Specific to Locomotives C. Compliance Issues Specific to Marine Engines V. Costs and Economic Impacts A. Engineering Costs B. Cost Effectiveness C. EIA VI. Benefits VII. Alternative Program Options A. Summary of Alternatives B. Summary of Results VIII. Public Participation IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory Flexibility Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments) G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations K. Congressional Review Act X. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority I. Overview This final rule completes an important step in EPA\'s ongoing National Clean Diesel Campaign (NCDC) by adding new programs for locomotives and marine diesel engines to the clean diesel initiatives we have already undertaken for highway, other nonroad, and stationary diesel engines. As detailed below, it significantly strengthens the locomotive and marine diesel programs we proposed last year (72 FR 15938, April 3, 2007), especially in controlling emissions during the critical early years through the early introduction of advanced technologies and the more complete coverage of existing engines. When fully implemented, this coordinated set of new programs will reduce harmful diesel engine emissions to a small fraction of their previous levels. The new programs address all types of diesel locomotives-- line- haul, switch, and passenger rail, and all types of marine diesel engines below 30 liters per cylinder displacement (hereafter referred to as ``marine diesel engines\'\').\\2\\ These engines are used to power a wide variety of vessels, from small fishing and recreational boats to large tugs and Great Lakes freighters. They are also used to generate auxiliary vessel power, including on ocean-going ships. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\2\\ Marine diesel engines at or above 30 liters per cylinder, called Category 3 engines, are typically used for propulsion power on ocean-going ships. EPA is addressing Category 3 engines through separate actions, including a planned rulemaking for a new tier of federal standards (see Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published December 7, 2007 at 72 FR 69522) and participation on the U.S. delegation to the International Maritime Organization for negotiations of new international standards (see http://www.epa.gov/ otaq/oceanvessels.com> for information on both of those actions), as well as EPA\'s Clean Ports USA Initiative (see http://www.epa.gov/ cleandiesel/ports/index.htm>). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emissions of fine particulate matter (PM2.5>) and nitrogen oxides (NOX>) from these diesel engines contribute to nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5> and ozone. Today, locomotives and marine diesel engines account for about 20 percent of mobile source NOX> emissions and 25 percent of mobile source diesel PM2.5> emissions in the U.S. Absent this final action, by 2030 the relative contributions of NOX> and PM2.5> from these engines would have grown to 35 and 65 percent, respectively. We are finalizing a comprehensive three-part program to address this problem. First, we are adopting stringent emission standards for existing locomotives and for existing commercial marine diesel engines above 600 kilowatt (kW) (800 horsepower (hp)). These standards apply when the engines are remanufactured. This part of the program will take effect as soon as certified remanufacture systems are available, for some engines as early as a few months from now. Under our existing program, locomotives have been certified to one of three tiers of standards: Tier 0 for locomotives originally built between 1973 and 2001, Tier 1 for those built between 2002 and 2004, and Tier 2 for those built in or after 2005. Under this new program, certified locomotive remanufacture systems must be made available by 2010 for Tier 0 and Tier 1 locomotives, and by 2013 for Tier 2 locomotives. Remanufacture systems that are certified for use in marine engine remanufactures are likewise required to be used. We are not, however, setting a specific compliance date for certified marine diesel remanufacture systems because we expect that engine manufacturers will be well motivated by the market opportunity to certify emissions- compliant systems. Second, we are adopting a set of near-term emission standards, referred to as Tier 3, for newly-built locomotives and marine engines. The Tier 3 standards reflect the application of technologies to reduce engine-out particulate matter (PM) and NOX>. Third, we are adopting longer-term standards, referred to as Tier 4, for newly-built locomotives and marine [[Page 25100]] engines. Tier 4 standards reflect the application of high-efficiency catalytic aftertreatment technology enabled by the availability of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD). These standards take effect in 2015 for locomotives, and phase in over time for marine engines, beginning in 2014. Finally, we are adopting provisions in all three parts of the program to eliminate emissions from unnecessary locomotive idling. Locomotives and marine diesel engines designed to these Tier 4 standards will achieve PM reductions of 90 percent and NOX> reductions of 80 percent, compared to engines meeting the current Tier 2 standards. The new standards will also yield sizeable reductions in emissions of nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC), carbon monoxide (CO), and hazardous compounds known as air toxics. Table I-1 summarizes the PM and NOX> emission reductions for the new standards compared to today\'s (Tier 2) emission standards; for remanufactured engines, the comparison is to the current standards for each tier of locomotives covered, and to typical unregulated levels for marine engines. Table I-1.--Reductions From Levels of Existing Standards ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PM Sector Standards tier (percent) NOX> (percent) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Locomotives............................. Remanufactured Tier 0.......... 60 15-20. Remanufactured Tier 1.......... 50 ........................ Remanufactured Tier 2.......... 50 ........................ Tier 3......................... 50 ........................ Tier 4......................... 90 80. All tiers--idle emissions...... 50 50. Marine Diesel Engines \\a\\............... Remanufactured Engines......... 25-60 Up to 20. Tier 3......................... 50 20. Tier 4......................... 90 80. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note:> (a) Standards vary by displacement and within power categories. Reductions indicated are typical. On a nationwide annual basis, these reductions will amount to 800,000 tons of NOX> and 27,000 tons of PM by 2030, resulting annually in the prevention of up to 1,100 PM-related premature deaths, 280 ozone-related premature deaths, 120,000 lost work days, 120,000 school day absences, and 1.1 million minor restricted- activity days. We estimate the annual monetized health benefits of this rule in 2030 will range from $9.2 billion to $11 billion, assuming a 3 percent discount rate, or between $8.4 billion to $10 billion, assuming a 7% discount rate.\\3\\ The estimated annual social cost of the program in 2030 is projected to be $740 million, significantly less than the estimated benefits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\3\\ Low and high benefits estimates are derived from a range of ozone-related premature mortality studies (including an assumption of no causality) and PM2.5-related premature mortality based on the ACS study (Pope et al., 2002). Benefits also include PM2.5- and ozone-related morbidity benefits. See section VI for a complete discussion and analysis of benefits associated with the final rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. What Is EPA Finalizing and How Does it Differ From the Proposal? This final rule makes a number of important changes to the program set out in our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Among these are changes that will yield significantly greater overall NOX and PM reductions, especially in the critical early years of the program: The adoption of standards for remanufactured marine engines and a 2-year pull-ahead of the Tier 4 NOX requirements for line-haul locomotives and for 2000-3700 kW (2760-4900 hp) marine engines. The major elements of the final program are summarized below. We are also revising existing testing, certification, and compliance provisions to better ensure emissions control in use. Detailed provisions and our justifications for them are discussed in sections III and IV. Section VII of this preamble describes a number of alternatives that we considered in developing the rule. After evaluating the alternatives, we believe that our new program provides the best opportunity for achieving timely and very substantial emissions reductions from locomotive and marine diesel engines. It balances a number of key factors: (1) Achieving very significant emissions reductions as early as possible, (2) providing appropriate lead time to develop and apply advanced control technologies, and (3) coordinating requirements in this final rule with existing highway and nonroad diesel engine programs. The provisions we are finalizing that are different from the proposed program are: The adoption of standards for remanufactured marine diesel engines to address emissions from the existing fleet (this was presented as one of the proposal alternatives), Inclusion of Tier 4 NOX controls on 2015-2016 model year locomotives at initial build rather than at first remanufacture, A two-year pull-ahead of the Tier 4 NOX standard for 2000-3700 kW marine engines to 2014, Inclusion of Class II railroads in the remanufactured locomotives program, No Tier 4 standards for the small fleet of large recreational vessels at this time, A revised approach to migratory vessels that spend part of their time overseas, Credit for locomotive design measures that reduce emissions as part of efforts to improve efficiency, A number of changes to test and compliance requirements detailed in sections III and IV. Overall, our comprehensive three-part approach to setting standards for locomotives and marine diesel engines will provide very large reductions in PM, NOX, and toxic compounds, both in the near-term (as early as 2008), and in the long-term. These reductions will be achieved in a manner that: (1) Leverages technology developments in other diesel sectors, (2) aligns well with the clean diesel fuel requirements already being implemented, and (3) provides the lead time needed to deal with the significant engineering design workload that is involved. (1) Locomotive Emission Standards We are setting stringent exhaust emission standards for newly-built and remanufactured locomotives, furthering the initiative for cleaner locomotives started in 2004 with the establishment of the ULSD locomotive fuel program, and adding this important category of engines to the highway and nonroad diesel applications already covered [[Page 25101]] under EPA\'s National Clean Diesel Campaign. Briefly, for newly-built line-haul locomotives we are setting a new Tier 3 PM standard of 0.10 grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr), based on improvements to existing engine designs. This standard will take effect in 2012. We are also setting new Tier 4 standards of 0.03 g/bhp-hr for PM and 1.3 g/bhp-hr for NOX, based on the evolution of high-efficiency catalytic aftertreatment technologies now being developed and introduced in the highway diesel sector. The Tier 4 standards will take effect in 2015. We are requiring that remanufactured Tier 2 locomotives meet a PM standard of 0.10 g/bhp-hr, based on the same engine design improvements as Tier 3 locomotives, and that remanufactured Tier 0 and Tier 1 locomotives meet a 0.22 g/bhp-hr PM standard. We are also requiring that remanufactured Tier 0 locomotives meet a NOX standard of 7.4 g/bhp-hr, the same level as current Tier 1 locomotives, or 8.0 g/bhp-hr if the locomotive is not equipped with a separate loop intake air cooling system. Section III provides a detailed discussion of these new standards, and section IV details improvements being made to the applicable test, certification, and compliance programs. In setting our original locomotive emission standards in 1998, the historic pattern of transitioning older line-haul locomotives to road- and yard-switcher service resulted in our making little distinction between line-haul and switch locomotives. Because of the increase in the size of new locomotives in recent years, that pattern cannot be sustained by the railroad industry, as today\'s 4000+ hp (3000+ kW) locomotives are poorly suited for switcher duty. Furthermore, although there is still a fairly sizeable legacy fleet of older smaller line- haul locomotives that could find their way into the switcher fleet, essentially the only newly-built switchers put into service over the last two decades have been of radically different design, employing one to three smaller high-speed diesel engines designed for use in nonroad applications. We are establishing new standards and special certification provisions for newly-built and remanufactured switch locomotives that take these factors into account. Locomotives spend a substantial amount of time idling, during which they emit harmful