Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Engines, 44212-44220 [2016-16045]
Download as PDF
44212
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(e) * * *
EPA-APPROVED TENNESSEE NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of non-regulatory SIP
provision
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
*
*
2008 Lead Maintenance Plan for
the Bristol Area.
*
Bristol Area ..................................
PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS
FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING
PURPOSES
3. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
■
State effective
date
*
7/10/2015
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
*
7/7/2016 [insert Federal
Register citation].
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
*
amended by revising the entry ‘‘Bristol,
TN:’’ to read as follows:
Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment
Status Designations
§ 81.343
*
4. In § 81.343, the table entitled
‘‘Tennessee—2008 Lead NAAQS’’ is
■
*
Tennessee.
*
*
*
TENNESSEE—2008 LEAD NAAQS
Designation for the 2008 NAAQS a
Designated area
Date 1
Bristol, TN:
Sullivan County (part) ...................................................................................................
Area is bounded by a 1.25 km radius surrounding the UTM coordinates 4042923
meters E., 386267 meters N., Zone 17, which surrounds the Exide Technologies
Facility.
*
a Includes
*
*
*
Type
7/7/2016
Attainment
*
*
*
Indian Country in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.
1 December
[FR Doc. 2016–16002 Filed 7–6–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0866; FRL–9948–65–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AS43
Standards of Performance for
Stationary Compression Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing amendments
to the standards of performance for
stationary compression ignition (CI)
internal combustion engines to allow
manufacturers to design the engines so
that operators can temporarily override
performance inducements related to the
emission control system for stationary
CI internal combustion engines. The
amendments apply to engines operating
during emergency situations where the
operation of the engine or equipment is
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
needed to protect human life, and to
require compliance with Tier 1 emission
standards during such emergencies. The
EPA is also amending the standards of
performance for certain stationary CI
internal combustion engines located in
remote areas of Alaska.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
September 6, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Docket: The EPA has
established a docket for this action
under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2014–0866. All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. The EPA
also relies on materials in Docket ID
Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708, EPA–
HQ–OAR–2010–0295, and EPA–HQ–
OAR–2011–1032, and incorporates
those dockets into the record for this
final rule.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available
(e.g., confidential business information
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute). Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA WJC West
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Building, 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 federal 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. Visit the EPA Docket
Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets for additional
information about the EPA’s public
docket.
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this final
rule will be available on the World
Wide Web (WWW). Following
signature, a copy of this final rule will
be posted at the following address:
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/icengines.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Melanie King, Energy Strategies Group,
Sector Policies and Programs Division
(D243–01), Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541–2469; facsimile number: (919)
541–5450; email address: king.melanie@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Organization of this document. The
information presented in this preamble
is organized as follows:
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
I. General Background
II. Final Amendments
A. Temporary Override of Inducements in
Emergency Situations
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
III. Public Comments and Responses
A. Temporary Override of Inducements in
Emergency Situations
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
IV. Impacts of the Final Action
A. Economic Impacts
B. Environmental Impacts
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
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
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Background
On July 11, 2006, the EPA
promulgated standards of performance
for stationary CI internal combustion
engines (71 FR 39154). These standards,
known as new source performance
standards (NSPS), implement section
111(b) of the Clean Air Act, and are
issued for categories of sources that
cause, or contribute significantly to, air
pollution that may reasonably be
anticipated to endanger public health or
welfare. The standards are codified at 40
CFR part 60 subpart IIII. The standards
apply to new stationary sources of
emissions, i.e., sources whose
construction, reconstruction, or
modification begins after a standard for
those sources is proposed. The NSPS for
stationary CI internal combustion
engines established limits on emissions
of particulate matter (PM), nitrogen
oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO)
and non-methane hydrocarbons
(NMHC). The emission standards are
generally modeled after the EPA’s
standards for nonroad and marine diesel
engines. The nonroad CI engine
standards are phased in over several
years and have Tiers with increasing
levels of stringency. The engine model
year in which the Tiers take effect varies
for different size ranges of engines. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
Tier 4 final standards for new stationary
non-emergency and nonroad CI engines
generally begin with either the 2014 or
2015 model year.
In 2011, the EPA finalized revisions to
the NSPS for stationary CI engines that
amended the standards for engines with
a displacement greater than 10 liters per
cylinder, and also for engines located in
remote areas of Alaska (76 FR 37954,
June 28, 2011). In this action, the EPA
is finalizing amendments to the NSPS
regarding performance inducements for
Tier 4 engines and the criteria for
defining remote areas of Alaska. The
final amendments are discussed below.
II. Final Amendments
A. Temporary Override of Inducements
in Emergency Situations
Many Tier 4 final engines are
equipped by the engine manufacturer
with selective catalytic reduction (SCR)
to reduce emissions of NOX. The
consumable reactant in an SCR system
is typically supplied as a solution of
urea in water known as diesel exhaust
fluid (DEF). Engines equipped with SCR
generally include controls that limit the
function of the engines if they are
operated without DEF, or if the engine’s
electronic control module cannot
otherwise confirm that the SCR system
is properly operating. Such controls are
generally called ‘‘inducements’’ because
they induce the operator to properly
maintain the SCR emission control
system. In normal circumstances, if
inducements begin, the engine operator
is expected to perform any necessary
maintenance to avoid shutdown.
Manufacturers as well as owners or
operators of nonroad and stationary CI
Tier 4 certified engines have raised
concerns regarding the inducements
being triggered and engines shutting
down during emergency situations.
Additional background on Tier 4
engines and this amendment can be
found in the proposal for this
rulemaking (80 FR 68808, November 6,
2015). On August 8, 2014, the EPA
promulgated provisions allowing
manufacturers of nonroad engines
certified to the emission standards in 40
CFR part 1039 to give operators the
means to temporarily override emission
control inducements during qualified
emergency situations, such as those
where operation of the engine is needed
to protect human life (79 FR 46356,
August 8, 2014). These provisions,
which are codified in 40 CFR 1039.665,
allow for auxiliary emission control
devices (AECDs) that help to ensure
proper function of engines in qualified
emergency situations. AECDs are any
element of design that senses
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44213
temperature, motive speed, engine
revolutions per minute, transmission
gear, or any other parameter for the
purpose of activating, modulating,
delaying, or deactivating the operation
of any part of the emission control
system. The provisions of 40 CFR
1039.665 allow the engine manufacturer
to include a dormant feature in the
engine’s control software that could be
activated to override emission control
inducements. In this action, the EPA is
adopting those same provisions for
stationary CI engines certified to the
standards in 40 CFR part 1039 and used
in qualified emergency situations. It is
important to emphasize that the EPA is
confident that Tier 4 engines will
function properly in the vast majority of
emergency situations. Thus, the EPA
expects that AECDs allowed under this
provision will rarely be activated. The
EPA is adopting this provision merely
as a precaution to ensure that stationary
CI engines can continue to operate in
emergency situations.
The final amendments allow engine
manufacturers to design into their
stationary CI engines a dormant AECD
that can be activated for up to 120
engine hours per use during a qualified
emergency situation to prevent emission
controls from interfering with engine
operation. The EPA is finalizing
amendments that allow engine
manufacturers to offer, and operators to
request, re-activations of the AECD for
additional time in increments of 120
engine hours in cases of a prolonged
emergency situation. During the
emergency situation, the engine must
meet the Tier 1 emission standard in 40
CFR 89.112 that applies to the engine’s
rated power. Operators activating the
AECD will be required to report the
incident to the engine manufacturers,
and engine manufacturers will submit
an annual report to the EPA
summarizing the use of these AECDs
during the prior year. These final
amendments are discussed in more
detail below.
1. Definition of Qualified Emergency
Situation
The EPA is using the definition of
qualified emergency situation
established in the August 8, 2014,
amendments for nonroad engines. This
definition is found in the introductory
text to 40 CFR 1039.665 and is crossreferenced in the NSPS for stationary CI
internal combustion engines,
specifically in 40 CFR 60.4204(f). The
definition specifies that a qualified
emergency situation is one in which the
condition of an engine’s emission
controls poses a significant direct or
indirect risk to human life. An example
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
44214
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
of a direct risk would be an emission
control condition that inhibits the
performance of an engine being used to
rescue a person from a life-threatening
situation (for example, providing power
to a medical facility during an
emergency situation). An example of an
indirect risk would be an emission
control condition that inhibits the
performance of an engine being used to
provide electrical power to a data center
that routes ‘‘911’’ emergency response
telecommunications.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
2. Basic AECD Criteria
Section 1039.665 specifies provisions
allowing for AECDs that are necessary to
ensure proper function of engines and
equipment in emergency situations. It
also includes specific criteria that the
engine manufacturer must meet to
ensure that any adverse environmental
impacts are minimized. These criteria
are cross-referenced in the NSPS for
stationary CI engines and are as follows:
• The AECD must be designed so that
it cannot be activated more than once
without the specific permission of the
certificate holder. Reactivation of the
AECD must require the input of a
temporary code or equivalent security
feature.
• The AECD must become inactive
within 120 engine hours of becoming
active. The engine must also include a
feature that allows the operator to
deactivate the AECD once the
emergency is over.
• The manufacturer must show that
the AECD deactivates emission controls
(such as inducement strategies) only to
the extent necessary to address the
expected emergency situation.
• The engine controls must be
configured to record in non-volatile
electronic memory the total number of
activations of the AECD for each engine.
• The manufacturer must take
appropriate additional steps to induce
operators to report AECD activation and
request resetting of the AECD. The EPA
recommends including one or more
persistent visible and/or audible alarms
that are active from the point when the
AECD is activated to the point when it
is reset.
• The manufacturer must provide
purchasers with instructions on how to
activate the AECD in emergency
situations, as well as information about
penalties for overuse.
