This can make it difficult to certify the marinized engines. Consequently, there may be situations in which, despite its best efforts, a marinizer cannot meet the implementation dates, even with the flexibility provisions described in this section. Such a situation may occur if an engine supplier without a major business interest in a marinizer were to change or drop an engine model very late in the implementation process, or was not able to supply the marinizer with an engine in sufficient time for the marinizer to recertify the engine. Based on this concern, we are allowing a one-year delay in the implementation dates for post-manufacture marinizers. In this case, marinizers would need only notify us that they are using the additional year before meeting emission standards.
A similar need for additional lead time is appropriate for post-manufacture marinizers to demonstrate compliance with Not-to-Exceed requirements. Post-manufacture marinizer's reliance on another company's base engines affects the time needed for the development and testing work needed to comply. As described above, engine manufacturers generally have until 2007 to comply with Not-to-Exceed requirements. We are extending that to 2010 for post-manufacture marinizers. Three years of extra lead time (compared to one year for the primary certification standards) is appropriate considering their more limited resources.
6. Special Hardship Provision
As a relief mechanism of last resort, we are also extending to post-manufacture marinizers the hardship relief provisions we included in the recently finalized land-based nonroad rule (see 40 CFR 89.102(f)). Under this provision, marinizers can ask us for additional time to meet the emission limits. Under this hardship relief provision, appeals must be made in writing, be submitted before the earliest date of noncompliance, include evidence that failure to comply was not the fault of the marinizer (e.g., a supply contract was broken by the engine supplier), and include evidence that the inability to sell the subject engines will have a major impact on the company's solvency. We would work with the applicant to ensure that all other remedies available under the flexibility provisions are exhausted before granting additional relief, and limit the period of relief to no more than one year. Furthermore, any relief may not exceed one year beyond the date relief is granted. We expect that this provision will be used only rarely. Each granting of relief would be treated as a separate agreement, with no prior guarantee of success, and with the inclusion of measures, agreed to in writing by the marinizer, for recovering the lost environmental benefit. If a marinizer during this hardship period produces certified engines (to emission levels less stringent than would otherwise be required), we would take that into account in determining the lost environmental benefit. This provision is not limited to small businesses, as described in the proposal, since all post-manufacture marinizers have a similar reliance on other manufacturers to produce their engines.
7. Incomplete Marine Engine Exemption
We finalized the nonroad diesel rule with no allowance to import uncertified nonroad engines that will be changed into a marine engine. This final rule is changing the definition of marine engines to include those that are "intended" to be installed on a marine vessel. This is necessary to allow post-manufacture marinizers to import loose engines for marinizing. We also include provisions specifically allowing post-manufacture marinizers to import uncertified engines. Once emission standards apply, a marinizer importing such engines must already have a certificate showing that the engine is part of a certified engine family. The regulations also obligate the marinizer to modify all the imported engines to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR part 94.
V. Technological Feasibility
The emissions standards in this final rule apply to a large variety of marine diesel engine sizes and applications. Section 213(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act directs us to establish standards that provide the "greatest degree of emission reduction achievable through the application of technology which the Administrator determines will be available for the engines or vehicles to which such standards apply, giving appropriate consideration to the cost of applying such technology within the period of time available to manufacturers and to noise, energy, and safety factors associated with the application of such technology."
We have concluded that the requirements in this final rule are appropriate under section 213 of the Clean Air Act and are technologically feasible on the prescribed schedule. The Final RIA and the Summary and Analysis of Comments contain a detailed treatment of emission-control technologies and the basis for selecting the individual standards. The costs associated with these technologies are discussed in Section VII. We have also concluded, as described in the Final RIA, that the emission standards will have no significant negative effect on noise, energy, or safety.
VI. Areas for Future Action
A. Tier 3 Emission Standards
We have decided not to finalize the proposed Tier 3 emission standards at this time. We intend to address this next tier of emission standards through a separate final rule. This may involve a supplemental proposal. Delaying action on Tier 3 standards will allow us to learn from the application of Tier 3 technology to land-based nonroad diesel engines. Also, it will give us time to consider emission control strategies such as aftertreatment.
B. Emission Standards for Remanufactured Engines
As described in the proposed rule, we are aware of the obstacles to implementing emission standards that would apply to existing engines at the point of rebuild or remanufacture. The comments in favor of such standards did not address these questions. Nevertheless, we are concerned that the gradual turnover to new engines and vessels will cause a very slow introduction of new technologies. As new technologies become available to comply with MARPOL Annex VI emission standards and the emission standards in this final rule, we are hopeful that emission controls on new engines will improve even before our standards take effect. Our early banking provisions add an incentive for this to occur.
To the extent that we observe companies not taking reasonable measures to introduce emission control technologies, we will need to reconsider the importance of setting standards on remanufactured engines. In contrast, introduction and use of emission control technologies ahead of the regulated schedule may reduce the need for a control program for these engines.
C. NTE Requirements for Auxiliary Engines
We are not at this time finalizing NTE requirements for auxiliary marine engines in this final rule. We are contemplating, however, to establish NTE requirements for similar land-based nonroad diesel engines. When we adopt such requirements for nonroad diesel engines, we expect to apply the same provisions, including zones and caps, to auxiliary marine diesel engines at the same time.