pollutants, consume fuel, create noise, and increase maintenance costs. We are requiring that idle controls, such as Automatic Engine Stop/Start Systems (AESS), be included on all newly- built Tier 3 and Tier 4 locomotives. We also are requiring that they be installed on all existing locomotives that are subject to the new remanufactured engine standards, at the point of first remanufacture under the standards, unless already equipped with idle controls. Additional idle emissions control beyond AESS is encouraged in our program by factoring it into the certification test program. (2) Marine Engine Emission Standards We are setting emissions standards for newly-built and remanufactured marine diesel engines with displacements up to 30 liters per cylinder (referred to as Category 1 and 2, or C1 and C2, engines). Newly-built engines subject to the new standards include those used in commercial, recreational, and auxiliary power applications, and those below 37 kW (50 hp) that were previously regulated in our nonroad diesel program. The new marine diesel engine standards include stringent engine- based Tier 3 standards for newly-built marine diesel engines that phase in beginning in 2009. These are followed by aftertreatment-based Tier 4 standards for engines above 600 kW (800 hp) that phase in beginning in 2014. The specific levels and implementation dates for the Tier 3 and Tier 4 standards vary by engine size and power. This yields an array of emission standards levels and start dates that help ensure the most stringent standards feasible at the earliest possible time for each group of newly-built marine engines, while helping engine and vessel manufacturers implement the program in a manner that minimizes their costs for emission reductions. The new standards and implementation schedules, as well as their technological feasibility, are described in detail in section III of this preamble. We are also adopting standards to address the considerable impact of emissions from large marine diesel engines installed in vessels in the existing fleet. These standards apply to commercial marine diesel engines above 600 kW when these engines are remanufactured, and take effect as soon as certified remanufacture systems are available. The final requirements are different from the programmatic alternative on which we sought comment in that there is no mandatory date by which marine remanufacture systems must be made available. However, systems for the larger Category 2 marine diesel engines are expected to become available at the same time as the locomotive remanufacture systems for similar engines, as early as 2008, because Category 2 marine diesel engines are often derived from locomotive engines. This new marine remanufacture program is described in more detail in section III.B(2)(b). We intend to revisit this program in the future to evaluate the extent to which remanufacture systems are being introduced into the market without a mandatory requirement, and to determine if the program should be extended to small commercial and recreational engines as well. Taken together, the program elements described above constitute a comprehensive program that addresses the problems caused by locomotive and marine diesel emissions from both a near-term and long-term perspective. It does this while providing for an orderly and cost- effective implementation schedule for the railroads, vessel owners, manufacturers, and remanufacturers. B. Why Is EPA Taking This Action? (1) Locomotives and Marine Diesels Contribute to Serious Air Pollution Problems As we discuss extensively in both the proposal and today\'s action, EPA strongly believes it is appropriate to take steps now to reduce future emissions from locomotive and marine diesel engines. Emissions from these engines generate significant emissions of PM2.5 and NOX that contribute to nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM2.5 and ozone. NOX is a key precursor to ozone and secondary PM formation. These engines also emit hazardous air pollutants or air toxics, which are associated with serious adverse health effects. Finally, emissions from locomotive and marine diesel engines cause harm to public welfare, including contributing to visibility impairment and other harmful environmental impacts across the U.S. The health and environmental effects associated with these emissions are a classic example of a negative externality (an activity that imposes uncompensated costs on others). With a negative externality, an activity\'s social cost (the cost borne to society imposed as a result of the activity taking place) exceeds its private cost (the cost to those directly engaged in the activity). In this case, as described below and in section II, emissions from locomotives and marine diesel engines and vessels impose public health and environmental costs on society. However, these added costs are not reflected in the costs of those using [[Page 25102]] these engines and equipment. The current market and regulatory scheme do not correct this externality because firms in the market are rewarded for minimizing their production costs, including the costs of pollution control, and do not benefit from reductions in emissions. In addition, firms that may take steps to use equipment that reduces air pollution may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage compared to firms that do not. The emission standards that EPA is finalizing help address this market failure and reduce the negative externality from these emissions by providing a regulatory incentive for engine and locomotive manufacturers to produce engines and locomotives that emit fewer harmful pollutants and for railroads and vessel builders and owners to use those cleaner engines. Emissions from locomotive and marine diesel engines account for substantial portions of the country\'s current ambient PM2.5 and NOX levels. We estimate that today these engines account for about 20 percent of mobile source NOX emissions and about 25 percent of mobile source diesel PM2.5 emissions. Under this rulemaking, by 2030, NOX emissions from these diesel engines will be reduced annually by 800,000 tons and PM2.5 emissions by 27,000 tons, and these reductions will grow beyond 2030 as fleet turnover to the cleanest engines continues. EPA has already taken steps to bring emissions levels from highway and nonroad diesel vehicles and engines to very low levels over the next decade, while the per horsepower-hour emission levels for locomotive and marine diesel engines remain at much higher levels-- comparable to the emissions for highway trucks in the early 1990s. Both ozone and PM2.5 contribute to serious public health problems, including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits, school absences, loss work days, and restricted activity days), changes in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms, altered respiratory defense mechanisms, and chronic bronchitis. Diesel exhaust is of special public health concern, and since 2002 EPA has classified exposure to diesel exhaust as likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation from environmental exposures.\\4\\ Recent studies are showing that populations living near large diesel emission sources such as major roadways, rail yards, and marine ports are likely to experience greater diesel exhaust exposure levels than the overall U.S. population, putting them at greater health risks.\\5 6\\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\4\\ U.S. EPA (2002) Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. EPA/600/8-90/057F. Office of Research and Development, Washington DC. This document is available electronically at http:// cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=29060. \\5\\ Kinnee, E.J.; Touman, J.S.; Mason, R.; Thurman, J.; Beidler, A.; Bailey, C.; Cook, R. (2004) Allocation of onroad mobile emissions to road segments for air toxics modeling in an urban area. Transport. Res. Part D 9: 139-150. \\6\\ State of California Air Resources Board. Roseville Rail Yard Study. Stationary Source Division, October 14, 2004. This document is available electronically at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/ documents/rrstudy.htm and State of California Air Resources Board. Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure Assessment Study for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, April 2006. This document is available electronically at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/marine2005/ portstudy0406.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA recently conducted an initial screening-level analysis \\7\\ of selected marine port areas and rail yards to better understand the populations that are exposed to diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from these facilities.<sup>8 9</sup> This screening-level analysis focused on a representative selection of national marine ports and rail yards.\\10\\ Of the 47 marine ports and 37 rail yards selected, the results indicate that at least 13 million people, including a disproportionate number of low-income households, African-Americans, and Hispanics, living in the vicinity of these facilities, are being exposed to ambient DPM levels that are 2.0 [mu]g/m<sup>3</sup> and 0.2 [mu]g/m<sup>3</sup> above levels found in areas further from these facilities. Because those populations exposed to DPM emissions from marine ports and rail yards are more likely to be low-income and minority residents, these populations will benefit from the controls being finalized in this action. The detailed findings of this study are available in the public docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\7\\ This type of screening-level analysis is an inexact tool and not appropriate for regulatory decisionmaking; it is useful in beginning to understand potential impacts and for illustrative purposes. Additionally, the emissions inventories used as inputs for the analyses are not official estimates and likely underestimate overall emissions because they are not inclusive of all emission sources at the individual ports in the sample. For example, most inventories included emissions from ocean-going vessels (powered by Category 3 engines), as well as some commercial vessel categories, including harbor crafts, (powered by Category 1 and 2 engines), cargo handling equipment, locomotives, and heavy-duty vehicles. This final rule will not address emissions from ocean-going vessels, cargo handling equipment or heavy-duty vehicles. \\8\\ ICF International. September 28, 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter concentration isopleths for marine harbor areas and rail yards. Memorandum to EPA under Work Assignment Number 0-3, Contract Number EP-C-06-094. This memo is available in Docket EPA- HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\9\\ ICF International. September 28, 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter population exposure near selected harbor areas and rail yards. Memorandum to EPA under Work Assignment Number 0-3, Contract Number EP-C-06-094. This memo is available in Docket EPA- HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\10\\ The Agency selected a representative sample of the top 150 U.S. ports including coastal, inland, and Great Lake ports. In selecting a sample of rail yards the Agency identified a subset from the hundreds of rail yards operated by Class I Railroads. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today, millions of Americans continue to live in areas that do not meet existing air quality standards. Currently, ozone concentrations exceeding the 8-hour ozone NAAQS occur over wide geographic areas, including most of the nation\'s major population centers. As of October 10, 2007, approximately 88 million people live in 39 designated areas (which include all or part of 208 counties) that either do not meet the current PM2.5 NAAQS or contribute to violations in other counties, and 144 million people live in 81 areas (which include all or part of 368 counties) designated as not in attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These numbers do not include the people living in areas where there is a significant future risk of failing to maintain or achieve either the current or future PM2.5 or ozone NAAQS. In addition to public health impacts, there are public welfare and environmental impacts associated with ozone and PM2.5 emissions. Ozone causes damage to vegetation which leads to crop and forestry economic losses, as well as harm to national parks, wilderness areas, and other natural systems. NOX and direct emissions of PM2.5 can contribute to the impairment of visibility in many parts of the U.S., where people live, work, and recreate, including national parks, wilderness areas, and mandatory class I federal areas. The deposition of airborne particles can also reduce the aesthetic appeal of buildings and culturally important objects through soiling and can contribute directly (or in conjunction with other pollutants) to structural damage by means of corrosion or erosion. Finally, NOX emissions from diesel engines contribute to the acidification, nitrification, and eutrophication of water bodies. While EPA has already adopted many emission control programs that are expected to reduce ambient ozone and PM2.5 levels, including the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) and the Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule (69 FR 38957, June 29, 2004), the Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements (66 FR 5002, Jan. 18, 2001), and the Tier 2 Vehicle and Gasoline Sulfur Program [[Page 25103]] (65 FR 6698, Feb. 10, 2000), the additional PM2.5 and NOX emission reductions resulting from this rule will assist states in attaining and maintaining the Ozone and the PM2.5 NAAQS both near term and in the decades to come. In September 2006, EPA finalized revised PM2.5 NAAQS standards and over the next few years the EPA will undergo the process of designating areas that do not meet this new standard. EPA modeling, conducted as part of finalizing the revised NAAQS, projects that in 2015 up to 52 counties with 53 million people may violate either the daily or annual standards for PM2.5 (or both), while an additional 27 million people in 54 counties may live in areas that have air quality measurements within 10 percent of the revised NAAQS. Even in 2020 up to 48 counties, with 54 million people, may still not be able to meet the revised PM2.5 NAAQS and an additional 25 million people, living in 50 counties, are projected to have air quality measurements within 10 percent of the revised standards. The locomotive and marine diesel PM2.5 reductions resulting from this rulemaking are needed by a number of states to both attain and maintain the revised PM2.5 NAAQS. State and local governments continue working to protect the health of their citizens and comply with requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act\'\'). As part of this effort they recognize the need to secure additional major reductions in both diesel PM2.5 and NOX emissions by undertaking numerous state-level actions.11 However, they have also urged Agency action to finalize a strong locomotive and marine diesel engine program that will provide crucial emission reductions both in the near and longterm. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\11\\ Two examples of state and local actions are: California Air Resources Board (2006). Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movements (April 2006), Available electronically at www.arb.ca.gov/ gmp/docs/finalgmpplan090905.pdf; Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (2006). Connecticut\'s Clean Diesel Plan (January 2006). See http://www.dep.state.ct.us/air2/diesel/index.htm for description of initiative. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The federal program finalized today results in earlier and significantly greater NOX and PM reductions from the locomotive and marine sector than the proposed program because of the first-ever national standards for remanufactured marine engines and the starting of Tier 4 NOX requirements for line-haul locomotives and for 2000-3700 kW (2760-4900 hp) marine engines two years earlier than proposed. These changes reflect important cooperative efforts by the regulated industry to implement cleaner technology as early as possible. While the program finalized today will help many states and communities achieve cleaner air, for some areas, such as the South Coast of California, the reductions achieved through this rule will not alone enable them to meet their near-term ozone and PM air quality goals. This was also the case for our 1998 locomotive rulemaking, where the State of California worked with Class I railroads operating in southern California to develop a Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) ensuring that the cleanest technologies enabled by federal rules were expeditiously introduced in areas of California with greatest air quality improvement needs. EPA continues to support California\'s efforts to reconcile likely future growth in the locomotive and marine sector with the public health protection needs of the area, and today\'s final rule includes provisions which are well- suited to encouraging early deployment of cleaner technologies through the development of similar programs. In addition to these new standards, EPA has a number of voluntary programs that help enable government, industry, and local communities to address challenging air quality problems. The EPA SmartWay program has worked with railroads to encourage them to reduce unnecessary locomotive idling and will continue to promote the use of innovative idle reduction technologies that can substantially reduce locomotive emissions while reducing fuel consumption. EPA\'s National Clean Diesel Campaign, through its Clean Ports USA program is working with port authorities, terminal operators, and trucking and rail companies to promote cleaner diesel technologies and emission reduction strategies through education, incentives, and financial assistance. Part of these efforts involves voluntary retrofit programs that can further reduce emissions from the existing fleet of diesel engines. Finally, EPA is implementing a new Sustainable Ports Strategy which will allow EPA to partner with ports, business partners, communities and other stakeholders to become world leaders in sustainability, including achieving cleaner air. This new strategy builds on the success of collaborative work EPA has been doing in partnership with the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), and through port related efforts of Clean Ports USA, SmartWay, EPA\'s Regional Diesel Collaboratives and other programs. Together these approaches augment the regulations being finalized today, helping states and communities achieve larger reductions sooner in the areas of our country that need them the most. (2) Advanced Technologies Can Be Applied Air pollution from locomotive and marine diesel exhaust is a challenging problem. However, we believe it can be addressed effectively through a combination of engine-out emission reduction technologies and high-efficiency catalytic aftertreatment technologies. As discussed in greater detail in section III.C, the development of these aftertreatment technologies for highway and nonroad diesel applications has advanced rapidly in recent years, so that new engines can achieve very large emission reductions in PM and NOX (in excess of 90 and 80 percent, respectively). High-efficiency PM control technologies are being broadly used in many parts of the world and are being used domestically to comply with EPA\'s heavy-duty truck standards that started taking effect in the 2007 model year. These technologies are highly durable and robust in use and have proved extremely effective in reducing exhaust hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide emissions. Control of NOX emissions from locomotive and marine diesel engines can also be achieved with high-efficiency exhaust emission control technologies. Such technologies are expected to be used to meet the stringent NOX standards included in EPA\'s heavy-duty highway diesel and nonroad Tier 4 programs and have been in production for heavy-duty trucks in Europe since 2005 and in many stationary source applications throughout the world. Section III.C discusses additional engineering challenges in applying these technologies to newly-built locomotive and marine engines, as well as the development steps that we expect to be taken to resolve the challenges. With the lead time available and the assurance of ULSD for the locomotive and marine sectors in 2012, as provided by our 2004 final rule for nonroad engines and fuel, we are confident the application of advanced technology to locomotives and marine diesel engines will proceed at a reasonable rate of progress and will result in systems capable of achieving the new standards on time. (3) Basis for Action Under the Clean Air Act Authority for the actions promulgated in this document is granted to the EPA [[Page 25104]] by sections 114, 203, 205, 206, 207, 208, 213, 216, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7414, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7547, 7550 and 7601(a)). Authority to Set Standards. EPA is promulgating emissions standards for new marine diesel engines pursuant to its authority under section 213(a)(3) and (4) of the CAA. EPA is promulgating emission standards for new locomotives and new engines used in locomotives pursuant to its authority under section 213(a)(5) of the CAA. EPA has previously determined that certain existing locomotive engines, when they are remanufactured, are returned to as-new condition and are expected to have the same performance, durability, and reliability as freshly-manufactured locomotive engines. Consequently we set emission standards for these remanufactured engines that apply at the time of remanufacture (defined as ``to replace, or inspect and qualify, each and every power assembly of a locomotive or locomotive engine, whether during a single maintenance event or cumulatively within a five-year period * * *\'\' (see 61 FR 53102, October 4, 1996; 40 CFR 92.2). In this action we are adopting new tiers of standards for both freshly manufactured and remanufactured locomotives and locomotive engines. In the proposal for this rulemaking we also discussed applying a similar approach to marine diesel engines. Many marine diesel engines, particularly those above 600 kW (800 hp), periodically undergo a maintenance process that returns them to as-new condition. A full rebuild that brings an engine back to as-new condition includes a complete overhaul of the engine, including piston, rings, liners, turbocharger, heads, bearings, and geartrain/camshaft removal and replacement. Engine manufacturers typically provide instructions for such a full rebuild. Marine diesel engine owners complete this process to maintain engine reliability, durability, and performance over the life of their vessel, and to avoid the need to repower (replace the engine) before their vessel wears out. A commercial marine vessel can be in operation in excess of 40 years, which means that a marine diesel engine may be remanufactured to as-new condition three or more times before the vessel is scrapped. Because these remanufactured engines are returned to as-new condition, section 213(a)(3) and (4) give EPA the authority to set emission standards for those engines. We are adopting requirements for remanufactured marine diesel engines, described in section III.B(2)(b) of this action. For the purpose of this program, we are defining remanufacture as the replacement of all cylinder liners, either in one maintenance event or over the course of five years (for the purpose of this program, ``replacement\'\' includes the removing, inspecting and requalifying a liner). While replacement of cylinder liners is only one element of a full rebuild, it is common to all rebuilds. Marine diesel engines that do not have their cylinder liners replaced all at once or within a five-year period, or that do not perform cylinder liner replacement at all, are not considered to be returned to as-new condition and therefore are not considered to be remanufactured. Those engines will not be subject to the marine remanufacture requirements. Pollutants That Can Be Regulated. CAA section 213(a)(3) directs the Administrator to set NOX, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), or carbon monoxide standards for classes or categories of engines such as marine diesel engines that contribute to ozone or carbon monoxide concentrations in more than one nonattainment area. These (``standards shall achieve the greatest degree of emission reduction achievable through the application of technology which the Administrator determines will be available for the engines or vehicles, giving appropriate consideration to cost, lead time, noise, energy, and safety factors associated with the application of such technology.\'\' CAA section 213(a)(4) authorizes the Administrator to establish standards to control emissions of pollutants which ``may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare\'\' where the Administrator determines, as it has done for emissions of PM, that nonroad engines as a whole contribute significantly to such air pollution. The Administrator may promulgate regulations that are deemed appropriate, taking into account costs, noise, safety, and energy factors, for classes or categories of new nonroad vehicles and engines which cause or contribute to such air pollution. Level of the Standards. CAA section 213(a)(5) directs EPA to adopt emission standards for new locomotives and new engines used in locomotives that achieve the ``greatest degree of emissions reductions achievable through the use of technology that the Administrator determines will be available for such vehicles and engines, taking into account the cost of applying such technology within the available time period, the noise, energy, and safety factors associated with the applications of such technology.