ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November 27,

1991

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

R90—20

DIESEL VEHICLE EXHAUST

)

 (Rulemaking)

OPACITY LIMITS

)

PROPOSED RULE.

 SECOND NOTICE.

OPINION

AND

ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by J.D.

 Dumelle):

On July 19,

 1990,

 this Board adopted an Order which

established inquiry hearings regarding diesel smoke.

 These

hearings were held on September 21 and September 28,

 1990.

 As a

result of these hearings the Board proposed a rule for First

Notice on July 25,

 1991.

 The proposed rule was published on

August 30,

 1991 at 15 Ill.

 Reg.

 12109.

 Hearings were held on

September 19 and October 3,

 1991.

 The First Notice proposal was

in large part an attempt to adapt California’s existing diesel

vehicle exhaust opacity rule to Illinois.

 Today’s Second Notice

proposal significantly revises the First Notice Proposal to

reflect concerns expressed at the hearings and in public

comments.

 These revisions are primarily deletions from

provisions proposed at First Notice rather than additions of

regulatory language.

 However, because of the significant changes

the Board will withhold filing the Second Notice with the Joint

Committee on Administrative Rules for a brief period to allow

 participants

 to provide input to be received at the Board not

later than 4:30 p.m., Friday, December 13,

 1991.

This rulemaking generated testimony from many different

gro~1ps.

 In the September 19th hearing, the Board received

testimony from Representative Clein Balanoff and Senator Judy Barr

Topinka; Glenn Keller, Executive Director of the Engine

Manufacturing Association (“EMA”); Fred Serpe and Burness Melton,

of the Illinois Trucking Association; Allan Schaeffer, on behalf

of the American Trucking Association; Charles Hudson of Navistar

Corporation; Ron Burke of the Chicago Lung Association; Steve

Adams of the Bosch Corporation; John Snide,

 President of

Westchester; and Rade Cujanovich and Mark Henschel, concerned

citizens.

In the October 3rd hearing, testimony was given by:

 Robert

Jasmon, who represented the Midwest Truckers Association, the

Illinois Petroleum Marketers Association, the Illinois Truck Stop

Association, the Illinois Movers Association, the Associated

Contractors of Illinois, the Feed and Grain Association of

Illinois and the Illinois Lumber Dealers Association; Don Dowdall

of Caterpillar Corporation; Berkely Moore of the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency (“Agency”); Steve Adams of Bosch

Corporation; James Redlich of the Illinois State Police, and;

Eugene Schey of Diesel Injection Service.

127—399

2

In addition to the testimony,

 130 public comments were

received.

 Among these commenters were the Village of LaGrange;

the Skokie Board of Health and the Skokie Department of Public

Health; the DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference; the City of

Chicago; the Regional Transportation Authority; the Center for

Neighborhood Technology; the Illinois Farm Bureau; State

Representative Barbara Flynn Currie; the Department of Commerce

and Community Affairs; the Department of Energy and Natural

Resources; the United States Environmental Protection Agency; the

Illinois, Environmental Regulatory Group and the Chicago Lung

Association.

 The Agency comments fully support the Board’s

actions today.

 Further, over 100 letters were received from

individual citizens.

 Although too numerous to mention

individually, the Board thanks all those who wrote as well as

those who participated at hearing.

DISCUSSION

The health effects of diesel smoke were discussed in the

First Notice Opinion and Order of July 25,

 1991,

 at pp.

 1-2,

and

need not be repeated here.

 It is well established that diesel

smoke

 is a health hazard and a public nuisance.

 The record is

persuasive that some level of control is appropriate.

 However,

testimony at hearing is also persuasive that the First Notice

Proposal should be substantially reduced in scope.

 The Board

believes that the best approach is to adopt a snap idle test

procedure which uses a smokeineter to measure opacity.

Opacity is defined as that fraction of light transmission

that is obscured by emissions from

 a stack and prevented from

reaching the observer or instrument receiver.

 The emissions of

concern here are those from

 a diesel vehicle’s exhaust pipe,

which contains particles suspended in the gaseous exhaust stream

which obscure, reflect and refract light.

 Opacity is generally

expressed as a percent and can be thought of as the difference

between 100

 light transmission and the percent transmission

through the diesel vehicle’s exhaust pipe emissions.

 Although

opacity is an objective parameter, its measurement using human

eyes (even when trained)

 is less precise and yields somewhat

subjective results.

 In order to remove the subjective element,

an instrumental technique termed the light extinction method can

be used to directly measure the fraction of light transmitted

(T)

through a smoke-obscured path.

 The opacity

 (0) expressed in

percent,

 is given by:

0

 100(1

T).

Instruments for the measurement of opacity of diesel vehicle

emissions are termed smokemeters or opacinieters.

 There are two

type of opacimeters, either full—flow or the partial—

flow/sampling type.

 In the full-flow type, the opacity of the

full smoke plume is measured either within the stack

 (i.e. in-

line)

 or at the outlet of the stack (end-of-line).

 In this type,

the light source and photocell,

 separated by a fixed distance

127—400

3

path length, are located on opposite sides of the smoke plume,

either in-line or a few inches from the open end of the exhaust

pipe (end-of-line).

 The light transmitted through the smoke

plume

 is read by the photocell from which signals are sent to the

calibrated meter.

 In the partial-flow/sampling type opacimeter,

a portion of the exhaust gas is continuously withdrawn and

allowed to flow through a sample tube with a fixed path length.

