EPA Regulations for Stationary Engines

[PandT]

Hello All,

This is my first post.

The following is not intended to be depressing but as I have spent more than 24 hours out of the last two days (this being my third) reading this forum and doing research.
I am a little bug eyed and slightly overwhelmed...
I am posting this abbreviated information because I have seen some others ask for it and I was interested myself.
If this information belongs somewhere else or has already been posted then please forgive the intrusion.

Sorry about the formatting for the tables, this site does not appear to handle any formatting code even in simplistic Rich Text Format (most sites don't either).


http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/stationary.php

In 2003, a lawsuit was filed against the EPA by Environmental Defense, a New York-based nonprofit advocacy group, which called for establishing federal emission standards for stationary diesel engines. In 2004, the lawsuit was resolved by a consent decree, which required the EPA to develop such standards.
On June 28, 2006, the EPA adopted emission regulations for stationary engines, which require that most new stationary diesel engines meet the Tier 1-4 emission standards for mobile nonroad engines.

Emission regulations for stationary diesel engines are published in Title 40 Chapter I, part 60 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Typical examples are stationary diesel engines used to generate electricity and operate compressors and pumps at power and manufacturing plants.
The rule also covers stationary engines that are used in emergencies, including emergency generators of electricity and water pumps for fire and flood control.
The emission standards apply to new, modified, and reconstructed stationary diesel engines (i.e., existing in-use engines are not affected).

Timing.
The emission standards apply to engines whose construction, modification or reconstruction commenced after July 11, 2005—the date the proposed rule was published in the Federal Register.
Compliance with Tier 1 standards is delayed to April 1, 2006 for non-fire pump engines and to July 1, 2006 for fire pump engines.

Standards for Engine Owners/Operators. Depending on the engine category, owners and operators are responsible for emission compliance as follows:

Engines < 30 liters per cylinder

Pre-2007:
Engines < 10 liters per cylinder must meet nonroad Tier 1 emission standards.

2007 and later: owners/operators must buy emission certified engines

Owners/operators of pre-2007 engines < 30 liters per cylinder can demonstrate compliance by purchasing a certified engine.
If a non-certified engine is purchased, compliance may be demonstrated using emission test results from a test conducted on a similar engine; data from the engine manufacturer; data from the control device vendor; or conducting a performance test.
If in-use performance test is conducted, the owner would be required to meet not-to-exceed (NTE) emission standards instead of the respective certification emission standards.
Pre-2007 engines must meet NTE standards of 1.25 × the applicable certification emission standard.
The information which demonstrates engine compliance and the appropriate maintenance records must be kept on site.

Two groups of standards have been adopted: (1) for engine manufacturers, and (2) for engine owners/operators.
Beginning with model year (MY) 2007, engine manufactures are required to emission certify stationary engines, and so they are responsible for compliance.

During the transitional period before the MY 2007, engines can be sold that are not emission certified. In that case, the engine owner/operator is responsible for emission compliance.

Standards for Engine Manufacturers. Emission certification requirements for stationary non-emergency diesel engines are summarized in Table 1.
From 2007, all stationary engines below 30 liters per cylinder must be certified to the respective standards, as applicable for the model year and maximum engine power (and displacement per cylinder in marine standards).

Table 1
Emission Requirements for Non-Emergency Stationary Engines
 
 Displacement (D)   Power   Model Year   Emission Certification      
D < 10 liter per cylinder   ≤ 3000 hp   2007+   Nonroad Tier 2/3 - Tier 4      
    > 3000 hp   2007-2010   Nonroad Tier 1      
        2011+   Nonroad Tier 2 - Tier 4      
10 ≤ D < 30 liter per cylinder   All   2007+   Marine Tier 2 (Cat. 2)   

Fuel Program. The affected engines would also have to switch to low sulfur fuels: no more than 500 ppm sulfur by October 2007 for all engines, followed by ultra-low sulfur diesel (15 ppm sulfur) by October 2010 for engines < 30 liters per cylinder. These fuel requirements are consistent with those for mobile nonroad engines.