3. Emission Standards During Qualified
Emergency Situations
The EPA is requiring stationary CI
engines to meet different emission
standards for the very narrow period of
operation where there is an emergency
situation with a risk to human life and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
the owner or operator is warned that the
inducement is about to occur. The
emission standards that apply when the
AECD is activated during the qualified
emergency situation are the Tier 1
standards in 40 CFR 89.112. Engine
manufacturers indicated that meeting
the Tier 2 or 3 standards in 40 CFR
89.112 is not feasible because the base
engine used in Tier 4 configurations
does not have exhaust gas recirculation
(EGR), which is the engine design
technology used to meet the Tier 2 and
3 standards. The EGR is not needed for
Tier 4 because NOX is controlled by the
SCR.1 The Tier 1 requirement applies
only when there is a qualified
emergency situation and bypass of
inducements is necessary to ensure
continued operation of the engine. Once
the emergency situation has ended and
the AECD is deactivated, the engine
must comply with the otherwise
applicable emission standard specified
in 40 CFR 60.4202. Engine
manufacturers must demonstrate that
the engine complies with the Tier 1
standard when the AECD is activated
when applying for certification of an
engine equipped with an AECD.
4. Approval, Recordkeeping and
Reporting for Engine Manufacturers
Manufacturers may ask for approval
of the use of emergency AECDs at any
time; however, the EPA encourages
manufacturers to obtain preliminary
approval before submitting an
application for certification. Otherwise,
the EPA’s review of the AECD, which
may include many unique features, may
delay the approval of the application for
certification.
The manufacturer is required to keep
records to document the use of
emergency AECDs until the end of the
calendar year 5 years after the onset of
the relevant emergency situation. The
manufacturer must submit an annual
compliance report to the EPA within 90
calendar days of the end of each
calendar year in which it authorizes use
of an AECD. The annual report must
include a description of each AECD
activation and copies of the reports
submitted by owners or operators (or
statements that an owner or operator did
not submit a report, to the extent of the
manufacturer’s knowledge). If an owner
or operator fails to report the use of an
emergency AECD to the manufacturer,
the manufacturer, to the extent it has
been made aware of the AECD
activation, must send written
notification to the operator that failure
1 See Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–
0866–0010.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to meet the submission requirements
may subject the operator to penalties.
5. Engine Owner or Operator
Requirements
Owners or operators who purchase
engines with this dormant feature will
receive instructions from the engine
manufacturer on how to activate the
AECD in qualified emergency situations,
as well as information about penalties
for overuse. The EPA would consider
appropriate use of this feature to be
during a situation where operation of a
stationary CI engine is needed to protect
human life (or where impaired
operation poses a significant direct or
indirect risk to human life), and
temporarily overriding emission
controls enables full operation of the
equipment. The EPA is adopting this
provision to give operators the means to
obtain short-term relief one time
without the need to contact the engine
manufacturer or the EPA. In a qualified
emergency situation, delaying the
activation to obtain approval could put
lives at risk, and would be
unacceptable. However, the EPA retains
the authority to evaluate, after the fact,
whether it was reasonable to judge that
there was a significant risk to human
life to justify the activation of the AECD.
Where the EPA determines that it was
not reasonable to judge (1) that there
was a significant risk to human life; or
(2) that the emission control strategy
was curtailing the ability of the engine
to perform, the owner or operator may
be subject to penalties for tampering
with emission controls. The owner or
operator requirements also include a
specific prohibition on operating the
engine with the AECD beyond the time
reasonably needed for such operation.
The owner or operator may also be
subject to penalties for tampering if they
continue to operate the engine with the
AECD once the emergency situation has
ended or the problem causing the
emission control strategy to interfere
with the performance of the engine has
been or can reasonably be fixed.
Nevertheless, the EPA will consider the
totality of the circumstances when
assessing penalties, and retain
discretion to reduce penalties where the
EPA determines that an owner or
operator acted in good faith.
The owner or operator must send a
written report to the engine
manufacturer within 60 calendar days
after activating an emergency AECD. If
any consecutive reactivations occur, this
report is still due 60 calendar days from
the first activation. The report must
include:
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
• Contact name, mail and email
addresses, and telephone number for the
responsible company or entity.
• A description of the emergency
situation, the location of the engine
during the emergency, and the contact
information for an official who can
verify the emergency situation (such as
a county sheriff, fire marshal, or
hospital administrator).
• The reason for AECD activation
during the emergency situation, such as
the lack of DEF, or the failure of an
emission-related sensor when the
engine was needed to respond to an
emergency situation.
• The engine’s serial number (or
equivalent).
• A description of the extent and
duration of the engine operation while
the AECD was active, including a
statement describing whether or not the
AECD was manually deactivated after
the emergency situation ended.
Paragraph 40 CFR 1039.665(g)
specifies that failure to provide this
information to the engine manufacturer
within the deadline is improper use of
the AECD and is prohibited.
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
The EPA is finalizing an amendment
to the NSPS for stationary CI internal
combustion engines that would align
the definition of remote areas of Alaska
with the definition currently used in the
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Stationary Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines, which can be
found at 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ.
The amendment specifies that engines
in areas that are accessible by the
Federal Aid Highway System (FAHS)
can be considered remote if each of the
following conditions is met: (1) The
only connection to the FAHS is through
the Alaska Marine Highway System, or
the stationary CI engine operation is
within an isolated grid in Alaska that is
not connected to the statewide electrical
grid referred to as the Alaska Railbelt
Grid; (2) at least 10 percent of the power
generated by the engine on an annual
basis is used for residential purposes;
and (3) the generating capacity of the
facility is less than 12 megawatts, or the
engine is used exclusively for backup
power for renewable energy. The Alaska
Railbelt Grid is defined as the service
areas of the six regulated public utilities
that extend from Fairbanks to
Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula.
These utilities are Golden Valley
Electric Association; Chugach Electric
Association; Matanuska Electric
Association; Homer Electric
Association; Anchorage Municipal Light
& Power; and the City of Seward Electric
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
System. Background on the provisions
related to remote areas of Alaska can be
found in the proposal for this
rulemaking (80 FR 68808, November 6,
2015).
The following NSPS provisions that
currently apply to stationary CI internal
combustion engines for engines that are
located in areas of Alaska that are not
accessible by the FAHS will be
extended to stationary CI internal
combustion engines located in the areas
identified above:
• Exemption for all pre-2014 model
year engines from diesel fuel sulfur
requirements (see 40 CFR 60.4216(d));
• Allowance for owners and operators
of stationary CI engines to use engines
certified to marine engine standards,
rather than land-based nonroad engine
standards (see 40 CFR 60.4216(b));
• No requirement to meet emission
standards that would necessitate the use
of aftertreatment devices for NOX, in
particular, SCR (emission standards that
are not based on the use of
aftertreatment devices for NOX will
apply) (see 40 CFR 60.4216(c));
• No requirement to meet emission
standards that would necessitate the use
of aftertreatment devices for PM until
the 2014 model year (see 40 CFR
60.4216(c)); and
• Allowance for the blending of used
lubricating oil, in volumes of up to 1.75
percent of the total fuel, if the sulfur
content of the used lubricating oil is less
than 200 parts per million and the used
lubricating oil is ‘‘on-spec,’’ i.e., it meets
the on-specification levels and
properties of 40 CFR 279.11 (see 40 CFR
60.4216(f)).
III. Public Comments and Responses
This section presents a summary of
the public comments that the EPA
received on the proposed amendments
and the responses developed. The EPA
received 7 public comments on the
proposed rule. The comments can be
obtained online from the Federal Docket
Management System at https://
www.regulations.gov.
A. Temporary Override of Inducements
in Emergency Situations
Comment: Two commenters
supported the proposed amendment to
allow manufacturers of stationary CI
engines certified to the emission
standards in 40 CFR part 1039 to give
engine operators the means to
temporarily override emission control
inducements while operating in
qualified emergency situations. One
commenter noted the critical need for
the proposed amendment to ensure that
stationary CI engines, when used in
emergency situations, may continue to
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44215
operate to ameliorate the emergency and
protect human life. The commenter
noted that the EPA had already adopted
the proposed provision for nonroad
engines, and that it was essential for
stationary engines as well. The
commenter also supported the proposed
amendment so that engines could be
dual-certified for both stationary and
nonroad use, which reduces the cost
and burden of certification.
Response: No response necessary.
Comment: One commenter supported
the proposed definition of an emergency
situation. Another commenter stated
that the EPA should not impose any
limitations on the operating time of an
engine during an emergency situation,
and noted that in the NESHAP for
Stationary Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines, emergencies are
excluded from operating time
limitations and should similarly be
excluded here. The commenter stated
that it is not necessary to newly
incorporate a definition of a qualified
emergency situation because there are
applicable examples of emergency
situations already provided in the
definition of an emergency stationary
internal combustion engine in the NSPS
for stationary CI internal combustion
engines. The commenter indicated that
if the EPA believes it must finalize
specific requirements for emergency
operations, then the definition of a
qualified emergency situation should be
revised so that it is more generalized
and more applicable to different types of
emergency situations which would
necessitate the operation of stationary CI
engines. According to the commenter,
the proposed definition of a qualified
emergency situation and the associated
examples of indirect and direct risk to
human life apply very specifically to
nonroad engines that are able to be
transported. The commenter urged the
EPA to acknowledge that the examples
provided in 40 CFR 1039.665 are merely
examples, and do not constitute limits
on interpreting the definition of a
qualified emergency situation for
stationary CI engines. The commenter
indicated the EPA should clarify that
there are other possible emergency
situations that might pose a risk to
human life, or list additional examples.
Response: The definition of
emergency stationary internal
combustion engine in the NSPS for
stationary CI internal combustion
engines, and the similar definition in
the NESHAP for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines, defines a subcategory of
engines that are subject to different
standards, whether operating in an
actual emergency or in other limited
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
44216
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
non-emergency circumstances. The
definition of a qualified emergency
situation has a different purpose; it
defines when the inducement can be
overridden for a non-emergency engine.
The definition of a qualified emergency
situation where an inducement can be
overridden is intended to be more
limited to emergency situations where
there is a significant direct or indirect
risk to human life.
The EPA does not agree with the
commenter that the proposed definition
is not sufficiently generalized and that
the examples provided are not
representative of stationary engines.
One of the examples is ‘‘an engine being
used to provide electrical power to a
data center that routes ‘911’ emergency
response telecommunications,’’ which
would likely be a stationary generator.