\'\' Section 213(a)(5) does not require any review of the contribution of locomotive emissions to pollution, though EPA does provide such information in this rulemaking. As described in section III of this preamble and in chapter 4 of the final Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), EPA has evaluated the available information to determine the technology that will be available for locomotives and engines subject to EPA standards. Certification and Implementation. EPA is also acting under its authority to implement and enforce both the marine diesel emission standards and the locomotive emission standards. Section 213(d) provides that the standards EPA adopts for both new locomotive and marine diesel engines ``shall be subject to sections 206, 207, 208, and 209\'\' of the Clean Air Act, with such modifications that the Administrator deems appropriate to the regulations implementing these sections. In addition, the locomotive and marine standards ``shall be enforced in the same manner as [motor vehicle] standards prescribed under section 202\'\' of the Act. Section 213(d) also grants EPA authority to promulgate or revise regulations as necessary to determine compliance with, and enforce, standards adopted under section 213. Technological Feasibility and Cost of Standards. The evidence provided in section III.C of this Preamble and in chapter 4 of the RIA indicates that the stringent emission standards we are setting today for newly-built and remanufactured locomotive and marine diesel engines are feasible and reflect the greatest degree of emission reduction achievable through the use of technology that will be available in the model years to which they apply. We have given appropriate consideration to costs in setting these standards. Our review of the costs and cost-effectiveness of these standards indicate that they will be reasonable and comparable to the cost-effectiveness of other emission reduction strategies that EPA has required in prior rulemakings. We have also reviewed and given appropriate consideration to the energy factors of this rule in terms of fuel efficiency as well as any safety and noise factors associated with these standards. Health and Environmental Need for the Standards. The information in section II of this Preamble and chapter 2 of the RIA regarding air quality and public health impacts provides strong evidence that emissions from marine diesel engines and locomotives significantly and adversely impact public health or welfare. EPA has [[Page 25105]] already found in previous rules that emissions from new marine diesel engines contribute to ozone and carbon monoxide concentrations in more than one area which has failed to attain the ozone and carbon monoxide NAAQS (64 FR 73300, December 29, 1999). EPA has also previously determined that it is appropriate to establish PM standards for marine diesel engines under section 213(a)(4), and the additional information on the carcinogenicity of exposure to diesel exhaust noted above reinforces this finding. In addition, we have already found that emissions from nonroad engines as a whole significantly contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public welfare due to regional haze and visibility impairment (67 FR 68241, Nov. 8, 2002). We find here, based on the information in the NPRM and in section II of this preamble and Chapters 2 and 3 of the final RIA, that emissions from the new marine diesel engines likewise contribute to regional haze and to visibility impairment. The PM and NOX emission reductions resulting from these standards are important to states\' efforts in attaining and maintaining the ozone and the PM2.5 NAAQS in the near term and in the decades to come. As noted above, the risk to human health and welfare will be significantly reduced by the standards finalized in today\'s action. II. Air Quality and Health Impacts The locomotive and marine diesel engines subject to this final rule generate significant emissions of particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) that contribute to nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5 and ozone. These engines also emit hazardous air pollutants or air toxics that are associated with serious adverse health effects and contribute to visibility impairment and other harmful environmental impacts across the U.S. By 2030, these standards are expected to reduce annual locomotive and marine diesel engine PM2.5 emissions by 27,000 tons; NOX emissions by 800,000 tons; and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions by 43,000 tons as well as reducing carbon monoxide (CO) and toxic compounds known as air toxics.\\12\\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\12\\ Nationwide locomotive and marine diesel engines comprise approximately 3 percent of the nonroad mobile sources hydrocarbon inventory. EPA National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report 1999. March 2001, Document Number: EPA 454/R-0-004. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. This document is available electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrnd99/. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We project that reductions of PM2.5, NOX, and VOC emissions from locomotive and marine diesel engines will produce nationwide air quality improvements. According to air quality modeling performed in conjunction with this rule, all 39 current PM2.5 nonattainment areas will experience a decrease in their projected 2030 design values. Likewise the 133 mandatory class I federal areas that EPA modeled will all see improvements in their visibility. This rule will also result in nationwide ozone benefits. In 2030, 573 counties (of 579 that have monitored data) experience at least a 0.1 ppb decrease in their ozone design values. A. Overview From a public health perspective, we are concerned with locomotive and marine diesel engines\' contributions to atmospheric levels of particulate matter in general, diesel PM2.5 in particular, various gaseous air toxics, and ozone. Today, locomotive and marine diesel engine emissions represent a substantial portion of the U.S. mobile source diesel PM2.5 and NOX inventories, approximately 20 percent of mobile source NOX and 25 percent of mobile source diesel PM2.5. Over time, the relative contribution of these diesel engines to air quality problems is expected to increase as the emission contribution from other mobile sources decreases and the usage of locomotives and marine vessels increases. By 2030, without the additional emissions controls finalized in today\'s rule, locomotive and marine diesel engines will emit about 65 percent of the total mobile source diesel PM2.5 emissions and 35 percent of the total mobile source NOX emissions. Based on the most recent data available for this rule, air quality problems continue to persist over a wide geographic area of the United States. As of October 10, 2007 there are approximately 88 million people living in 39 designated areas (which include all or part of 208 counties) that either do not meet the current PM2.5 NAAQS or contribute to violations in other counties, and 144 million people living in 81 areas (which include all or part of 366 counties) designated as not in attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These numbers do not include the people living in areas where there is a significant future risk of failing to maintain or achieve either the current or future PM2.5 or ozone NAAQS. Figure II-1 illustrates the widespread nature of these problems. This figure depicts counties which are currently designated nonattainment for either or both the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and PM2.5 NAAQS. It also shows the location of mandatory class I federal areas for visibility. BILLING CODE 6560-50-P [[Page 25106]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MY08.000 BILLING CODE 6560-50-C The engine standards finalized in this rule will help reduce emissions of PM, NOX, VOCs, CO, and air toxics and their associated health and environmental effects. Emissions from locomotives and diesel marine engines contribute to PM and ozone concentrations in many, if not all, of these nonattainment areas.\\13\\ The engine standards being finalized today will become effective as early as 2008, making the expected PM2.5, NOX, and VOC inventory reductions from this rulemaking critical to a number of states as they seek to either attain or maintain the current PM2.5 or ozone NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\13\\ See section II.B.(1)(c) and II.B.(2)(c) for a summary of the impact emission reductions from locomotive and marine diesel engines will have on air quality in current PM2.5 and ozone nonattainment areas. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Beyond the impact locomotive and marine diesel engines have on our nation\'s ambient air quality the diesel [[Page 25107]] exhaust emissions from these engines are also of particular concern since exposure to diesel exhaust is classified as likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation from environmental levels of exposure.\\14\\ Many people spend a large portion of time in or near areas of concentrated locomotive or marine diesel emissions, near rail yards, marine ports, railways, and waterways. Recent studies show that populations living near large diesel emission sources such as major roadways,\\15\\ rail yards \\16\\ and marine ports \\17\\ are likely to experience greater diesel exhaust exposure levels than the overall U.S. population, putting them at a greater health risk. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\14\\ U.S. EPA (2002) Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. EPA/600/8-90/057F. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. This document is available electronically at http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=29060. \\15\\ Kinnee, E.J.; Touma, J.S.: Mason, R.; Thurman, J.; Beidler, A.; Bailey, C.; Cook, R. (2004) Allocation of onroad mobile emissions to road segments for air toxics modeling in an urban area. Transport. Res. Part D 9:139-150; also see Cohen, J.; Cook, R; Bailey, C.R.; Carr, E. (2005) Relationship between motor vehicle emissions of hazardous pollutants, roadway proximity, and ambient concentrations in Portland, Oregon. Environ. Modeling & Software 20: 7-12. \\16\\ Hand, R.; Di, P; Servin, A.; Hunsaker, L.; Suer, C. (2004) Roseville Rail Yard Study. California Air Resources Board. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. [Online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrstudy.htm]. \\17\\ Di P.; Servin, A.; Rosenkranz, K.; Schwehr, B.; Tran, H. (April 2006); Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure Assessment Study for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. State of California Air Resources Board. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA recently conducted an initial screening-level analysis \\18\\ of selected marine port areas and rail yards to better understand the populations that are exposed to diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from these facilities.<sup>19 20</sup> This screening-level analysis focused on a representative selection of national marine ports and rail yards.\\21\\ Of the 47 marine ports and 37 rail yards selected, the results indicate that at least 13 million people, including a disproportionate number of low-income households, African-Americans, and Hispanics, living in the vicinity of these facilities, are being exposed to ambient DPM levels that are 2.0 [mu]g/m<sup>3</sup> and 0.2 [mu]g/m<sup>3</sup> above levels found in areas further from these facilities. Because those populations exposed to DPM emissions from marine ports and rail yards are more likely to be low-income and minority residents, these populations will benefit from the controls being finalized in this action. The detailed findings of this study are available in the public docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\18\\ This type of screening-level analysis is an inexact tool and not appropriate for regulatory decision-making; it is useful in beginning to understand potential impacts and for illustrative purposes. Additionally, the emissions inventories used as inputs for the analyses are not official estimates and likely underestimate overall emissions because they are not inclusive of all emission sources at the individual ports in the sample. For example, most inventories included emissions from ocean-going vessels (powered by Category 3 engines), as well as some commercial vessel categories, including harbor crafts (powered by Category 1 and 2 engines), cargo handling equipment, locomotives, and heavy-duty vehicles. This final rule will not address emissions from ocean-going vessels, cargo handling equipment or heavy-duty vehicles. \\19\\ ICF International. September 28, 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter concentration isopleths for marine harbor areas and rail yards. Memorandum to EPA under Work Assignment Number 0-3, Contract Number EP-C-06-094. This memo is available in Docket EPA- HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\20\\ ICF International. September 28, 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter population exposure near selected harbor areas and rail yards. Memorandum to EPA under Work Assignment Number 0-3, Contract Number EP-C-06-094. This memo is available in Docket EPA- HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\21\\ The Agency selected a representative sample of the top 150 U.S. ports including coastal, inland and Great Lake ports. In selecting a sample of rail yards the Agency identified a subset from the hundreds of rail yards operated by Class I Railroads. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the following sections we review important public health effects linked to pollutants emitted from locomotive and marine diesel engines. First, the human health effects caused by the pollutants and their current and projected ambient levels are discussed. Following the discussion of health effects, the modeled air quality benefits resulting from this action and the welfare effects associated with emissions from diesel engines are presented. Finally, the locomotive and marine engine emission inventories for the primary pollutants affected by this rule are provided. In summary, the emission reductions from this rule will contribute to controlling the health and welfare problems associated with ambient PM and ozone levels and with diesel- related air toxics. Taken together, the materials in this section and in the proposal describe the need for tightened emission standards for both locomotive and marine diesel engines and the air quality and public health benefits resulting from this program. This section is not an exhaustive treatment of these issues. For a fuller understanding of the topics treated here, you should refer to the extended presentations in Chapter 2, 3 and 5 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) accompanying this final rule. B. Public Health Impacts (1) Particulate Matter The locomotive and marine engine standards detailed in this action will result in significant reductions in primary (directly emitted) PM2.5 emissions. In addition, the standards finalized today will reduce emissions of NOX and VOCs, which contribute to the formation of secondary PM2.5. Locomotive and marine diesel engines emit high levels of NOX, which react in the atmosphere to form secondary PM2.5 (namely ammonium nitrate). These engines also emit SO2 and VOC, which react in the atmosphere to form secondary PM2.5 composed of sulfates and organic carbonaceous PM2.5. This rule will reduce both primary and secondary PM. (a) Background Particulate matter (PM) represents a broad class of chemically and physically diverse substances. It can be principally characterized as discrete particles that exist in the condensed (liquid or solid) phase spanning several orders of magnitude in size. PM is further described by breaking it down into size fractions. PM10 refers to particles generally less than or equal to 10 micrometers ([mu]m) in diameter. PM2.5 refers to fine particles, generally less than or equal to 2.5 [mu]m in diameter. Inhalable (or ``thoracic\'\') coarse particles refer to those particles generally greater than 2.5 [mu]m but less than or equal to 10 [mu]m in diameter. Ultrafine PM refers to particles less than 100 nanometers (0.1 [mu]m) in diameter. Larger particles tend to be removed by the respiratory clearance mechanisms (e.g. coughing), whereas smaller particles are deposited deeper in the lungs. Fine particles are produced primarily by combustion processes and by transformations of gaseous emissions (e.g., SOx, NOX and VOC) in the atmosphere. The chemical and physical properties of PM2.5 may vary greatly with time, region, meteorology, and source category. Thus, PM2.5 may include a complex mixture of different pollutants including sulfates, nitrates, organic compounds, elemental carbon and metal compounds. These particles can remain in the atmosphere for days to weeks and travel hundreds to thousands of kilometers. The primary PM2.5 NAAQS includes a short-term (24-hour) and a long-term (annual) standard. The 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS established by EPA set the 24-hour standard at a level of 65 [mu]g/ m³ based on the 98th percentile concentration averaged over three years. The annual standard specifies an [[Page 25108]] expected annual arithmetic mean not to exceed 15 [mu]g/m³ averaged over three years. EPA has recently amended the NAAQS for PM2.5 (71 FR 61144, October 17, 2006). The final rule, signed on September 21, 2006, addressed revisions to the primary and secondary NAAQS for PM to provide increased protection of public health and welfare, respectively. The level of the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS was revised from 65 [mu]g/m³ to 35 [mu]g/m³ and the level of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS was retained at 15 [mu]g/ m³. With regard to the secondary standards for PM2.5, EPA has revised these standards to be identical in all respects to the revised primary standards. (b) Health Effects of PM2.5 Scientific studies show ambient PM is associated with a series of adverse health effects. These health effects are discussed in detail in the 2004 EPA Particulate Matter Air Quality Criteria Document (PM AQCD), and the 2005 PM Staff Paper.^{22 23} Further discussion of health effects associated with PM can also be found in the RIA for this rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\22\\ U.S. EPA (2004) Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter (Oct 2004), Volume I Document No. EPA600/P-99/002aF and Volume II Document No. EPA600/P-99/002bF. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\23\\ U.S. EPA (2005) Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Particulate Matter: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information, OAQPS Staff Paper. EPA-452/R-05-005. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Health effects associated with short-term exposures (hours to days) to ambient PM include premature mortality, increased hospital admissions, heart and lung diseases, increased cough, adverse lower- respiratory symptoms, decrements in lung function and changes in heart rate rhythm and other cardiac effects. Studies examining populations exposed to different levels of air pollution over a number of years, including the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study, show associations between long-term exposure to ambient PM2.5 and both total and cardiovascular and respiratory mortality.\\24\\ In addition, a reanalysis of the American Cancer Society Study shows an association between fine particle and sulfate concentrations and lung cancer mortality.\\25\\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\24\\ Dockery, DW; Pope, CA III: Xu, X; et al. 1993. An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities. N Engl J Med 329:1753-1759. \\25\\ Pope, C. A., III; Burnett, R. T.; Thun, M. J.; Calle, E. E.; Krewski, D.; Ito, K.; Thurston, G. D. (2002) Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 287:1132-1141. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The health effects of PM2.5 have been further documented in local impact studies which have focused on health effects due to PM2.5 exposures measured on or near roadways. These studies take into account all air pollution sources, including both spark- ignition (gasoline) and diesel powered vehicles, and indicate that exposure to PM2.5 emissions near roadways, which are dominated by mobile sources, are associated with potentially serious health effects. For instance, a recent study found associations between concentrations of cardiac risk factors in the blood of healthy young police officers and PM2.5 concentrations measured in vehicles.26 Also, a number of studies have shown associations between residential or school outdoor concentrations of some fine particle constituents that are found in motor vehicle exhaust, and adverse respiratory outcomes, including asthma prevalence in children who live near major roadways.^{27 28 29} Although the engines considered in this rule differ from those in these studies with respect to their applications and fuel qualities, these studies provide an indication of the types of health effects that might be expected to be associated with personal exposure to PM2.5 emissions from large marine diesel and locomotive engines. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\26\\ Riediker, M.; Cascio, W.E.; Griggs, T.R.; et al. (2004) Particulate matter exposure in cars is associated with cardiovascular effects in healthy young men. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 169: 934-940. \\27\\ Van Vliet, P.; Knape, M.; de Hartog, J.; Janssen, N.; Harssema, H.; Brunekreef, B. (1997). Motor vehicle exhaust and chronic respiratory symptoms in children living near freeways. Env. Research 74: 122-132. \\28\\ Brunekreef, B., Janssen, N.A.H.; de Hartog, J.; Harssema, H.; Knape, M.; van Vliet, P. (1997). Air pollution from truck traffic and lung function in children living near roadways. Epidemiology 8:298-303. \\29\\ Kim, J.J.; Smorodinsky, S.; Lipsett, M.; Singer, B.C.; Hodgson, A.T.; Ostro, B. (2004). Traffic-related air pollution near busy roads: The East Bay children\'s respiratory health study. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 170: 520-526. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recent new studies from the State of California provide evidence that PM2.5 emissions within marine ports and rail yards can contribute significantly to elevated ambient concentrations near these sources.^{30 31} A substantial number of people experience exposure to locomotive and marine diesel engine emissions, raising potential health concerns. The controls finalized in this action will help reduce exposure to PM2.5, specifically exposure to marine port and rail yard related diesel PM2.5 sources. Additional information on marine port and rail yard emissions and ambient exposures can be found in Chapter 2 of the RIA. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\30\\ State of California Air Resources Board. Roseville Rail Yard Study. Stationary Source Division, October 14, 2004. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. This document is available electronically at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/ documents/rrstudy.htm. \\31\\ State of California Air Resources Board. Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure Assessment Study for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, April 2006. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ- OAR-2003-0190. This document is available electronically at: ftp:// ftp.arb.ca.gov/carbis/msprog/offroad/marinevess/documents/ portstudy0406.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (c) Current and Projected PM2.5 Levels PM2.5 concentrations exceeding the level of the PM2.5 NAAQS occur in many parts of the country.\\32\\ In 2005 EPA designated 39 nonattainment areas for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 943, January 5, 2005). These areas are comprised of 208 full or partial counties with a total population exceeding 88 million. The 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS was recently revised and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS became effective on December 18, 2006. Table II- 1 presents the number of counties in areas currently designated as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS as well as the number of additional counties that have monitored data that is violating the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\32\\ A listing of the PM2.5 nonattainment areas is included in the RIA for this rule. [[Page 25109]] Table II-1.--Fine Particle Standards: Current Nonattainment Areas and Other Violating Counties ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nonattainment areas/other violating Number of counties counties Population a ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1997 PM2.5 Standards: 39 areas currently 208 88,394,000 designated............................. 2006 PM2.5 Standards: counties with 49 18,198,676 violating monitors b................... ------------------------------- Total............................... 257 106,595,676 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Notes: (a) Population numbers are from 2000 census data. (b) This table provides an estimate of the counties violating the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS based on 2003-05 air quality data. The areas designated as nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS will be based on 3 years of air quality data from later years. Also, the county numbers in the summary table includes only the counties with monitors violating the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The monitored county violations may be an underestimate of the number of counties and populations that will eventually be included in areas with multiple counties designated nonattainment. A number of state governments have told EPA that they need the reductions this rule will provide in order to meet and maintain the PM2.5 NAAQS. Areas designated as not attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS will need to attain the 1997 standards in the 2010 to 2015 time frame, and then maintain them thereafter. The attainment dates associated with the potential new 2006 PM2.5 nonattainment areas are likely to be in the 2015 to 2020 timeframe. The emission standards finalized in this action become effective as early as 2008 making the NOX, PM, and VOC inventory reductions from this rulemaking useful to states in attaining or maintaining the PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has already adopted many emission control programs that are expected to reduce ambient PM2.5 levels and which will assist in reducing the number of areas that fail to achieve the PM2.5 NAAQS. Even so, our air quality modeling for this final rule projects that in 2020, with all current controls but excluding the reductions achieved through this rule, up to 11 counties with a population of 24 million may not attain the current annual PM2.5 standard of 15 [mu]g/m³. These numbers do not account for additional areas that have air quality measurements within 10 percent of the annual PM2.5 standard. These areas, although not violating the standards, will also benefit from the additional reductions from this rule ensuring long-term maintenance of the PM2.5 NAAQS. Air quality modeling performed for this final rule shows that in 2020 and 2030 all 39 current PM2.5 nonattainment areas will experience decreases in their PM2.5 design values. For areas with current PM2.5 design values greater than 15 [mu]g/ m³ the modeled future-year population weighted PM2.5 design values are expected to decrease on average by 0.08 [mu]g/m³ in 2020 and by 0.16 [mu]g/m³ in 2030. The maximum decrease for future-year PM2.5 design values will be 0.38 [mu]g/m³ in 2020 and 0.81 [mu]g/ m³ in 2030. The air quality modeling methodology and the projected reductions are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of the RIA. (2) Ozone The locomotive and marine engine standards finalized in this action are expected to result in significant reductions of NOX and VOC emissions. NOX and VOC contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone pollution or smog. People in many areas across the U.S. continue to be exposed to unhealthy levels of ambient ozone. (a) Background Ground-level ozone pollution is typically formed by the reaction of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the lower atmosphere in the presence of heat and sunlight. These pollutants, often referred to as ozone precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, such as highway and nonroad motor vehicles and engines, power plants, chemical plants, refineries, makers of consumer and commercial products, industrial facilities, and smaller area sources. The science of ozone formation, transport, and accumulation is complex.