http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/offroad.html#tier3

The nonroad diesel emission regulations are not applicable to all nonroad diesel engines. Exempted are the following nonroad engine categories:
Hobby engines (below 50 cm3 per cylinder)

Emission Standards
Tier 1-3 Standards
The 1998 nonroad engine regulations are structured as a 3-tiered progression. Each tier involves a phase in (by horsepower rating) over several years.
Tier 1 standards were phased-in from 1996 to 2000.
The more stringent Tier 2 standards take effect from 2001 to 2006, and yet more stringent Tier 3 standards phase-in from 2006 to 2008 (Tier 3 standards apply only for engines from 37-560 kW).

Tier 1-3 emissions standards are listed in Table 1. Nonroad regulations are in the metric system of units, with all standards expressed in grams of pollutant per kWh.
Table 1
EPA Tier 1-3 Nonroad Diesel Engine Emission Standards, g/kWh (g/bhp·hr)
 
 Engine Power   Tier   Year   CO   HC   NMHC+NOx   NOx   PM      
kW < 8
(hp < 11)   Tier 1   2000   8.0 (6.0)   -   10.5 (7.   -   1.0 (0.75)      
    Tier 2   2005   8.0 (6.0)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.8 (0.6)      
8 ≤ kW < 19
(11 ≤ hp < 25)   Tier 1   2000   6.6 (4.9)   -   9.5 (7.1)   -   0.8 (0.6)      
    Tier 2   2005   6.6 (4.9)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.8 (0.6)      
19≤ kW < 37
(25 ≤ hp < 50)   Tier 1   1999   5.5 (4.1)   -   9.5 (7.1)   -   0.8 (0.6)      
    Tier 2   2004   5.5 (4.1)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.6 (0.45)      
37 ≤ kW < 75
(50 ≤ hp < 100)   Tier 1   1998   -   -   -   9.2 (6.9)   -      
    Tier 2   2004   5.0 (3.7)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.4 (0.3)      
    Tier 3   2008   5.0 (3.7)   -   4.7 (3.5)   -   -�    


Tier 4 Standards
The Tier 4 emission standards—to be phased-in from 2008-2015—are listed in Table 3 for engines below 560 kW and in Table 4 for engines above 560 kW. These standards introduce substantial reductions of NOx (for engines above 56 kW) and PM (above 19 kW), as well as more stringent HC limits. CO emission limits remain unchanged from the Tier 2-3 stage.

Table 3
Tier 4 Emission Standards—Engines Up To 560 kW, g/kWh (g/bhp-hr)
 
 Engine Power   Year   CO   NMHC   NMHC+NOx   NOx   PM      
kW < 8
(hp < 11)   2008   8.0 (6.0)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.4a (0.3)      
8 ≤ kW < 19
(11 ≤ hp < 25)   2008   6.6 (4.9)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.4 (0.3)      
19 ≤ kW < 37
(25 ≤ hp < 50)   2008   5.5 (4.1)   -   7.5 (5.6)   -   0.3 (0.22)      
    2013   5.5 (4.1)   -   4.7 (3.5)   -   0.03 (0.022)      
37 ≤ kW < 56
(50 ≤ hp < 75)   2008   5.0 (3.7)   -   4.7 (3.5)   -   0.3b (0.22)      
    2013   5.0 (3.7)   -   4.7 (3.5)   -   0.03 (0.022)      
56 ≤ kW < 130
(75 ≤ hp < 175)   2012-2014c   5.0 (3.7)   0.19 (0.14)   -   0.40 (0.30)   0.02 (0.015)      
130 ≤ kW ≤ 560
(175 ≤ hp ≤ 750)   2011-2014d   3.5 (2.6)   0.19 (0.14)   -   0.40 (0.30)   0.02 (0.015)   

Existing Tier 2-3 smoke opacity standards and procedures continue to apply in some engines. Exempted from smoke emission standards are engines certified to PM emission standards at or below 0.07 g/kWh (because an engine of such low PM level has inherently low smoke emission).
The Tier 4 regulation does not require closed crankcase ventilation in nonroad engines. However, in engines with open crankcases, crankcase emissions must be measured and added to exhaust emissions in assessing compliance.
Similarly to earlier standards, the Tier 4 regulation includes such provisions as averaging, banking and trading of emission credits and FEL limits for emission averaging.