The possible scenarios provided in the
definition are merely examples and are
not intended to be the only types of
applications and situations that can
qualify. The use of the word ‘‘example’’
in the definition is an indication that
they are just examples and not limits on
interpreting the definition. It would not
be possible to provide examples of all of
the potential uses of engines in qualified
emergency situations.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that the initial period for
AECD operation should be 15 days (360
hours) rather than the proposed 120
hours, with follow-on increments of 120
hours activated by communications
with the engine certificate holder. The
commenter stated that the time limit
should be designed to address a worstcase situation, such as a region-wide
disaster and a remote area, where
extended communications and/or
supply chain disruptions may impact
the engine operator and the certificate
holder beyond 120 hours. According to
the commenter, the threat of postemergency analysis and punishment by
the EPA will likely be sufficient to
minimize overuse of the leeway
provided by the proposed amendment.
Another commenter opposed any
hour limit during an emergency
situation. According to the commenter,
because emergencies are sudden,
uncontrollable, and unlikely, there is no
need to limit the amount of override
time allowable to keep engines running
during emergencies. The commenter
also expressed concern about the
procedures set forth for reactivation of
the AECD, and urged the EPA to remove
the requirements for resetting of the
AECD. The commenter stated that the
engine manufacturer is not the
appropriately qualified entity to
determine a facility’s qualified
emergency, and that there need not be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
such stringent requirements for
activation of the AECD, since the EPA
has the authority to evaluate after the
fact whether or not it was reasonable to
justify the qualified emergency.
Response: The proposed definition of
a qualified emergency situation
specifies emergency situations for
which an engine owner or operator may
temporarily override emission control
inducements. Should the engine owner
or operator need to extend the override
beyond the initial 120 hour period, it
can work with the engine manufacturer
to reset the AECD for additional time.
Thus, the engine owner/operator will be
able to override the emission controls
throughout the duration of the qualified
emergency situation. The limit on AECD
activation periods and procedures for
resetting the AECD are necessary to
ensure that the time of the override is
truly limited to the time necessary to
address the emergency situation, and
minimize excess emissions, which
would lead to adverse environmental
impacts. The commenters that suggested
an initial 360 hour AECD activation
period to address a ‘‘worst case
scenario’’ or an unlimited activation
period did not provide any specific
example of a qualified emergency
situation of longer than 120 hours where
the procedures for resetting the AECD
could not have been followed, or
explain why 360 hours represents a
‘‘worst case scenario.’’ The EPA’s
approach appropriately balances the
need to provide regulatory relief in
emergency circumstances with the need
to deter overuse, and the EPA does not
agree that an unlimited period is
necessary or that a period of 360 hours
or unlimited hours is preferable. In
order to reactivate the AECD, the engine
manufacturer is only required to have
evidence that the emergency situation is
continuing and is not required to judge
if the situation is a qualifying
emergency. As indicated in the
proposal, it is expected that AECDs
would be activated rarely, if ever, so the
provisions are unlikely to impose a
significant burden on engine owners/
operators.
Further, the EPA’s decision to adopt
requirements concerning initial AECD
activation periods, reactivation and
notification that are identical to such
requirements in the nonroad engine
rules is influenced by our desire to
allow for dual certification of stationary
and nonroad engines, which reduces the
burden of the rule on engine
manufacturers. The Truck and Engine
Manufacturers Association noted in
their public comments 2 that the ability
PO 00000
2 EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0866–0017.
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to dual certify nonroad and stationary
engines reduces the number of engine
families that a manufacturer must
certify, reduces the number of engine
models that dealers, distributors, and
customers must inventory and manage,
and reduces the number of engine
families that the EPA must certify.
According to the commenter, if the EPA
were to foreclose the ability of
manufacturers to continue to dual
certify, significant costs and burdens
would result. Given that the NSPS for
stationary CI internal combustion
engines places a great deal of the
compliance demonstration burden on
the engine manufacturer, it is reasonable
to have the manufacturer’s compliance
obligations be as consistent as possible
for stationary and nonroad engines.
Comment: One commenter supported
the recordkeeping process outlined in
the proposed rule. Another commenter
disagreed with the proposed
requirements for the engine owner/
operator to send a written report to the
engine manufacturer detailing the
activation of the emergency AECD.
According to the commenter, the engine
manufacturer has no authority to
enforce penalties or regulations
promulgated by the EPA, and, therefore,
the commenter did not think it made
logical sense for owners/operators to be
required to submit reports to the engine
manufacturers, nor are the engine
manufacturers qualified to determine
what constitutes a qualified emergency
situation at the affected facility. The
commenter stated that using the engine
manufacturers to collect reports and
then report this information to the EPA
is unprecedented and creates an
unnecessary middleman. The
commenter recommended that the
proposed provisions be revised so that
owners/operators are required to report
the information directly to the EPA, or
to the appropriate permitting authority.
Response: Similar to the limit on
AECD activation periods and the
procedures for resetting the AECD, the
recordkeeping process is necessary to
ensure the AECD is used in true
emergencies only and prevent adverse
environmental impacts. The proposed
reporting provisions do not require
engine manufacturers to enforce
penalties or EPA regulations. Rather,
they require that, in cases where the
manufacturer is aware of use of the
AECD, the manufacturer must make the
engine owner/operator aware that they
may be subject to penalties from the
EPA for failing to report the use of the
AECD. There are other situations in the
regulations where an engine
manufacturer is required to indicate that
an owner/operator may be subject to
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
penalties, such as the labeling
requirement in 40 CFR 1039.20. The
commenter did not provide any
information to show that it would be
unreasonable for engine manufacturers
to compile information on the use of
AECDs, and the engine manufacturers
have not objected to the requirement. As
stated previously, it is expected that
AECDs will be activated rarely, if ever,
so the reporting provisions are unlikely
to impose a significant burden on
engine owners/operators or engine
manufacturers.
Comment: One commenter requested
that the EPA clarify that manufacturers
are not required to submit actual
certification test-based data to
demonstrate that engines equipped with
an AECD that helps to ensure proper
function of engines in qualified
emergency situations will meet the Tier
1 emission standards in 40 CFR 89.112
when the AECD is activated. According
to the commenter, submittal of
certification test-based data would be
unduly expensive and burdensome for
engine manufacturers and the EPA. The
commenter recommended that engine
manufacturers be allowed to
demonstrate that an engine complies
with the Tier 1 emission standards
when the AECD is activated by
submitting the conversion efficiencies
for the Tier 4 engine’s emission control
systems and using good engineering
judgement to demonstrate that the
engine complies with the Tier 1
standard. Specifically, according to the
commenter, manufacturers could
compare the conversion efficiency with
the Tier 4 emission standard for the
engine to demonstrate that the engine
would meet the Tier 1 emission
standard if the emission control system
is disabled. The commenter noted that
the EPA allows the demonstration of
compliance through means other than
the generation of actual certification
data for the not-to-exceed standards in
part 1039. The commenter suggested
specific edits to 40 CFR 60.4210(j) to
help clarify the required demonstration.
Response: The proposed rule was not
intended to require certification testbased data to be submitted to
demonstrate that the engines will meet
the Tier 1 emission standards. The final
rule includes language in 40 CFR
60.4210(j) to clarify that certification
test-based data are not required for such
demonstration. The intent of the
provision is that engine manufacturers
would demonstrate achievement of the
Tier 1 emission standards at the time
that the manufacturer applies for
certification of the engine equipped
with an AECD. Manufacturers must
document that the engine complies with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
the Tier 1 emission standards when the
AECD is activated and provide any
relevant testing, engineering analysis, or
other information in sufficient detail to
support such statement when applying
for certification (or amending an
existing certificate) of an engine
equipped with an AECD.
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
Comment: Four commenters
supported the proposed amendment to
align the definition of remote areas of
Alaska in the NSPS for stationary CI
engines with the definition currently
used in the NESHAP for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines. Commenters indicated that the
proposed amendment would address
the unique circumstances of engines
located in remote areas of Alaska. No
commenters opposed the proposed
amendment.
Response: No response necessary.
Comment: One commenter requested
that the EPA reconsider the
effectiveness of, and need for, PM
emission control equipment on new
Tier 3 marine engines providing prime
power in remote areas of Alaska. The
commenter questioned the benefit of
installing PM emission controls on
engines certified to the Tier 3 marine
engine standards, which have lower PM
emissions than engines certified to the
Tier 3 standards for nonroad engines.
The commenter stated that it believes
that the capital and operating cost,
questionable reliability, and additional
complexity resulting from the PM
emission control requirement do not
appear to be warranted or economically
viable.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of the proposal, which did not
seek comment on the appropriateness of
the PM emission control requirement in
40 CFR 61.4216(c) for remote areas of
Alaska.
IV. Impacts of the Final Action
A. Economic Impacts
The EPA does not expect any
significant economic impacts as a result
of this final rule. A significant economic
impact for the amendment allowing the
temporary override of inducements in
emergency situations is not anticipated
because AECDs are expected to be
activated rarely (if ever), and, thus, the
impacts to affected sources and
consumers of affected output will be
minimal.
The economic impact from the change
to the criteria for remote areas of Alaska
will be a cost savings for owners or
operators of engines that are located in
the additional areas that will now be
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44217
considered remote. The precise savings
depends on the number and size of
engines that will be installed each year.
Information provided by the Alaska
Energy Authority indicated that one to
two new engines are expected to be
installed each year. Information
provided by the state of Alaska
indicated that the expected initial
capital cost savings per engine ranges
from $28,000 to $163,000, depending on
the size of the engine. There will also be
annual operating and maintenance cost
savings due to avoidance of the need to
obtain and store DEF.
B. Environmental Impacts
The EPA does not expect any
significant environmental impacts as a
result of the amendment to allow a
temporary override of inducements in
emergency situations. The AECDs are
expected to be activated rarely (if ever)
and will only affect emissions for a very
short period.