\\33\\ Ground-level ozone is produced and destroyed in a cyclical set of chemical reactions, many of which are sensitive to temperature and sunlight. When ambient temperatures and sunlight levels remain high for several days and the air is relatively stagnant, ozone and its precursors can build up and result in more ozone than typically occurs on a single high-temperature day. Ozone can also be transported into an area from pollution sources found hundreds of miles upwind, resulting in elevated ozone levels even in areas with low local VOC or NOX emissions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\33\\ U.S. EPA Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA 600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. This document may be accessed electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ ozone/s_o3_cr_cd.html. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The current ozone NAAQS, established by EPA in 1997, has an 8-hour averaging time. The 8-hour ozone NAAQS is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration over three years is less than or equal to 0.084 ppm. On June 20, 2007, EPA proposed to strengthen the ozone NAAQS, the proposed revisions reflect new scientific evidence about ozone and its effects on people and public welfare.\\34\\ The final ozone NAAQS rule is scheduled for March 2008. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\34\\ EPA proposed to set the 8-hour primary ozone standard to a level within the range of 0.070-0.075 ppm. The agency also requested comments on alternative levels of the 8-hour primary ozone standard, within a range from 0.060 ppm up to and including retention of the current standard (0.084 ppm). EPA also proposed two options for the secondary ozone standard. One option would establish a new form of standard designed specifically to protect sensitive plants from damage caused by repeated ozone exposure throughout the growing season. This cumulative standard would add daily ozone concentrations across a three-month period. EPA proposed to set the level of the cumulative standard within the range of 7 to 21 ppm- hours. The other option would follow the current practice of making the secondary standard equal to the proposed 8-hour primary standard. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (b) Health Effects of Ozone The health and welfare effects of ozone are well documented and are assessed in EPA\'s 2006 ozone Air Quality Criteria Document (ozone AQCD) and EPA Staff Paper.^{35, 36} Ozone [[Page 25110]] can irritate the respiratory system, causing coughing, throat irritation, and/or uncomfortable sensation in the chest. Ozone can reduce lung function and make it more difficult to breathe deeply; breathing may also become more rapid and shallow than normal, thereby limiting a person\'s activity. Ozone can also aggravate asthma, leading to more asthma attacks that require medical attention and/or the use of additional medication. There is evidence of an elevated risk of mortality associated with acute exposure to ozone, especially in the summer or warm season when ozone levels are typically high. Animal toxicological evidence indicates that with repeated exposure, ozone can inflame and damage the lining of the lungs, which may lead to permanent changes in lung tissue and irreversible reductions in lung function. People who are more susceptible to effects associated with exposure to ozone can include children, the elderly, and individuals with respiratory disease such as asthma. Those with greater exposures to ozone, for instance due to time spent outdoors (e.g., children and outdoor workers), are also of particular concern. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\35\\ U.S. EPA Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Final). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA 600/R-05/004aF-cF, 2006. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. This document may be accessed electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ ozone/s_o3_cr_cd.html. \\36\\ U.S. EPA (2007) Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information. OAQPS Staff Paper.EPA-452/R-07-003. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. This document is available electronically at: http:www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_ o3_cr_sp.html. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The recent ozone AQCD also examined relevant new scientific information that has emerged in the past decade, including the impact of ozone exposure on such health effects as changes in lung structure and biochemistry, inflammation of the lungs, exacerbation and causation of asthma, respiratory illness-related school absence, hospital admissions and premature mortality. Animal toxicological studies have suggested potential interactions between ozone and PM with increased responses observed to mixtures of the two pollutants compared to either ozone or PM alone. The respiratory morbidity observed in animal studies along with the evidence from epidemiologic studies supports a causal relationship between acute ambient ozone exposures and increased respiratory-related emergency room visits and hospitalizations in the warm season. In addition, there is suggestive evidence of a contribution of ozone to cardiovascular-related morbidity and non- accidental and cardiopulmonary mortality. (c) Current and Projected Ozone Levels Ozone concentrations exceeding the level of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS occur over wide geographic areas, including most of the nation\'s major population centers.\\37\\ As of October 10, 2007, there were approximately 144 million people living in 81 areas (which include all or part of 366 counties) designated as not in attainment with the 8- hour ozone NAAQS. These numbers do not include the people living in areas where there is a future risk of failing to maintain or attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\37\\ A listing of the 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas is included in the RIA for this rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- States with 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are required to take action to bring those areas into compliance in the future. Based on the final rule designating and classifying 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004), most 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas will be required to attain the ozone NAAQS in the 2007 to 2013 time frame and then maintain the NAAQS thereafter.\\38\\ Many of these nonattainment areas will need to adopt additional emission reduction programs and the NOX and VOC reductions from this final action are particularly important for these states. In addition, EPA\'s review of the ozone NAAQS is currently underway with a final rule scheduled for March 2008. If the ozone NAAQS is revised then new nonattainment areas will be designated. While EPA is not relying on it for purposes of justifying this rule, the emission reductions from this rulemaking will also be helpful to states if EPA revises the ozone NAAQS to be more stringent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\38\\ The Los Angeles South Coast Air Basin 8-hour ozone nonattainment area will have to attain before June 15, 2021. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA has already adopted many emission control programs that are expected to reduce ambient ozone levels. These control programs are described in section I.B.1 of this preamble. As a result of these programs, the number of areas that fail to meet the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the future is expected to decrease. Based on the air quality modeling performed for this rule, which does not include any additional local controls, we estimate nine counties (where 22 million people are projected to live) will exceed the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 2020.\\39\\ An additional 39 counties (where 29 million people are projected to live) are expected to be within 10 percent of violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 2020. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\39\\ We expect many of the 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas to adopt additional emission reduction programs but we are unable to quantify or rely upon future reductions from additional state and local programs that have not yet been adopted. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This rule results in reductions in nationwide ozone levels. The air quality modeling projects that in 2030, 573 counties (of 579 that have monitored data) experience at least a 0.1 ppb decrease in their ozone design values. There are three nonattainment areas in southern California, the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin nonattainment area, the Riverside Co. (Coachella Valley) nonattainment area and the Los Angeles--San Bernardino (W. Mojave) nonattainment area, which will experience 8-hour ozone design value increases due to the NOX disbenefits which occur in these VOC-limited ozone nonattainment areas. Briefly, NOX reductions at certain times and in some areas can lead to increased ozone levels. The air quality modeling methodology (Section 2.3), the projected reductions (Section 2.2.4), and the limited NOX disbenefits (Section 2.2.4.2.1), are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of the RIA. Results from the air quality modeling conducted for this final rule indicate that the locomotive and marine diesel engine emission reductions in 2020 and 2030 will improve both the average and population-weighted average ozone concentrations for the U.S. In addition, the air quality modeling shows that on average this final rule will help bring counties closer to ozone attainment as well as assist counties whose ozone concentrations are within ten percent below the standard. For example, in projected nonattainment counties, on a population-weighted basis, the 8-hour ozone design value will on average decrease by 0.13 ppb in 2020 and 0.62 ppb in 2030.\\40\\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\40\\ Ozone design values are reported in parts per million (ppm) as specified in 40 CFR part 50. Due to the scale of the design value changes in this action, results have been presented in parts per billion (ppb) format. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The impact of the reductions has also been analyzed with respect to those areas that have the highest design values, at or above 85 ppb, in 2020. We project there will be nine U.S. counties with design values at or above 85 ppb in 2020. After implementation of this rule, we project that one of these nine counties will drop below 85 ppb. Further, two of the nine counties will be at least 10 percent closer to a design value of less than 85 ppb, and on average all nine counties will be about 18 percent closer to a design value of less than 85 ppb. (3) Air Toxics People experience elevated risk of cancer and other noncancer health effects from exposure to the class of pollutants known collectively as ``air toxics\'\'. Mobile sources are responsible for a significant portion of this exposure. According to the National Air Toxic Assessment (NATA) for 1999, mobile sources, including locomotive and marine diesel marine engines, were [[Page 25111]] responsible for 44 percent of outdoor toxic emissions and almost 50 percent of the cancer risk among the 133 pollutants quantitatively assessed in the 1999 NATA. Benzene is the largest contributor to cancer risk of all the assessed pollutants and mobile sources were responsible for about 68 percent of all benzene emissions in 1999. Although the 1999 NATA did not quantify cancer risks associated with exposure to diesel exhaust, EPA has concluded that diesel exhaust ranks with other emissions that the national-scale assessment suggests pose the greatest relative risk. According to the 1999 NATA, nearly the entire U.S. population was exposed to an average level of air toxics that has the potential for adverse respiratory noncancer health effects. This potential was indicated by a hazard index (HI) greater than 1.