Test Cycles and Fuels
Nonroad engine emissions are measured on a steady-state test cycle that is nominally the same as the ISO 8178 C1, 8-mode steady-state test cycle. Other ISO 8178 test cycles are allowed for selected applications, such as constant-speed engines (D2 5-mode cycle), variable-speed engines rated under 19 kW (G2 cycle), and marine engines (E3 cycle).

Transient Testing.
Tier 4 standards have to be met over both the steady-state test and the nonroad transient cycle, NRTC.
The transient testing requirements begin with MY 2013 for engines below 56 kW, in 2012 for 56-130 kW, and in 2011 for 130-560 kW engines. Engines above 560 kW are not tested on the transient test. Also constant-speed, variable-load engines of any power category are not subject to transient testing.
The NRTC protocol includes a cold start test. The cold start emissions are weighted at 5% and hot start emissions are weighted at 95% in calculating the final result.

Tier 4 nonroad engines will also have to meet not-to-exceed standards (NTE), which are measured without reference to any specific test schedule.

The NTE standards become effective in 2011 for engines above 130 kW; in 2012 for 56-130 kW; and in 2013 for engines below 56 kW.
In most engines, the NTE limits are set at 1.25 times the regular standard for each pollutant (in engines certified to NOx standards below 2.5 g/kWh or PM standards below 0.07 g/kWh, the NTE multiplier is 1.5). The NTE standards apply to engines at the time of certification, as well as in use throughout the useful life of the engine.

The purpose of the added testing requirements is to prevent the possibility of “defeating” the test cycle by electronic engine controls and producing off-cycle emissions.

Certification Fuels.
Fuels with sulfur levels no greater than 0.2 wt% (2,000 ppm) are used for certification testing of Tier 1-3 engines. From 2011, all Tier 4 engines will be tested using fuels of 7-15 ppm sulfur content. A transition from the 2000 ppm S specification to the 7-15 ppm specification will occur in the 2006-2010 period (see Certification Diesel Fuel).

A change from measuring total hydrocarbons to nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC) has been introduced in the 1998 rule. Since there is no standardized EPA method for measuring methane in diesel engine exhaust, manufacturers can either use their own procedures to analyze nonmethane hydrocarbons or measure total hydrocarbons and subtract 2% from the measured hydrocarbon mass to correct for methane.

Engine Useful Life
Emission standards listed in the above tables must be met over the entire useful life of the engine. EPA requires the application of deterioration factors (DFs) to all engines covered by the rule. The DF is a factor applied to the certification emission test data to represent emissions at the end of the useful life of the engine.

The engine useful life and the in-use testing liability period, as defined by the EPA for emission testing purposes, are listed in Table 5 for different engine categories. The Tier 4 rule maintains the same engine useful life periods.

Table 5
Useful Life and Recall Testing Periods
 
 Power Rating   Rated Engine Speed   Useful Life      Recall Testing Period         
        hours   years   hours   years      
< 19 kW   all   3000   5   2250   4      
19-37 kW   constant speed engines
≥3000 rpm   3000   5   2250   4      
    all others   5000   7   3750   5      
>37 kW   all   8000   10   6000   7   

[okiezeke]

Uncle Sugar wont stop untill he has warning labels on toilet paper!!!  My 2007 listeriod cane with an EPA label. Link to a picture is on my Lovson 20-2 thread.
Zeke

[Rick Rowlands]

The nonroad diesel emission regulations are not applicable to all nonroad diesel engines. Exempted are the following nonroad engine categories:
Hobby engines (below 50 cm3 per cylinder)

So the question really is are the Listeroids below the 50 cm3 threshold?

[rmchambers]

50 CC's  is the size of a moped engine, take your half liter bottle of spring water and divide the contents of that equally into 10 cups.  each cup is 50 CC.