The EPA also does not expect
significant environmental impacts as a
result of the amendments to the criteria
for remote areas of Alaska. As an
example, allowing the use of a Tier 3
engine instead of a Tier 4 engine would
result in less reductions for a 250
horsepower (HP) stationary CI engine of
5.4 tons per year (tpy) of NOX, 0.1 tpy
of NMHC, 1.6 tpy of CO, and 0.3 tpy of
PM, assuming the engine operates full
time (8,760 hours per year).3 As stated
previously, the state of Alaska estimates
that only one to two new engines will
be installed each year in the additional
remote areas.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
3 Estimates are based on Tier 3 and Tier 4
emission factors for a 175–300 HP engine provided
in Table A4 of Exhaust and Crankcase Emission
Factors for Nonroad Engine Modeling—
Compression-Ignition. NR–009d. Assessment and
Standards Division, Office of Transportation and
Air Quality. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA–420–R–10–018. July 2010. https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nonrdmdl/
nonrdmdl2010/420r10018.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
44218
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities
in this rule have been submitted for
approval to the OMB under the PRA.
The Information Collection Request
(ICR) document that the EPA prepared
has been assigned EPA ICR number
2196.05. The only new information
collection activity in this rule is the
reporting by engine owners and
operators and engine manufacturers that
would occur if the AECD is activated
during a qualified emergency situation.
The EPA expects that it is unlikely that
these AECDs will ever need to be
activated. Therefore, the EPA estimates
that there will be no additional burden
from this reporting requirement.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When
OMB approves this ICR, the Agency will
announce that approval in the Federal
Register and publish a technical
amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display
the OMB control number for the
approved information collection
activities contained in this final rule.
The OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities
contained in the existing regulations
and has assigned OMB control number
2060–0590.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. In making this
determination, the impact of concern is
any significant adverse economic
impact on small entities. An agency may
certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities if
the rule relieves regulatory burden, has
no net burden or otherwise has a
positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. As
mentioned earlier in this preamble, the
EPA is harmonizing the NSPS for
stationary CI engines in this action with
an existing rule issued by the EPA for
nonroad CI engines. Thus, this action is
reducing regulatory impacts to small
entities as well as other affected entities.
The EPA is also including additional
remote areas of Alaska in the regulatory
flexibility provisions already in the rule
for remote areas of Alaska, which
further reduces the burden of the
existing rule on small entities and other
affected entities. We have, therefore,
concluded that this action will relieve
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
regulatory burden for all directly
regulated small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. It will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, on
the relationship between the federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
This final rule would impose
compliance costs primarily on engine
manufacturers, depending on the extent
to which they take advantage of the
flexibilities offered. The final
amendments to expand the areas that
are considered remote areas of Alaska
would reduce the compliance costs for
owners and operators of stationary
engines in those areas. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that the EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The provisions being finalized in this
action are designed to eliminate risks to
human life and are expected to be used
rarely, if at all, and will only affect
emissions for a very short period. Other
changes the EPA is finalizing have
minimal effect on emissions.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 28, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 60 of
the Code of the Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 60—STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for part 60
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart IIII—Standards of Performance
for Stationary Compression Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines
2. Amend § 60.4201 by revising
paragraph (f)(1) and adding paragraph
(h) to read as follows:
■
§ 60.4201 What emission standards must I
meet for non-emergency engines if I am a
stationary CI internal combustion engine
manufacturer?
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) Remote areas of Alaska; and
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Stationary CI ICE certified to the
standards in 40 CFR part 1039 and
equipped with auxiliary emission
control devices (AECDs) as specified in
40 CFR 1039.665 must meet the Tier 1
certification emission standards for new
nonroad CI engines in 40 CFR 89.112
while the AECD is activated during a
qualified emergency situation. A
qualified emergency situation is defined
in 40 CFR 1039.665. When the qualified
emergency situation has ended and the
AECD is deactivated, the engine must
resume meeting the otherwise
applicable emission standard specified
in this section.
■ 3. Amend § 60.4202 by revising
paragraph (g)(1) to read as follows:
§ 60.4202 What emission standards must I
meet for emergency engines if I am a
stationary CI internal combustion engine
manufacturer?
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(1) Remote areas of Alaska; and
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Amend § 60.4204 by adding
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 60.4204 What emission standards must I
meet for non-emergency engines if I am an
owner or operator of a stationary CI internal
combustion engine?
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Owners and operators of stationary
CI ICE certified to the standards in 40
CFR part 1039 and equipped with
AECDs as specified in 40 CFR 1039.665
must meet the Tier 1 certification
emission standards for new nonroad CI
engines in 40 CFR 89.112 while the
AECD is activated during a qualified
emergency situation. A qualified
emergency situation is defined in 40
CFR 1039.665. When the qualified
emergency situation has ended and the
AECD is deactivated, the engine must
resume meeting the otherwise
applicable emission standard specified
in this section.
■ 5. Amend § 60.4210 by adding
paragraph (j) to read as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 60.4210 What are my compliance
requirements if I am a stationary CI internal
combustion engine manufacturer?
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Stationary CI ICE manufacturers
may equip their stationary CI internal
combustion engines certified to the
emission standards in 40 CFR part 1039
with AECDs for qualified emergency
situations according to the requirements
of 40 CFR 1039.665. Manufacturers of
stationary CI ICE equipped with AECDs
as allowed by 40 CFR 1039.665 must
meet all of the requirements in 40 CFR
1039.665 that apply to manufacturers.
Manufacturers must document that the
engine complies with the Tier 1
standard in 40 CFR 89.112 when the
AECD is activated. Manufacturers must
provide any relevant testing,
engineering analysis, or other
information in sufficient detail to
support such statement when applying
for certification (including amending an
existing certificate) of an engine
equipped with an AECD as allowed by
40 CFR 1039.665.
■ 6. Amend § 60.4211 by adding
paragraph (h) to read as follows:
§ 60.4211 What are my compliance
requirements if I am an owner or operator
of a stationary CI internal combustion
engine?
*
*
*
*
*
(h) The requirements for operators
and prohibited acts specified in 40 CFR
1039.665 apply to owners or operators
of stationary CI ICE equipped with
AECDs for qualified emergency
situations as allowed by 40 CFR
1039.665.
■ 7. Amend § 60.4214 by adding
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 60.4214 What are my notification,
reporting, and recordkeeping requirements
if I am an owner or operator of a stationary
CI internal combustion engine?
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Owners or operators of stationary
CI ICE equipped with AECDs pursuant
to the requirements of 40 CFR 1039.665
must report the use of AECDs as
required by 40 CFR 1039.665(e).
■ 8. Amend § 60.4216 by revising
paragraphs (b) through (d) and (f) to
read as follows:
§ 60.4216 What requirements must I meet
for engines used in Alaska?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Except as indicated in paragraph
(c) of this section, manufacturers,
owners and operators of stationary CI
ICE with a displacement of less than 10
liters per cylinder located in remote
areas of Alaska may meet the
requirements of this subpart by
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44219
manufacturing and installing engines
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
parts 94 or 1042, as appropriate, rather
than the otherwise applicable
requirements of 40 CFR parts 89 and
1039, as indicated in §§ 60.4201(f) and
60.4202(g).
(c) Manufacturers, owners and
operators of stationary CI ICE that are
located in remote areas of Alaska may
choose to meet the applicable emission
standards for emergency engines in
§§ 60.4202 and 60.4205, and not those
for non-emergency engines in
§§ 60.4201 and § 60.4204, except that for
2014 model year and later nonemergency CI ICE, the owner or operator
of any such engine that was not certified
as meeting Tier 4 PM standards, must
meet the applicable requirements for
PM in §§ 60.4201 and 60.4204 or install
a PM emission control device that
achieves PM emission reductions of 85
percent, or 60 percent for engines with
a displacement of greater than or equal
to 30 liters per cylinder, compared to
engine-out emissions.
(d) The provisions of § 60.4207 do not
apply to owners and operators of pre2014 model year stationary CI ICE
subject to this subpart that are located
in remote areas of Alaska.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) The provisions of this section and
§ 60.4207 do not prevent owners and
operators of stationary CI ICE subject to
this subpart that are located in remote
areas of Alaska from using fuels mixed
with used lubricating oil, in volumes of
up to 1.75 percent of the total fuel. The
sulfur content of the used lubricating oil
must be less than 200 parts per million.
The used lubricating oil must meet the
on-specification levels and properties
for used oil in 40 CFR 279.11.
■ 9. Amend § 60.4219 by adding in
alphabetical order the definitions for
‘‘Alaska Railbelt Grid’’ and ‘‘Remote
areas of Alaska’’ to read as follows:
§ 60.4219
subpart?
What definitions apply to this
*
*
*
*
*
Alaska Railbelt Grid means the
service areas of the six regulated public
utilities that extend from Fairbanks to
Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula.
These utilities are Golden Valley
Electric Association; Chugach Electric
Association; Matanuska Electric
Association; Homer Electric
Association; Anchorage Municipal Light
& Power; and the City of Seward Electric
System.
*
*
*
*
*
Remote areas of Alaska means areas
of Alaska that meet either paragraph (1)
or (2) of this definition.
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
44220
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(1) Areas of Alaska that are not
accessible by the Federal Aid Highway
System (FAHS).
(2) Areas of Alaska that meet all of the
following criteria:
(i) The only connection to the FAHS
is through the Alaska Marine Highway
System, or the stationary CI ICE
operation is within an isolated grid in
Alaska that is not connected to the
statewide electrical grid referred to as
the Alaska Railbelt Grid.
(ii) At least 10 percent of the power
generated by the stationary CI ICE on an
annual basis is used for residential
purposes.
(iii) The generating capacity of the
source is less than 12 megawatts, or the
stationary CI ICE is used exclusively for
backup power for renewable energy.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–16045 Filed 7–6–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Changes From the Proposed Rule
IV. Compliance With Statutory and
Regulatory Requirements
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[EPA–R01–OW–2016–0068; FRL–9948–61–
Region 1]
Ocean Disposal; Amendments to
Restrictions on Use of Dredged
Material Disposal Sites in the Central
and Western Regions of Long Island
Sound; Connecticut
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) today is amending federal
regulations that designated, and placed
restrictions on the use of, the Central
Long Island Sound and Western Long
Island Sound dredged material disposal
sites, located offshore from New Haven
and Stamford, Connecticut,
respectively. The amended regulations
incorporate standards and procedures
for the use of those sites consistent with
those recommended in the Long Island
Sound Dredged Material Management
Plan, which was completed by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers on January 11,
2016. The Dredged Material
Management Plan identifies a wide
range of alternatives to open-water
disposal and recommends standards
and procedures for determining which
alternatives to pursue for different
dredging projects, so as to reduce or
eliminate the open-water disposal of
dredged material.