\\41\\ Mobile sources were responsible for 74 percent of the potential noncancer hazard from outdoor air toxics in 1999. About 91 percent of this potential noncancer hazard was from acrolein; \\42\\ however, the confidence in the RfC for acrolein is medium 43 and confidence in NATA estimates of population noncancer hazard from ambient exposure to this pollutant is low.\\44\\ It is important to note that NATA estimates of noncancer hazard do not include the adverse health effects associated with particulate matter identified in EPA\'s Particulate Matter Air Quality Criteria Document. Gasoline and diesel engine emissions contribute significantly to particulate matter concentration. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\41\\ To express chronic noncancer hazards, we used the RfC as part of a calculation called the hazard quotient (HQ), which is the ratio between the concentration to which a person is exposed and the RfC. (RfC is defined by EPA as, ``an estimate of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human population, including sensitive subgroups, with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude, which is likely to be without appreciable risks of deleterious noncancer effects during a lifetime.\'\') A value of the HQ less than one indicates that the exposure is lower than the RfC and that no adverse health effects would be expected. Combined noncancer hazards were calculated using the hazard index (HI), defined as the sum of hazard quotients for individual air toxic compounds that affect the same target organ or system. As with the hazard quotient, a value of the HI at or below 1.0 will likely not result in adverse effects over a lifetime of exposure. However, a value of the HI greater than 1.0 does not necessarily suggest a likelihood of adverse effects. Furthermore, the HI cannot be translated into a probability that adverse effects will occur and is not likely to be proportional to risk. \\42\\ U.S. EPA (2006) National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment for 1999. This material is available electronically at http:// www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/risksum.html. \\43\\ U.S. EPA (2003) Integrated Risk Information System File of Acrolein. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. 2003. This material is available electronically at http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0364.htm. \\44\\ U.S. EPA (2006) National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment for 1999. This material is available electronically at http:// www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/risksum.html. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The NATA modeling framework has a number of limitations which prevent its use as the sole basis for setting regulatory standards. These limitations and uncertainties are discussed on the 1999 NATA website.\\45\\ Even so, this modeling framework is very useful in identifying air toxic pollutants and sources of greatest concern, setting regulatory priorities, and informing the decision making process. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\45\\ U.S. EPA (2006) National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment for 1999. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following section provides a brief overview of air toxics which are associated with nonroad engines, including locomotive and marine diesel engines, and provides a discussion of the health risks associated with each air toxic. (a) Diesel Exhaust (DE) Locomotive and marine diesel engines emit diesel exhaust (DE), a complex mixture comprised of carbon dioxide, oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, carbon monoxide, nitrogen compounds, sulfur compounds and numerous low-molecular-weight hydrocarbons. A number of these gaseous hydrocarbon components are individually known to be toxic, including aldehydes, benzene and 1,3-butadiene. The diesel particulate matter (DPM) present in diesel exhaust consists of fine particles (< 2.5 [mu]m), including a subgroup with a large number of ultrafine particles (< 0.1 [mu]m). These particles have a large surface area which makes them an excellent medium for adsorbing organics and their small size makes them highly respirable and able to reach the deep lung. Many of the organic compounds present on the particles and in the gases are individually known to have mutagenic and carcinogenic properties. Diesel exhaust varies significantly in chemical composition and particle sizes between different engine types (heavy-duty, light-duty), engine operating conditions (idle, accelerate, decelerate), and fuel formulations (high/low sulfur fuel). Also, there are emissions differences between on-road and nonroad engines because the nonroad engines are generally of older technology. This is especially true for locomotive and marine diesel engines.\\46\\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\46\\ U.S. EPA (2002) Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. EPA/600/8-90/057F Office of Research and Development, Washington DC. Pp1-1 1-2. This document is available electronically at http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ recordisplay.cfm?deid=29060. This document can be found in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- After being emitted in the engine exhaust, diesel exhaust undergoes dilution as well as chemical and physical changes in the atmosphere. The lifetime for some of the compounds present in diesel exhaust ranges from hours to days. (i) Diesel Exhaust: Potential Cancer Effects In EPA\'s 2002 Diesel Health Assessment Document (Diesel HAD),\\47\\ exposure to diesel exhaust was classified as likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation from environmental exposures, in accordance with the revised draft 1996/1999 EPA cancer guidelines. A number of other agencies (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the World Health Organization, California EPA, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) have made similar classifications. However, EPA also concluded in the Diesel HAD that it is not possible currently to calculate a cancer unit risk for diesel exhaust due to a variety of factors that limit the current studies, such as limited quantitative exposure histories in occupational groups investigated for lung cancer. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\47\\ U.S. EPA (2002) Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. EPA/600/8-90/057F Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. This document is available electronically at http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ recordisplay.cfm?deid=29060. This document can be found in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Diesel HAD, EPA reviewed 22 epidemiologic studies on the subject of the carcinogenicity of workers exposed to diesel exhaust in various occupations, finding increased lung cancer risk, although not always statistically significant, in 8 out of 10 cohort studies and 10 out of 12 case-control studies within several industries, including railroad workers. Relative risk for lung cancer associated with exposure ranged from 1.2 to 1.5, although a few studies show relative risks as high as 2.6. Additionally, the Diesel HAD also relied on two independent meta-analyses, which examined 23 and 30 occupational studies respectively, which found statistically significant increases in smoking-adjusted relative lung cancer risk associated with exposure to diesel exhaust, of 1.33 to 1.47. These meta-analyses demonstrate the effect of pooling many studies and in this case show the positive relationship between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer [[Page 25112]] across a variety of diesel exhaust-exposed occupations.^{48 49} --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\48\\ Bhatia, R., Lopipero, P., Smith, A. (1998) Diesel exposure and lung cancer. Epidemiology 9(1):84-91. \\49\\ Lipsett, M; Campleman, S; (1999) Occupational exposure to diesel exhaust and lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Am J Public Health 80(7): 1009-1017. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the absence of a cancer unit risk, the Diesel HAD sought to provide additional insight into the significance of the diesel exhaust- cancer hazard by estimating possible ranges of risk that might be present in the population. An exploratory analysis was used to characterize a possible risk range by comparing a typical environmental exposure level for highway diesel sources to a selected range of occupational exposure levels. The occupationally observed risks were then proportionally scaled according to the exposure ratios to obtain an estimate of the possible environmental risk. A number of calculations are needed to accomplish this, and these can be seen in the EPA Diesel HAD. The outcome was that environmental risks from diesel exhaust exposure could range from a low of 10^-4 to 10^-5 to as high as 10^-3, reflecting the range of occupational exposures that could be associated with the relative and absolute risk levels observed in the occupational studies. Because of uncertainties, the analysis acknowledged that the risks could be lower than 10^-4 or 10^-5, and a zero risk from diesel exhaust exposure was not ruled out. Retrospective health studies of railroad workers have played an important part in determining that exposure to diesel exhaust is likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation from environmental exposures. Key evidence of the diesel exhaust exposure linkage to lung cancer comes from two retrospective case-control studies of railroad workers which are discussed at length in the Diesel HAD and summarized in Chapter 2 of the RIA. (ii) Diesel Exhaust: Other Health Effects Noncancer health effects of acute and chronic exposure to diesel exhaust emissions are also of concern to the EPA. EPA derived a diesel exhaust reference concentration (RfC) from consideration of four well- conducted chronic rat inhalation studies showing adverse pulmonary effects.^{50 51 52 53} The RfC is 5 [mu]g/m³ for diesel exhaust as measured by diesel PM. This RfC does not consider allergenic effects such as those associated with asthma or immunologic effects. There is growing evidence, discussed in the Diesel HAD, that exposure to diesel exhaust can exacerbate these effects, but the exposure-response data are presently lacking to derive an RfC. The EPA Diesel HAD states, ``With DPM [diesel particulate matter] being a ubiquitous component of ambient PM, there is an uncertainty about the adequacy of the existing DE [diesel exhaust] noncancer database to identify all of the pertinent DE-caused noncancer health hazards.\'\' (p. 9-19). The Diesel HAD concludes ``that acute exposure to DE [diesel exhaust] has been associated with irritation of the eye, nose, and throat, respiratory symptoms (cough and phlegm), and neurophysiological symptoms such as headache, lightheadedness, nausea, vomiting, and numbness or tingling of the extremities.\'\' \\54\\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\50\\ Ishinishi, N; Kuwabara, N; Takaki, Y; et al. (1988) Long- term inhalation experiments on diesel exhaust. In: Diesel exhaust and health risks. Results of the HERP studies. Ibaraki, Japan: Research Committee for HERP Studies; pp. 11-84. \\51\\ Heinrich, U; Fuhst, R; Rittinghausen, S; et al. (1995) Chronic inhalation exposure of Wistar rats and two different strains of mice to diesel engine exhaust, carbon black, and titanium dioxide. Inhal. Toxicol. 7:553-556. \\52\\ Mauderly, JL; Jones, RK; Griffith, WC; et al. (1987) Diesel exhaust is a pulmonary carcinogen in rats exposed chronically by inhalation. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 9:208-221. \\53\\ Nikula, KJ; Snipes, MB; Barr, EB; et al. (1995) Comparative pulmonary toxicities and carcinogenicities of chronically inhaled diesel exhaust and carbon black in F344 rats. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 25:80-94. \\54\\ ``Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust,\'\' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 600/8-90/057F, http:// www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/dieselfinal.pdf, May 2002, p. 9-9. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Exposure to diesel exhaust has also been shown to cause serious noncancer effects in occupational exposure studies. One study of railroad workers and electricians, cited in the Diesel HAD,\\55\\ found that exposure to diesel exhaust resulted in neurobehavioral impairments in one or more areas including reaction time, balance, blink reflex latency, verbal recall, and color vision confusion indices. Pulmonary function tests also showed that 10 of the 16 workers had airway obstruction and another group of 10 of 16 workers had chronic bronchitis, chest pain, tightness, and hyperactive airways. Finally, a variety of studies have been published subsequent to the completion of the Diesel HAD. One such study, published in 2006,\\56\\ found that railroad engineers and conductors with diesel exhaust exposure from operating trains had an increased incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) mortality. The odds of COPD mortality increased with years on the job so that those who had worked more than 16 years as an engineer or conductor after 1959 had an increased risk of 1.61 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.30). EPA is assessing the significance of this study within the context of the broader literature. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\55\\ Kilburn (2000) See HAD Chapter 5-7. \\56\\ Hart, JE; Laden F; Schenker, M.B.; and Garshick, E. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Mortality in Diesel-Exposed Railroad Workers; Environmental Health Perspective July 2006: 1013-1016. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (iii) Ambient PM2.5 Levels and Exposure to Diesel Exhaust PM The Diesel HAD also briefly summarizes health effects associated with ambient PM and discusses the EPA\'s annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 [mu]g/m\\3\\. There is a much more extensive body of human data showing a wide spectrum of adverse health effects associated with exposure to ambient PM, of which diesel exhaust is an important component. The PM2.5 NAAQS is designed to provide protection from the noncancer and premature mortality effects of PM2.5 as a whole. (iv) Diesel Exhaust PM Exposures Exposure of people to diesel exhaust depends on their various activities, the time spent in those activities, the locations where these activities occur, and the levels of diesel exhaust pollutants in those locations. The major difference between ambient levels of diesel particulate and exposure levels for diesel particulate is that exposure accounts for a person moving from location to location, proximity to the emission source, and whether the exposure occurs in an enclosed environment. Occupational Exposures Occupational exposures to diesel exhaust from mobile sources, including locomotive engines and marine diesel engines, can be several orders of magnitude greater than typical exposures in the non- occupationally exposed population. Over the years, diesel particulate exposures have been measured for a number of occupational groups. A wide range of exposures have been reported, from 2 [mu]g/m³ to 1,280 [mu]g/m³, for a variety of occupations. Studies have shown that miners and railroad workers typically have higher diesel exposure levels than other occupational groups studied, including firefighters, truck dock workers, and truck drivers (both short and long haul).\\57\\ As discussed in the Diesel HAD, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health [[Page 25113]] (NIOSH) has estimated a total of 1,400,000 workers are occupationally exposed to diesel exhaust from on-road and nonroad vehicles including locomotive and marine diesel engines. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\57\\ Diesel HAD Page 2-110, 8-12; Woskie, SR; Smith, TJ; Hammond, SK: et al. (1988a) Estimation of the DE exposures of railroad workers: II. National and historical exposures. Am J Ind Med 12:381-394. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elevated Concentrations and Ambient Exposures in Mobile Source-Impacted Areas Regions immediately downwind of rail yards and marine ports may experience elevated ambient concentrations of directly-emitted PM2.5 from diesel engines. Due to the unique nature of rail yards and marine ports, emissions from a large number of diesel engines are concentrated in a small area. Furthermore, emissions occur at or near ground level, allowing emissions of diesel engines to reach nearby receptors without fully mixing with background air. A 2004 study conducted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) examined the air quality impacts of railroad operations at the J.R. Davis Rail Yard, the largest service and maintenance rail facility in the western United States.\\58\\ The yard occupies 950 acres along a one- quarter mile wide and four-mile long section of land in Roseville, CA. The study developed an emissions inventory for the facility for the year 2000 and modeled ambient concentrations of diesel PM using a well- accepted dispersion model (ISCST3). The study estimated substantially elevated diesel PM concentrations in an area 5,000 meters from the facility, with higher concentrations closer to the rail yard. Using local meteorological data, annual average contributions from the rail yard to ambient diesel PM concentrations under prevailing wind conditions were 1.74, 1.18, 0.80, and 0.25 [mu]g/m³ at receptors located 200, 500, 1000, and 5000 meters from the yard, respectively. Several tens of thousands of people live within the area estimated to experience substantial increases in annual average ambient PM2.5 as a result of these rail yard emissions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\58\\ Hand, R.; Pingkuan, D.; Servin, A.; Hunsaker, L.; Suer, C. (2004) Roseville rail yard study. California Air Resources Board. [Online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrstudy.htm] This document can be found in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another study from CARB evaluated air quality impacts of diesel engine emissions within the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles in California, one of the largest ports in the U.S.\\59\\ Like the earlier rail yard study, the port study employed the ISCST3 dispersion model. Using local meteorological data, annual average concentrations were substantially elevated over an area exceeding 200,000 acres. Because the ports are located near heavily-populated areas, the modeling indicated that over 700,000 people lived in areas with at least 0.3 [mu]g/m\\3\\ of port-related diesel PM in ambient air, about 360,000 people lived in areas with at least 0.6 [mu]g/m³ of diesel PM, and about 50,000 people lived in areas with at least 1.5 ug/ m³ of ambient diesel PM directly from the port. Most recently, CARB released several additional Railyard Health Risk Assessments which all show that diesel PM emissions result in significantly higher pollution risks in nearby communities.\\60\\ Together these studies highlight the substantial contribution these facilities make to elevated ambient concentrations in populated areas. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\59\\ State of California Air Resources Board. Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure Assessment Study for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, April 2006. This document is available in Docket EPA-HQ- OAR-2003-0190. This document is available electronically at: ftp:// ftp.arb.ca.gov/carbis/msprog/offroad/marinevess/documents/ portstudy0406.pdf. \\60\\ These studies are available in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0190. Studies are also available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/railyard/hra/ hra.htm. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As mentioned in section II.A of this preamble, EPA recently conducted an initial screening-level analysis of a representative selection of national marine port areas and rail yards to begin to better understand the populations that are exposed to DPM emissions from these facilities.^{61 62} As part of this study, a computer geographic information system (GIS) was used to identify the locations and property boundaries of 47 marine ports and 37 rail yard facilities.\\63\\ Census information was used to estimate the size and demographic characteristics of the population living in the vicinity of the ports and rail yards. The results indicate that at least 13 million people, including a disproportionate number of low-income, African- Americans, and Hispanics, live in the vicinity of these facilities and are being exposed to ambient DPM levels that are 2.0 [mu]g/ m³ and 0.2 [mu]g/m³ above levels found in areas further from these facilities. These populations will benefit from the controls being finalized in this action. This study is discussed in greater detail in chapter 2 of the RIA and detailed findings of this study are available in the public docket for this rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\61\\ ICF International. September 28, 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter concentration isopleths for marine harbor areas and rail yards. Memorandum to EPA under Work Assignment Number 0-3, Contract Number EP-C-06-094. This memo is available in Docket EPA- HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\62\\ ICF International. September 28, 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter population exposure near selected harbor areas and rail yards. Memorandum to EPA under Work Assignment Number 0-3, Contract Number EP-C-06-094. This memo is available in Docket EPA- HQ-OAR-2003-0190. \\63\\ The Agency selected a representative sample of the top 150 U.S. ports including coastal, inland, and Great Lake ports. In selecting a sample of rail yards the Agency identified a subset from the hundreds of rail yards operated by Class I Railroads. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (b) Other Air Toxics--benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, POM, naphthalene Locomotive and marine diesel engine exhaust emissions also contribute to ambient levels of other air toxics known or suspected as human or animal carcinogens, or that have noncancer health effects. These other air toxics include benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, polycyclic organic matter (POM), and naphthalene. All of these compounds, except acetaldehyde, were identified as national or regional cancer risk or noncancer hazard drivers in the 1999 National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) and have significant inventory contributions from mobile sources. That is, for a significant portion of the population, these compounds pose a significant portion of the total cancer and noncancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics. The reductions in locomotive and marine diesel engine emissions finalized in this rulemaking will help reduce exposure to these harmful substances. Benzene: EPA has characterized benzene as a known human carcinogen (causing leukemia) by all routes of exposure, and concludes that exposure is associated with additional health effects, including genetic changes in both humans and animals and increased proliferation of bone marrow cells in mice.^{64 65 66} EPA states in its IRIS database that data indicate a causal relationship between benzene exposure and acute lymphocytic leukemia and suggests a relationship between benzene exposure and chronic non-lymphocytic leukemia and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The IARC has determined that benzene is a human carcinogen and the U.S. DHHS has characterized [[Page 25114]] benzene as a known human carcinogen.^{67 68} --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\64\\ U.S. EPA. 2000. Integrated Risk Information System File for Benzene. This material is available electronically at http:// www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0276.htm. \\65\\ International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). 1982. Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans, Volume 29, Some industrial chemicals and dyestuffs, World Health Organization, Lyon, France, p. 345-389. \\66\\ Irons, R.D.; Stillman, W.S.; Colagiovanni, D.B.; Henry, V.A. 1992. Synergistic action of the benzene metabolite hydroquinone on myelopoietic stimulating activity of granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor in vitro, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 89:3691- 3695. \\67\\ International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). 1987. Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans, Volume 29, Supplement 7, Some industrial chemicals and dyestuffs, World Health Organization, Lyon, France. \\68\\ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Toxicology Program 11th Report on Carcinogens available at: http:// ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/16183. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A number of adverse noncancer health effects including blood disorders, such as preleukemia and aplastic anemia, have also been associated with long-term exposure to benzene.^{69 70} The most sensitive noncancer effect observed in humans, based on current data, is the depression of the absolute lymphocyte count in blood.^{71 72} In addition, recent work, including studies sponsored by the Health Effects Institute (HEI), provides evidence that biochemical responses are occurring at lower levels of benzene exposure than previously known.^{73, 74, 75, 76} EPA\'s IRIS program has not yet evaluated these new data. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \\69\\ Aksoy, M. (1989). Hematotoxicity and carcinogenicity of benzene. Environ. Health Perspect. 82: 193-197. \\70\\ Goldstein, B.D. (1988). Benzene toxicity. Occupational medicine. State of the Art Reviews. 3: 541-554. \\71\\ Rothman, N., G.L. Li, M. Dosemeci, W.E. Bechtold, G.E. Marti, Y.Z. Wang, M. Linet, L.Q. Xi, W. Lu, M.T. Smith, N. Titenko- Holland, L.P. Zhang, W. Blot, S.N. Yin, and R.B. Hayes (1996) Hematotoxicity among Chinese workers heavily exposed to benzene. Am. J. Ind. Med. 29: 236-246. \\72\\ U.S. EPA (2002