[asavage]

So the question really is are the Listeroids below the 50 cm3 threshold?

Here's the dataplate from a 20-2 (20 HP, 2 cylinder):


That's 3160cc  . . . for 20 HP, or about 160cc more than my 130 HP Aerostar.

[mobile_bob]

that is an interesting sticker, but i bet a dollar to a dog turd it don't hold water with the epa.

notice there is no mention of the usa, epa or any other wording that comes on genuine compliance stickers placed on engine's that are compliant
and sold in this country, regardless of country of origin.

but if it works to get it past customs, cool

bob g

[listeroidsusa]

I have been searching the EPA regs for months now trying to find a way to keep importing and to come up with the actual test cycle/testing procedure. I just found the updated specifications for the 2007 year Tier 2 test cycles. It may be doable since the 8178 test cycles are a weighted average using the D2 Constant Speed 5 mode load cycle. it is weighted in the following areas:

100% power..............................5%
75% power..............................25%
50% power..............................30%
25% power..............................30%
10% power..............................10%

I ran a 6/1 GM-90 last fall on a 100% duty cycle and passed the Tier 1 NTE in-use 125% standard. The GM-90 6/1 I used IS HIGHLY MODIFIED with fuel rate modifications, temperature control, catalytic converter, modified injector, ect. Using the weighted scale would have been MUCH easier to achieve. The GM-90 engines easily pass using the D2 test cycle.

The weighted load factors will help greatly in passing these engines since the only problem is NOx, which increases proportionally with load. HC and CO are inherently low in all diesel engines. PM can be controlled by limiting the fueling rate to avoid smoke and overload conditions. I'll be running new tests in the next couple of weeks. I have the instrumentation at my shop to do this. My exhaust analyzer checks O2, CO, CO2, HC, and NOx. As of now it is just a matter of running the tests and logging the results in a database to demonstrate compliance with Tier 2 if the tests I run pass, and to come up with the big bucks for EPA 2007 certification.

Mike Montieth
Listeroids/USA

[mobile_bob]

god bless you and good luck Mike

do you know of an online link to the comprehensive rule, or all the regs?
i am sure it is 5 million pages, the government cant say "crap" in less that 500 words, so i would expect a rather long read.

bob g

[listeroidsusa]

Bob, like you said, there are literally millions of pages of regs to go through. Compliance includes all "applicable" regs which are scattered throughout, from labeling, emissions levels, weighting, banking, FEL's, and many other aspects. There is no "one" document to go by. The research simply has to be done and with all the work and effort involved I won't simply "hand it over". It IS out there. Its not exactly a trade secret but its close. It seems I do a lot of the work and then someone copies it. Several examples exist. A couple of years ago no one wanted to hear about thermostats and now most people are using them. Pressure lube in the GM-90 engines is another example. Regarding the serpentine drives, even today George is copying my line of flywheel type CNC machined heavy serpentine pulleys. I get a good line of engines developed and then others who don't want to do the work try to hijack the brand. This has happened twice so far. Anyway, I seldom post my results as a consequence. My goal is to make the line of engines I'm dealing with the best I can make them. I don't cut corners although there are plenty of people selling the engines willing to do so. That is one of the main reasons I abandoned the CS versions and went with the GM-90 line. The factory was willing to work with me to develop the US market. Even today, the shipment of engines is delayed a couple of weeks because the factory made me a new pattern for extra heavy flywheels.

Mike

[rmchambers]

Mike,
   They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but when it comes to taking money out of your pocket - that kind of flattery you can well do without.

Have you done much work with regards EPA compliance on the Petteroids you import?  Since mostly the discussions around this have revolved around the Lister type engines I don't know if you even worry about the Petteroids or not.  I'd be interested to hear what your plans are for the various models.

Thanks for your frequent and useful contributions to the group by the way.

Robert

[cujet]

People often forget that in addition to meeting exhaust requirements, there are many other requirements.

One that comes to mind is the engine must be rated for lifespan. In other words, the engine will be known to be emissions compliant for a certain period of operational hours. This means testing the engines to the point of non compliance or to the maximum hourly rating (times two, I believe).