DATES: This final regulation is effective
on August 8, 2016.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:01 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R01–OW–2016–
0068. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov
Web site. Publically available docket
materials are also available from EPA’s
Web site https://www.epa.gov/oceandumping/dredged-materialmanagement-long-island-sound.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen Perkins, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, New England
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square,
Suite 100, Mail Code: OEP06–3, Boston,
MA 02109–3912, telephone (617) 918–
1501, electronic mail: perkins.stephen@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Organization of this document. The
following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.
ADDRESSES:
I. Background
On February 10, 2016, EPA published
in the Federal Register (81 FR 7055) a
proposed rule (the Proposed Rule)
amending federal regulations that
designated, and placed restrictions on
the use of, the Central Long Island
Sound (CLDS) and Western Long Island
Sound (WLDS) dredged material
disposal sites, located offshore from
New Haven and Stamford, Connecticut,
respectively. The existing restrictions on
the sites were imposed when EPA
designated CLDS and WLDS (70 FR
32498) (the 2005 Rule), to ensure
appropriate use and management of the
designated disposal sites and to support
the common goal of New York and
Connecticut to reduce or eliminate the
disposal of dredged material in Long
Island Sound.
To support this goal, the restrictions
in the 2005 Rule contemplated that
there would be a regional dredged
material management plan (DMMP) for
Long Island Sound that would help to
guide the management of dredged
material from projects which occur after
completion of the DMMP. The amended
restrictions in this Final Rule
incorporate standards and procedures
for the use of those sites consistent with
those recommended in the Long Island
Sound DMMP, which was completed by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) on January 11, 2016.
The restrictions imposed on the sites
in the 2005 Rule also included
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
conditions that specified that use of the
sites would be suspended if, within 120
days of completion of the DMMP, and
subject to EPA’s consideration of public
comments, EPA does not issue legally
binding final amendments adopting
such procedures and standards. Any
such suspension in the use of the sites
would be lifted if and when EPA issues
the required final rule.
II. Response to Comments
EPA received comments on the
Proposed Rule from 119 individuals,
groups or entities. Comments were
received from the Connecticut
Congressional Delegation, USACE, the
states of Connecticut and New York, a
number of municipalities,
environmental groups, harbor and
marine trade groups, and many private
citizens. Approximately eighty percent
of the commenters supported the
Proposed Rule, with some offering
suggested improvements. The remainder
expressed opposition in part or in whole
to the Proposed Rule. A document
containing copies of all of the public
comments received by EPA and a
document containing EPA’s response to
each of the comments have been placed
in the public docket and on the Web site
identified in the ADDRESSES section of
this document. There was significant
overlap among the comments received.
Below, EPA summarizes the main
points of the commenters and provides
responses.
Comment #1. A number of
commenters, including the states of
Connecticut and New York, asked that
EPA be explicit in retaining the
common goal of the 2005 Rule—to
reduce or eliminate open-water disposal
of dredged material in Long Island
Sound.
Response #1. EPA did not intend to
signal any change to the goal of the 2005
Rule. In fact, the goal was so stated in
the first paragraph of the Background
section of the Proposed Rule. EPA did
not include the goal statement in the
proposed regulations because it was
previously included in a provision
addressing development of the DMMP
and EPA deleted that provision because
the DMMP had been completed. Again,
EPA did not by this deletion intend to
signal a change in the goal. Therefore,
to address this comment, EPA has
added a sentence, restating the common
goal, in the introductory paragraph
(b)(4)(vi) in the Final Rule.
Comment #2. The states of
Connecticut and New York proposed
similar ideas for revisions to the
Proposed Rule intended to spur
increased beneficial use and result in
staged reductions in open water
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44212-44220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16045]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0866; FRL-9948-65-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS43
Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing
amendments to the standards of performance for stationary compression
ignition (CI) internal combustion engines to allow manufacturers to
design the engines so that operators can temporarily override
performance inducements related to the emission control system for
stationary CI internal combustion engines. The amendments apply to
engines operating during emergency situations where the operation of
the engine or equipment is needed to protect human life, and to require
compliance with Tier 1 emission standards during such emergencies. The
EPA is also amending the standards of performance for certain
stationary CI internal combustion engines located in remote areas of
Alaska.
DATES: This final rule is effective on September 6, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this action
under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0866. All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. The EPA also relies
on materials in Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708, EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-
0295, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-1032, and incorporates those dockets into the
record for this final rule.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available (e.g., confidential business information or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute). Certain other material,
such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA
Docket Center, EPA WJC West Building, 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 federal 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. Visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/dockets for additional
information about the EPA's public docket.
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this final rule will be available on the World Wide Web (WWW).
Following signature, a copy of this final rule will be posted at the
following address: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/icengines.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Melanie King, Energy Strategies
Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-01), Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number: (919) 541-2469; facsimile number: (919) 541-5450;
email address: king.melanie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Organization of this document. The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
[[Page 44213]]
I. General Background
II. Final Amendments
A. Temporary Override of Inducements in Emergency Situations
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
III. Public Comments and Responses
A. Temporary Override of Inducements in Emergency Situations
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
IV. Impacts of the Final Action
A. Economic Impacts
B. Environmental Impacts
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
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 Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Background
On July 11, 2006, the EPA promulgated standards of performance for
stationary CI internal combustion engines (71 FR 39154). These
standards, known as new source performance standards (NSPS), implement
section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act, and are issued for categories of
sources that cause, or contribute significantly to, air pollution that
may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. The
standards are codified at 40 CFR part 60 subpart IIII. The standards
apply to new stationary sources of emissions, i.e., sources whose
construction, reconstruction, or modification begins after a standard
for those sources is proposed. The NSPS for stationary CI internal
combustion engines established limits on emissions of particulate
matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO) and
non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC). The emission standards are generally
modeled after the EPA's standards for nonroad and marine diesel
engines. The nonroad CI engine standards are phased in over several
years and have Tiers with increasing levels of stringency. The engine
model year in which the Tiers take effect varies for different size
ranges of engines. The Tier 4 final standards for new stationary non-
emergency and nonroad CI engines generally begin with either the 2014
or 2015 model year.
In 2011, the EPA finalized revisions to the NSPS for stationary CI
engines that amended the standards for engines with a displacement
greater than 10 liters per cylinder, and also for engines located in
remote areas of Alaska (76 FR 37954, June 28, 2011). In this action,
the EPA is finalizing amendments to the NSPS regarding performance
inducements for Tier 4 engines and the criteria for defining remote
areas of Alaska. The final amendments are discussed below.
II. Final Amendments
A. Temporary Override of Inducements in Emergency Situations
Many Tier 4 final engines are equipped by the engine manufacturer
with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to reduce emissions of
NOX. The consumable reactant in an SCR system is typically
supplied as a solution of urea in water known as diesel exhaust fluid
(DEF). Engines equipped with SCR generally include controls that limit
the function of the engines if they are operated without DEF, or if the
engine's electronic control module cannot otherwise confirm that the
SCR system is properly operating. Such controls are generally called
``inducements'' because they induce the operator to properly maintain
the SCR emission control system. In normal circumstances, if
inducements begin, the engine operator is expected to perform any
necessary maintenance to avoid shutdown. Manufacturers as well as
owners or operators of nonroad and stationary CI Tier 4 certified
engines have raised concerns regarding the inducements being triggered
and engines shutting down during emergency situations. Additional
background on Tier 4 engines and this amendment can be found in the
proposal for this rulemaking (80 FR 68808, November 6, 2015). On August
8, 2014, the EPA promulgated provisions allowing manufacturers of
nonroad engines certified to the emission standards in 40 CFR part 1039
to give operators the means to temporarily override emission control
inducements during qualified emergency situations, such as those where
operation of the engine is needed to protect human life (79 FR 46356,
August 8, 2014). These provisions, which are codified in 40 CFR
1039.665, allow for auxiliary emission control devices (AECDs) that
help to ensure proper function of engines in qualified emergency
situations. AECDs are any element of design that senses temperature,
motive speed, engine revolutions per minute, transmission gear, or any
other parameter for the purpose of activating, modulating, delaying, or
deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system.
The provisions of 40 CFR 1039.665 allow the engine manufacturer to
include a dormant feature in the engine's control software that could
be activated to override emission control inducements. In this action,
the EPA is adopting those same provisions for stationary CI engines
certified to the standards in 40 CFR part 1039 and used in qualified
emergency situations. It is important to emphasize that the EPA is
confident that Tier 4 engines will function properly in the vast
majority of emergency situations. Thus, the EPA expects that AECDs
allowed under this provision will rarely be activated. The EPA is
adopting this provision merely as a precaution to ensure that
stationary CI engines can continue to operate in emergency situations.
The final amendments allow engine manufacturers to design into
their stationary CI engines a dormant AECD that can be activated for up
to 120 engine hours per use during a qualified emergency situation to
prevent emission controls from interfering with engine operation. The
EPA is finalizing amendments that allow engine manufacturers to offer,
and operators to request, re-activations of the AECD for additional
time in increments of 120 engine hours in cases of a prolonged
emergency situation. During the emergency situation, the engine must
meet the Tier 1 emission standard in 40 CFR 89.112 that applies to the
engine's rated power. Operators activating the AECD will be required to
report the incident to the engine manufacturers, and engine
manufacturers will submit an annual report to the EPA summarizing the
use of these AECDs during the prior year. These final amendments are
discussed in more detail below.
1. Definition of Qualified Emergency Situation
The EPA is using the definition of qualified emergency situation
established in the August 8, 2014, amendments for nonroad engines. This
definition is found in the introductory text to 40 CFR 1039.665 and is
cross-referenced in the NSPS for stationary CI internal combustion
engines, specifically in 40 CFR 60.4204(f). The definition specifies
that a qualified emergency situation is one in which the condition of
an engine's emission controls poses a significant direct or indirect
risk to human life. An example
[[Page 44214]]
of a direct risk would be an emission control condition that inhibits
the performance of an engine being used to rescue a person from a life-
threatening situation (for example, providing power to a medical
facility during an emergency situation). An example of an indirect risk
would be an emission control condition that inhibits the performance of
an engine being used to provide electrical power to a data center that
routes ``911'' emergency response telecommunications.
2. Basic AECD Criteria
Section 1039.665 specifies provisions allowing for AECDs that are
necessary to ensure proper function of engines and equipment in
emergency situations. It also includes specific criteria that the
engine manufacturer must meet to ensure that any adverse environmental
impacts are minimized. These criteria are cross-referenced in the NSPS
for stationary CI engines and are as follows:
The AECD must be designed so that it cannot be activated
more than once without the specific permission of the certificate
holder. Reactivation of the AECD must require the input of a temporary
code or equivalent security feature.
The AECD must become inactive within 120 engine hours of
becoming active. The engine must also include a feature that allows the
operator to deactivate the AECD once the emergency is over.
The manufacturer must show that the AECD deactivates
emission controls (such as inducement strategies) only to the extent
necessary to address the expected emergency situation.
The engine controls must be configured to record in non-
volatile electronic memory the total number of activations of the AECD
for each engine.
The manufacturer must take appropriate additional steps to
induce operators to report AECD activation and request resetting of the
AECD. The EPA recommends including one or more persistent visible and/
or audible alarms that are active from the point when the AECD is
activated to the point when it is reset.
The manufacturer must provide purchasers with instructions
on how to activate the AECD in emergency situations, as well as
information about penalties for overuse.
3. Emission Standards During Qualified Emergency Situations
The EPA is requiring stationary CI engines to meet different
emission standards for the very narrow period of operation where there
is an emergency situation with a risk to human life and the owner or
operator is warned that the inducement is about to occur. The emission
standards that apply when the AECD is activated during the qualified
emergency situation are the Tier 1 standards in 40 CFR 89.112. Engine
manufacturers indicated that meeting the Tier 2 or 3 standards in 40
CFR 89.112 is not feasible because the base engine used in Tier 4
configurations does not have exhaust gas recirculation (EGR), which is
the engine design technology used to meet the Tier 2 and 3 standards.
The EGR is not needed for Tier 4 because NOX is controlled
by the SCR.\1\ The Tier 1 requirement applies only when there is a
qualified emergency situation and bypass of inducements is necessary to
ensure continued operation of the engine. Once the emergency situation
has ended and the AECD is deactivated, the engine must comply with the
otherwise applicable emission standard specified in 40 CFR 60.4202.
Engine manufacturers must demonstrate that the engine complies with the
Tier 1 standard when the AECD is activated when applying for
certification of an engine equipped with an AECD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Document ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0866-0010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Approval, Recordkeeping and Reporting for Engine Manufacturers
Manufacturers may ask for approval of the use of emergency AECDs at
any time; however, the EPA encourages manufacturers to obtain
preliminary approval before submitting an application for
certification. Otherwise, the EPA's review of the AECD, which may
include many unique features, may delay the approval of the application
for certification.
The manufacturer is required to keep records to document the use of
emergency AECDs until the end of the calendar year 5 years after the
onset of the relevant emergency situation. The manufacturer must submit
an annual compliance report to the EPA within 90 calendar days of the
end of each calendar year in which it authorizes use of an AECD. The
annual report must include a description of each AECD activation and
copies of the reports submitted by owners or operators (or statements
that an owner or operator did not submit a report, to the extent of the
manufacturer's knowledge). If an owner or operator fails to report the
use of an emergency AECD to the manufacturer, the manufacturer, to the
extent it has been made aware of the AECD activation, must send written
notification to the operator that failure to meet the submission
requirements may subject the operator to penalties.
5. Engine Owner or Operator Requirements
Owners or operators who purchase engines with this dormant feature
will receive instructions from the engine manufacturer on how to
activate the AECD in qualified emergency situations, as well as
information about penalties for overuse. The EPA would consider
appropriate use of this feature to be during a situation where
operation of a stationary CI engine is needed to protect human life (or
where impaired operation poses a significant direct or indirect risk to
human life), and temporarily overriding emission controls enables full
operation of the equipment. The EPA is adopting this provision to give
operators the means to obtain short-term relief one time without the
need to contact the engine manufacturer or the EPA. In a qualified
emergency situation, delaying the activation to obtain approval could
put lives at risk, and would be unacceptable. However, the EPA retains
the authority to evaluate, after the fact, whether it was reasonable to
judge that there was a significant risk to human life to justify the
activation of the AECD. Where the EPA determines that it was not
reasonable to judge (1) that there was a significant risk to human
life; or (2) that the emission control strategy was curtailing the
ability of the engine to perform, the owner or operator may be subject
to penalties for tampering with emission controls. The owner or
operator requirements also include a specific prohibition on operating
the engine with the AECD beyond the time reasonably needed for such
operation. The owner or operator may also be subject to penalties for
tampering if they continue to operate the engine with the AECD once the
emergency situation has ended or the problem causing the emission
control strategy to interfere with the performance of the engine has
been or can reasonably be fixed. Nevertheless, the EPA will consider
the totality of the circumstances when assessing penalties, and retain
discretion to reduce penalties where the EPA determines that an owner
or operator acted in good faith.
The owner or operator must send a written report to the engine
manufacturer within 60 calendar days after activating an emergency
AECD. If any consecutive reactivations occur, this report is still due
60 calendar days from the first activation. The report must include:
[[Page 44215]]
Contact name, mail and email addresses, and telephone
number for the responsible company or entity.
A description of the emergency situation, the location of
the engine during the emergency, and the contact information for an
official who can verify the emergency situation (such as a county
sheriff, fire marshal, or hospital administrator).
The reason for AECD activation during the emergency
situation, such as the lack of DEF, or the failure of an emission-
related sensor when the engine was needed to respond to an emergency
situation.
The engine's serial number (or equivalent).
A description of the extent and duration of the engine
operation while the AECD was active, including a statement describing
whether or not the AECD was manually deactivated after the emergency
situation ended.
Paragraph 40 CFR 1039.665(g) specifies that failure to provide this
information to the engine manufacturer within the deadline is improper
use of the AECD and is prohibited.
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
The EPA is finalizing an amendment to the NSPS for stationary CI
internal combustion engines that would align the definition of remote
areas of Alaska with the definition currently used in the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, which can be found at 40 CFR
part 63, subpart ZZZZ. The amendment specifies that engines in areas
that are accessible by the Federal Aid Highway System (FAHS) can be
considered remote if each of the following conditions is met: (1) The
only connection to the FAHS is through the Alaska Marine Highway
System, or the stationary CI engine operation is within an isolated
grid in Alaska that is not connected to the statewide electrical grid
referred to as the Alaska Railbelt Grid; (2) at least 10 percent of the
power generated by the engine on an annual basis is used for
residential purposes; and (3) the generating capacity of the facility
is less than 12 megawatts, or the engine is used exclusively for backup
power for renewable energy. The Alaska Railbelt Grid is defined as the
service areas of the six regulated public utilities that extend from
Fairbanks to Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula. These utilities are
Golden Valley Electric Association; Chugach Electric Association;
Matanuska Electric Association; Homer Electric Association; Anchorage
Municipal Light & Power; and the City of Seward Electric System.
Background on the provisions related to remote areas of Alaska can be
found in the proposal for this rulemaking (80 FR 68808, November 6,
2015).
The following NSPS provisions that currently apply to stationary CI
internal combustion engines for engines that are located in areas of
Alaska that are not accessible by the FAHS will be extended to
stationary CI internal combustion engines located in the areas
identified above:
Exemption for all pre-2014 model year engines from diesel
fuel sulfur requirements (see 40 CFR 60.4216(d));
Allowance for owners and operators of stationary CI
engines to use engines certified to marine engine standards, rather
than land-based nonroad engine standards (see 40 CFR 60.4216(b));
No requirement to meet emission standards that would
necessitate the use of aftertreatment devices for NOX, in
particular, SCR (emission standards that are not based on the use of
aftertreatment devices for NOX will apply) (see 40 CFR
60.4216(c));
No requirement to meet emission standards that would
necessitate the use of aftertreatment devices for PM until the 2014
model year (see 40 CFR 60.4216(c)); and
Allowance for the blending of used lubricating oil, in
volumes of up to 1.75 percent of the total fuel, if the sulfur content
of the used lubricating oil is less than 200 parts per million and the
used lubricating oil is ``on-spec,'' i.e., it meets the on-
specification levels and properties of 40 CFR 279.11 (see 40 CFR
60.4216(f)).
III. Public Comments and Responses
This section presents a summary of the public comments that the EPA
received on the proposed amendments and the responses developed. The
EPA received 7 public comments on the proposed rule. The comments can
be obtained online from the Federal Docket Management System at https://www.regulations.gov.
A. Temporary Override of Inducements in Emergency Situations
Comment: Two commenters supported the proposed amendment to allow
manufacturers of stationary CI engines certified to the emission
standards in 40 CFR part 1039 to give engine operators the means to
temporarily override emission control inducements while operating in
qualified emergency situations. One commenter noted the critical need
for the proposed amendment to ensure that stationary CI engines, when
used in emergency situations, may continue to operate to ameliorate the
emergency and protect human life. The commenter noted that the EPA had
already adopted the proposed provision for nonroad engines, and that it
was essential for stationary engines as well. The commenter also
supported the proposed amendment so that engines could be dual-
certified for both stationary and nonroad use, which reduces the cost
and burden of certification.
Response: No response necessary.
Comment: One commenter supported the proposed definition of an
emergency situation. Another commenter stated that the EPA should not
impose any limitations on the operating time of an engine during an
emergency situation, and noted that in the NESHAP for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, emergencies are excluded
from operating time limitations and should similarly be excluded here.