This could be at least a 2000 hour test, most likely much more. I believe it also requires more than one example.

Chris

[mobile_bob]

Mike:

when i posted my question it was without intent of poaching anyones idea's,
i simply asked if you, or for that matter anyone knows of a source of the complete epa rule, not some abreviated pick and choose or overview.

i have no idea whether or not the gm 90 is a better engine than a listeroid, i also have not idea where you got the idea to use a serpentine drive
but i can tell you that 32 years ago, the only place i ever saw them was on detroit diesels on GM trucks. since then they have been used on dozens if not hundreds
of pieces of equipment, cars and trucks. hard to imagine you getting upset about other folks using them, or thinking that they stole your idea.

also machine tool guys have used them (turned inside out) for years on plain pulleys to replace leather belts, at least 10 years that i am aware of.
as far as the term CNC being branished about like it is some space age wonder i assure you any compitent machinist could turn out an equal quality pulley on
a 100 year old mechanical lathe that i would defy you or anyone to distinquish from a CNC part, CNC just does it faster and is better a repetitive work, and generally takes
a less eperienced machinist to do the job.

i applaud your efforts however in making your engines the best to the best of your ability, and no one expects you to turn over trade secrets, but

serp drives are hardly something new or something you or anyone can corner the market on, or take exception to others useing them.
thermostats, have been around forever, and i dont think it takes much more than an apprentice mechanic to explain their function or the engines need for one.
oil pumps,and lubrication issues are all over the board, whatever you do on the gm90 is ok by me, but i would suggest that there will be those that come up
with something equally as successful for the listeroids, independantly or you, me, or anyone else. (that is assuming that they havent done so already, which is a broad assumption)

when i asked for the full epa reg's it was not to poach your work, or to piggyback on your work or that of anyone else.
if you want to invest in making your engine compliant, then as i said god bless you, go for it.

i want the rules and regs, because i am looking to go quite a different direction.
i assure you i do not wish to even know what you are doing or anyone else for that matter (at least in detail)

the direction i am looking into will not be for personal gain, and will be freely distributed to all that want to go that direction.

i have found that i am too old to think that i am going to become a millionaire, and find it much more rewarding to work through things, theory, etc with others
for the common good of all envolved.

i understand you have a commercial interest and as such you have differing approaches, thinking, and realities,  and that is ok too.

respectfully
bob g

[Doug]

Now the Haggas is in the fire.

Whom ever invented what the flame wars have begun.

But I wish to go on record as saying publicly that catalysts were the final solution to the emissions question.

Now give me money and credibility!!!!!!!

I am Napolian!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Joe]

Mike,
I understand your frustration …like my signature line says Nothing Is Easy…However you can’t hold your cards tight forever … eventually you have to show your hand… I don’t know who did what first…I don’t really care…all I want is the latest and greatest I can get for my 6/1 interests… whether it’s a gasket or the next epiphany of the 21st century…what does it matter?

There were two guys a hundred years ago who were solely responsible for stifling…. yes I said ‘stifling’ aircraft development in the United States… because it was their idea and they wanted to keep it that way… it was the Wright Brothers…

There are people in this industry that give their ideas away freely and also sell information and products…as Abbot and Costello said ‘who’s on first’…to me it does not matter it’s the positive atmosphere for development and progress that is fostered…and that is not accomplished by trying to poke someone in the eye…

Like the guy in the cornfield…”build it and they will come “ and if they don’t then maybe it was the wind up before the pitch that wasn’t quite right….

The early bird gets the worm.
The second mouse gets the cheese.
Getting old sucks.
That’s life…..

Joe

[Doug]

Nobody is in this for free....

For what its worth no Listeroid is worth its weight in scrap if It not legal to import safe to use and comes with a real warrenty.

You can't squeeze cheese from a cow before it hatches....
The early bird gets worms...

Doug

Did you ever wonder why electricians wear fire retarded gear?
We burn like cord wood.
Cause is likely the high Alcohol content of the average electrician......