The commenter stated that it is not necessary to newly incorporate a
definition of a qualified emergency situation because there are
applicable examples of emergency situations already provided in the
definition of an emergency stationary internal combustion engine in the
NSPS for stationary CI internal combustion engines. The commenter
indicated that if the EPA believes it must finalize specific
requirements for emergency operations, then the definition of a
qualified emergency situation should be revised so that it is more
generalized and more applicable to different types of emergency
situations which would necessitate the operation of stationary CI
engines. According to the commenter, the proposed definition of a
qualified emergency situation and the associated examples of indirect
and direct risk to human life apply very specifically to nonroad
engines that are able to be transported. The commenter urged the EPA to
acknowledge that the examples provided in 40 CFR 1039.665 are merely
examples, and do not constitute limits on interpreting the definition
of a qualified emergency situation for stationary CI engines. The
commenter indicated the EPA should clarify that there are other
possible emergency situations that might pose a risk to human life, or
list additional examples.
Response: The definition of emergency stationary internal
combustion engine in the NSPS for stationary CI internal combustion
engines, and the similar definition in the NESHAP for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, defines a subcategory of
engines that are subject to different standards, whether operating in
an actual emergency or in other limited
[[Page 44216]]
non-emergency circumstances. The definition of a qualified emergency
situation has a different purpose; it defines when the inducement can
be overridden for a non-emergency engine. The definition of a qualified
emergency situation where an inducement can be overridden is intended
to be more limited to emergency situations where there is a significant
direct or indirect risk to human life.
The EPA does not agree with the commenter that the proposed
definition is not sufficiently generalized and that the examples
provided are not representative of stationary engines. One of the
examples is ``an engine being used to provide electrical power to a
data center that routes `911' emergency response telecommunications,''
which would likely be a stationary generator. The possible scenarios
provided in the definition are merely examples and are not intended to
be the only types of applications and situations that can qualify. The
use of the word ``example'' in the definition is an indication that
they are just examples and not limits on interpreting the definition.
It would not be possible to provide examples of all of the potential
uses of engines in qualified emergency situations.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the initial period for AECD
operation should be 15 days (360 hours) rather than the proposed 120
hours, with follow-on increments of 120 hours activated by
communications with the engine certificate holder. The commenter stated
that the time limit should be designed to address a worst-case
situation, such as a region-wide disaster and a remote area, where
extended communications and/or supply chain disruptions may impact the
engine operator and the certificate holder beyond 120 hours. According
to the commenter, the threat of post-emergency analysis and punishment
by the EPA will likely be sufficient to minimize overuse of the leeway
provided by the proposed amendment.
Another commenter opposed any hour limit during an emergency
situation. According to the commenter, because emergencies are sudden,
uncontrollable, and unlikely, there is no need to limit the amount of
override time allowable to keep engines running during emergencies. The
commenter also expressed concern about the procedures set forth for
reactivation of the AECD, and urged the EPA to remove the requirements
for resetting of the AECD. The commenter stated that the engine
manufacturer is not the appropriately qualified entity to determine a
facility's qualified emergency, and that there need not be such
stringent requirements for activation of the AECD, since the EPA has
the authority to evaluate after the fact whether or not it was
reasonable to justify the qualified emergency.
Response: The proposed definition of a qualified emergency
situation specifies emergency situations for which an engine owner or
operator may temporarily override emission control inducements. Should
the engine owner or operator need to extend the override beyond the
initial 120 hour period, it can work with the engine manufacturer to
reset the AECD for additional time. Thus, the engine owner/operator
will be able to override the emission controls throughout the duration
of the qualified emergency situation. The limit on AECD activation
periods and procedures for resetting the AECD are necessary to ensure
that the time of the override is truly limited to the time necessary to
address the emergency situation, and minimize excess emissions, which
would lead to adverse environmental impacts. The commenters that
suggested an initial 360 hour AECD activation period to address a
``worst case scenario'' or an unlimited activation period did not
provide any specific example of a qualified emergency situation of
longer than 120 hours where the procedures for resetting the AECD could
not have been followed, or explain why 360 hours represents a ``worst
case scenario.'' The EPA's approach appropriately balances the need to
provide regulatory relief in emergency circumstances with the need to
deter overuse, and the EPA does not agree that an unlimited period is
necessary or that a period of 360 hours or unlimited hours is
preferable. In order to reactivate the AECD, the engine manufacturer is
only required to have evidence that the emergency situation is
continuing and is not required to judge if the situation is a
qualifying emergency. As indicated in the proposal, it is expected that
AECDs would be activated rarely, if ever, so the provisions are
unlikely to impose a significant burden on engine owners/operators.
Further, the EPA's decision to adopt requirements concerning
initial AECD activation periods, reactivation and notification that are
identical to such requirements in the nonroad engine rules is
influenced by our desire to allow for dual certification of stationary
and nonroad engines, which reduces the burden of the rule on engine
manufacturers. The Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association noted in
their public comments \2\ that the ability to dual certify nonroad and
stationary engines reduces the number of engine families that a
manufacturer must certify, reduces the number of engine models that
dealers, distributors, and customers must inventory and manage, and
reduces the number of engine families that the EPA must certify.
According to the commenter, if the EPA were to foreclose the ability of
manufacturers to continue to dual certify, significant costs and
burdens would result. Given that the NSPS for stationary CI internal
combustion engines places a great deal of the compliance demonstration
burden on the engine manufacturer, it is reasonable to have the
manufacturer's compliance obligations be as consistent as possible for
stationary and nonroad engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0866-0017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: One commenter supported the recordkeeping process outlined
in the proposed rule. Another commenter disagreed with the proposed
requirements for the engine owner/operator to send a written report to
the engine manufacturer detailing the activation of the emergency AECD.
According to the commenter, the engine manufacturer has no authority to
enforce penalties or regulations promulgated by the EPA, and,
therefore, the commenter did not think it made logical sense for
owners/operators to be required to submit reports to the engine
manufacturers, nor are the engine manufacturers qualified to determine
what constitutes a qualified emergency situation at the affected
facility. The commenter stated that using the engine manufacturers to
collect reports and then report this information to the EPA is
unprecedented and creates an unnecessary middleman. The commenter
recommended that the proposed provisions be revised so that owners/
operators are required to report the information directly to the EPA,
or to the appropriate permitting authority.
Response: Similar to the limit on AECD activation periods and the
procedures for resetting the AECD, the recordkeeping process is
necessary to ensure the AECD is used in true emergencies only and
prevent adverse environmental impacts. The proposed reporting
provisions do not require engine manufacturers to enforce penalties or
EPA regulations. Rather, they require that, in cases where the
manufacturer is aware of use of the AECD, the manufacturer must make
the engine owner/operator aware that they may be subject to penalties
from the EPA for failing to report the use of the AECD. There are other
situations in the regulations where an engine manufacturer is required
to indicate that an owner/operator may be subject to
[[Page 44217]]
penalties, such as the labeling requirement in 40 CFR 1039.20. The
commenter did not provide any information to show that it would be
unreasonable for engine manufacturers to compile information on the use
of AECDs, and the engine manufacturers have not objected to the
requirement. As stated previously, it is expected that AECDs will be
activated rarely, if ever, so the reporting provisions are unlikely to
impose a significant burden on engine owners/operators or engine
manufacturers.
Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA clarify that
manufacturers are not required to submit actual certification test-
based data to demonstrate that engines equipped with an AECD that helps
to ensure proper function of engines in qualified emergency situations
will meet the Tier 1 emission standards in 40 CFR 89.112 when the AECD
is activated. According to the commenter, submittal of certification
test-based data would be unduly expensive and burdensome for engine
manufacturers and the EPA. The commenter recommended that engine
manufacturers be allowed to demonstrate that an engine complies with
the Tier 1 emission standards when the AECD is activated by submitting
the conversion efficiencies for the Tier 4 engine's emission control
systems and using good engineering judgement to demonstrate that the
engine complies with the Tier 1 standard. Specifically, according to
the commenter, manufacturers could compare the conversion efficiency
with the Tier 4 emission standard for the engine to demonstrate that
the engine would meet the Tier 1 emission standard if the emission
control system is disabled. The commenter noted that the EPA allows the
demonstration of compliance through means other than the generation of
actual certification data for the not-to-exceed standards in part 1039.
The commenter suggested specific edits to 40 CFR 60.4210(j) to help
clarify the required demonstration.
Response: The proposed rule was not intended to require
certification test-based data to be submitted to demonstrate that the
engines will meet the Tier 1 emission standards. The final rule
includes language in 40 CFR 60.4210(j) to clarify that certification
test-based data are not required for such demonstration. The intent of
the provision is that engine manufacturers would demonstrate
achievement of the Tier 1 emission standards at the time that the
manufacturer applies for certification of the engine equipped with an
AECD. Manufacturers must document that the engine complies with the
Tier 1 emission standards when the AECD is activated and provide any
relevant testing, engineering analysis, or other information in
sufficient detail to support such statement when applying for
certification (or amending an existing certificate) of an engine
equipped with an AECD.
B. Remote Areas of Alaska
Comment: Four commenters supported the proposed amendment to align
the definition of remote areas of Alaska in the NSPS for stationary CI
engines with the definition currently used in the NESHAP for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. Commenters indicated that
the proposed amendment would address the unique circumstances of
engines located in remote areas of Alaska. No commenters opposed the
proposed amendment.
Response: No response necessary.
Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA reconsider the
effectiveness of, and need for, PM emission control equipment on new
Tier 3 marine engines providing prime power in remote areas of Alaska.
The commenter questioned the benefit of installing PM emission controls
on engines certified to the Tier 3 marine engine standards, which have
lower PM emissions than engines certified to the Tier 3 standards for
nonroad engines. The commenter stated that it believes that the capital
and operating cost, questionable reliability, and additional complexity
resulting from the PM emission control requirement do not appear to be
warranted or economically viable.
Response: This comment is outside the scope of the proposal, which
did not seek comment on the appropriateness of the PM emission control
requirement in 40 CFR 61.4216(c) for remote areas of Alaska.
IV. Impacts of the Final Action
A. Economic Impacts
The EPA does not expect any significant economic impacts as a
result of this final rule. A significant economic impact for the
amendment allowing the temporary override of inducements in emergency
situations is not anticipated because AECDs are expected to be
activated rarely (if ever), and, thus, the impacts to affected sources
and consumers of affected output will be minimal.
The economic impact from the change to the criteria for remote
areas of Alaska will be a cost savings for owners or operators of
engines that are located in the additional areas that will now be
considered remote. The precise savings depends on the number and size
of engines that will be installed each year. Information provided by
the Alaska Energy Authority indicated that one to two new engines are
expected to be installed each year. Information provided by the state
of Alaska indicated that the expected initial capital cost savings per
engine ranges from $28,000 to $163,000, depending on the size of the
engine. There will also be annual operating and maintenance cost
savings due to avoidance of the need to obtain and store DEF.
B. Environmental Impacts
The EPA does not expect any significant environmental impacts as a
result of the amendment to allow a temporary override of inducements in
emergency situations. The AECDs are expected to be activated rarely (if
ever) and will only affect emissions for a very short period.
The EPA also does not expect significant environmental impacts as a
result of the amendments to the criteria for remote areas of Alaska. As
an example, allowing the use of a Tier 3 engine instead of a Tier 4
engine would result in less reductions for a 250 horsepower (HP)
stationary CI engine of 5.4 tons per year (tpy) of NOX, 0.1
tpy of NMHC, 1.6 tpy of CO, and 0.3 tpy of PM, assuming the engine
operates full time (8,760 hours per year).\3\ As stated previously, the
state of Alaska estimates that only one to two new engines will be
installed each year in the additional remote areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Estimates are based on Tier 3 and Tier 4 emission factors
for a 175-300 HP engine provided in Table A4 of Exhaust and
Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Engine Modeling--Compression-
Ignition. NR-009d. Assessment and Standards Division, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA-420-R-10-018. July 2010. https://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nonrdmdl/nonrdmdl2010/420r10018.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
[[Page 44218]]
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities in this rule have been
submitted for approval to the OMB under the PRA. The Information
Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been
assigned EPA ICR number 2196.05. The only new information collection
activity in this rule is the reporting by engine owners and operators
and engine manufacturers that would occur if the AECD is activated
during a qualified emergency situation. The EPA expects that it is
unlikely that these AECDs will ever need to be activated. Therefore,
the EPA estimates that there will be no additional burden from this
reporting requirement.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB
approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection
activities contained in this final rule. The OMB has previously
approved the information collection activities contained in the
existing regulations and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0590.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. As mentioned earlier in this preamble,
the EPA is harmonizing the NSPS for stationary CI engines in this
action with an existing rule issued by the EPA for nonroad CI engines.
Thus, this action is reducing regulatory impacts to small entities as
well as other affected entities. The EPA is also including additional
remote areas of Alaska in the regulatory flexibility provisions already
in the rule for remote areas of Alaska, which further reduces the
burden of the existing rule on small entities and other affected
entities. We have, therefore, concluded that this action will relieve
regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on
tribal governments, on the relationship between the federal government
and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This final rule would impose compliance costs
primarily on engine manufacturers, depending on the extent to which
they take advantage of the flexibilities offered. The final amendments
to expand the areas that are considered remote areas of Alaska would
reduce the compliance costs for owners and operators of stationary
engines in those areas. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
provisions being finalized in this action are designed to eliminate
risks to human life and are expected to be used rarely, if at all, and
will only affect emissions for a very short period. Other changes the
EPA is finalizing have minimal effect on emissions.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 28, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
60 of the Code of the Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
[[Page 44219]]
Subpart IIII--Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression
Ignition Internal Combustion Engines
0
2. Amend Sec. 60.4201 by revising paragraph (f)(1) and adding
paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4201 What emission standards must I meet for non-emergency
engines if I am a stationary CI internal combustion engine
manufacturer?
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) Remote areas of Alaska; and
* * * * *
(h) Stationary CI ICE certified to the standards in 40 CFR part
1039 and equipped with auxiliary emission control devices (AECDs) as
specified in 40 CFR 1039.665 must meet the Tier 1 certification
emission standards for new nonroad CI engines in 40 CFR 89.112 while
the AECD is activated during a qualified emergency situation. A
qualified emergency situation is defined in 40 CFR 1039.665. When the
qualified emergency situation has ended and the AECD is deactivated,
the engine must resume meeting the otherwise applicable emission
standard specified in this section.
0
3. Amend Sec. 60.4202 by revising paragraph (g)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4202 What emission standards must I meet for emergency
engines if I am a stationary CI internal combustion engine
manufacturer?
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) Remote areas of Alaska; and
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 60.4204 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4204 What emission standards must I meet for non-emergency
engines if I am an owner or operator of a stationary CI internal
combustion engine?
* * * * *
(f) Owners and operators of stationary CI ICE certified to the
standards in 40 CFR part 1039 and equipped with AECDs as specified in
40 CFR 1039.665 must meet the Tier 1 certification emission standards
for new nonroad CI engines in 40 CFR 89.112 while the AECD is activated
during a qualified emergency situation. A qualified emergency situation
is defined in 40 CFR 1039.665. When the qualified emergency situation
has ended and the AECD is deactivated, the engine must resume meeting
the otherwise applicable emission standard specified in this section.
0
5. Amend Sec. 60.4210 by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4210 What are my compliance requirements if I am a stationary
CI internal combustion engine manufacturer?
* * * * *
(j) Stationary CI ICE manufacturers may equip their stationary CI
internal combustion engines certified to the emission standards in 40
CFR part 1039 with AECDs for qualified emergency situations according
to the requirements of 40 CFR 1039.665. Manufacturers of stationary CI
ICE equipped with AECDs as allowed by 40 CFR 1039.665 must meet all of
the requirements in 40 CFR 1039.665 that apply to manufacturers.
Manufacturers must document that the engine complies with the Tier 1
standard in 40 CFR 89.112 when the AECD is activated. Manufacturers
must provide any relevant testing, engineering analysis, or other
information in sufficient detail to support such statement when
applying for certification (including amending an existing certificate)
of an engine equipped with an AECD as allowed by 40 CFR 1039.665.
0
6. Amend Sec. 60.4211 by adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4211 What are my compliance requirements if I am an owner or
operator of a stationary CI internal combustion engine?
* * * * *
(h) The requirements for operators and prohibited acts specified in
40 CFR 1039.665 apply to owners or operators of stationary CI ICE
equipped with AECDs for qualified emergency situations as allowed by 40
CFR 1039.665.
0
7. Amend Sec. 60.4214 by adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4214 What are my notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements if I am an owner or operator of a stationary CI internal
combustion engine?
* * * * *
(e) Owners or operators of stationary CI ICE equipped with AECDs
pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 1039.665 must report the use of
AECDs as required by 40 CFR 1039.665(e).
0
8. Amend Sec. 60.4216 by revising paragraphs (b) through (d) and (f)
to read as follows:
Sec. 60.4216 What requirements must I meet for engines used in
Alaska?
* * * * *
(b) Except as indicated in paragraph (c) of this section,
manufacturers, owners and operators of stationary CI ICE with a
displacement of less than 10 liters per cylinder located in remote
areas of Alaska may meet the requirements of this subpart by
manufacturing and installing engines meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
parts 94 or 1042, as appropriate, rather than the otherwise applicable
requirements of 40 CFR parts 89 and 1039, as indicated in Sec. Sec.
60.4201(f) and 60.4202(g).
(c) Manufacturers, owners and operators of stationary CI ICE that
are located in remote areas of Alaska may choose to meet the applicable
emission standards for emergency engines in Sec. Sec. 60.4202 and
60.4205, and not those for non-emergency engines in Sec. Sec. 60.4201
and Sec. 60.4204, except that for 2014 model year and later non-
emergency CI ICE, the owner or operator of any such engine that was not
certified as meeting Tier 4 PM standards, must meet the applicable
requirements for PM in Sec. Sec. 60.4201 and 60.4204 or install a PM
emission control device that achieves PM emission reductions of 85
percent, or 60 percent for engines with a displacement of greater than
or equal to 30 liters per cylinder, compared to engine-out emissions.
(d) The provisions of Sec. 60.4207 do not apply to owners and
operators of pre-2014 model year stationary CI ICE subject to this
subpart that are located in remote areas of Alaska.
* * * * *
(f) The provisions of this section and Sec. 60.4207 do not prevent
owners and operators of stationary CI ICE subject to this subpart that
are located in remote areas of Alaska from using fuels mixed with used
lubricating oil, in volumes of up to 1.75 percent of the total fuel.
The sulfur content of the used lubricating oil must be less than 200
parts per million. The used lubricating oil must meet the on-
specification levels and properties for used oil in 40 CFR 279.11.
0
9. Amend Sec. 60.4219 by adding in alphabetical order the definitions
for ``Alaska Railbelt Grid'' and ``Remote areas of Alaska'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.4219 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Alaska Railbelt Grid means the service areas of the six regulated
public utilities that extend from Fairbanks to Anchorage and the Kenai
Peninsula. These utilities are Golden Valley Electric Association;
Chugach Electric Association; Matanuska Electric Association; Homer
Electric Association; Anchorage Municipal Light & Power; and the City
of Seward Electric System.
* * * * *
Remote areas of Alaska means areas of Alaska that meet either
paragraph (1) or (2) of this definition.
[[Page 44220]]
(1) Areas of Alaska that are not accessible by the Federal Aid
Highway System (FAHS).
(2) Areas of Alaska that meet all of the following criteria:
(i) The only connection to the FAHS is through the Alaska Marine
Highway System, or the stationary CI ICE operation is within an
isolated grid in Alaska that is not connected to the statewide
electrical grid referred to as the Alaska Railbelt Grid.
(ii) At least 10 percent of the power generated by the stationary
CI ICE on an annual basis is used for residential purposes.
(iii) The generating capacity of the source is less than 12
megawatts, or the stationary CI ICE is used exclusively for backup
power for renewable energy.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-16045 Filed 7-6-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P