Mr. Adams of Bosch Corporation presented testimony indicating

that full—flow opacimeters were not as convenient and easy to use

as the partial flow opacimeters.

 He noted that the full flow

opacimeter readings needed much greater operator training and

intervention both during the measurement and for the subsequent

analysis.

 This is because of the need for exhaust stack diameter

corrections to account for differing path lengths, the need for

more frequent cleaning and, with some instruments, physical

recording of the results.

 The price of a full flow opacimeter

was stated to be approximately $4,500.

 (R2 at 59;

R.l

 denotes

the September 19,

 199.

 hearing, R.2 denotes the October 3,

1991

hearing))

On the other hand, the newer,

 more modern opacimeters,

particularly those utilizing partial-flow with a fixed length

measurement chamber are extremely fast and are capable of

measuring and recording opacity continuously with readings being

recorded sometimes as quickly as every 50 milliseconds

 (i.e.,

0.05 second).

 The partial flow opacimeter extracts a sample from

inside the exhaust stack and is conveyed to the measurement

chamber and is not affected by wind,

 light conditions,

 etc.

In

addition, a fully computerized system costs about $7,500 and has

the capability of recording and integrating readings to give 0.5

second-averaged readings which are similar to what the human eye

sees.

 These instruments are self calibrating, easy to use and

operate and allow a complete snap idle test to be completed in

10—15 minutes.

The use of the 0.5 second—averaged values

 is specified in

order to establish a consistent method for measuring opacity.

Although the sampling type instrument is capable of extremely

fast response times,

 a 0.5 second—averaged value is closest to

what the human eye would see.

 Shorter averaging times will

detect short-term

 (i.e.,

 lasting less than 0.5 second) opacity

peaks but are not of concern since the standard that is being

established is a visual standard that is measured with an opacity

meter.

 The ready availability, low cost and accuracy of these

 instruments convince the Board that they provide the best method

for a reliable test to enforce diesel opacity standards.

Structurally, this Second Notice rule would represent only a

minor modification of the Board’s existing standard of 30

opacity by visual observation.

 35 Ill. Adm. Code 240.122(b).

That regulation provides a standard only for engines manufactured

prior to 1970; while today’s proposal regulates all engines of

12 7—40

1

4

past, present or future manufacture.

 That regulation provides

for compliance determinations by visual inspection;

 today’s

proposal provides for compliance determination by smokemeter.

The opacity compliance standard is also changed by today’s

proposal.

The record supports a standard of 55

 peak opacity not to be

exceeded during a snap idle test for all engines certified prior

to 1991.

 For engines certified in 1991 or thereafter a 40

 peak

opacity ~wi1lapply.

 This dual standard of 55/40

 using a snap

idle test appears technically feasible and economically

reasonable.

 All of the potentially regulated participants viewed

the 55/40

 standard to be fair and attainable.

 Testimony at

hearing shows that tampering or improper maintenance are the most

likely reasons for the vast majority of trucks which will be

unable to meet this standard.

 Consequently, the Board will

 proceed to Second Notice with this standard and test method.

For the reasons outlined above, the Board today proposes an

update of the existing standard only.

 Accordingly, many of the

sections proposed at First Notice will be deleted.

 The proposed

inspection programs, the visual opacity test, and the penalty

provisions,

 along with many of the accompanying definitions, will

be scrapped.

 The only remaining sections will be 240.140 and

240.141.

 Also,

 Section 240.107 will be added to incorporate by

reference the specifications necessary for the opacimeters.

CHANGES FROM FIRST NOTICE

The Board has made significant changes from the July 25,

1991 First Notice Opinion and Order.

 These changes have been

grouped into several conceptual segments.

A. Opacity Standards

The Board outlined two standards in our proposal: the snap

idle test procedure for measurement of opacity and the visual

opacity reading.

 The snap idle test procedure (which uses a

sniokeineter to measure opacity)

 is clearly more precise due to its

repeatability.

 Visual opacity was inserted to insure that

enforcement could occur outside the area of prearranged

inspection sites.

 At hearing, however, most of the regulated

community stated that visual opacity was too subjective to be

relied upon as the basis for issuing a citation to a moving

truck.

 Various road, weather and environmental conditions would

 impose difficult obstacles to visual readings absent smoke

training and experience.

There are merits to visual readings when conducted by

trained andcertified smoke readers

 (R.2 at 29—50

 However,

in

this proceeding the Board will drop the 20

 visual opacity

12

7—402

5

standard.

 The primary reason for this action

 is the portable

opacity test devices which are currently available on the market.

Steve Adams of Robert Bosch Corporation testified that portable

opacity meters, which require virtually no training, are readily

available today.

 (R.2 at 60).

 These devices measure opacity, are

capable of measuring the engine’s revolutions per minute during

the test to insure testing accuracy, and print out the results.

Because this equipment is portable and testing would not require

extensive manual labor,

 potential exists for enforcement

throughqut the state.

Finally, the visual opacity test proposed at First Notice

made allowance,

 should the violator request,

 for the truck to be

tested by the snap idle procedure within five days.

 Although the

trucking community noted the theoretical merit of this provision,

it also attacked the impracticality of such a measure.

 (R.1 at

163-164).

 Specifically, the Illinois Trucking Association

 pointed out that a vehicle engaged in interstate commerce would

not easily be able to return in order to be tested.

Another main concern of the industry involved the 55

 versus

the 40

 opacity standard.

 At First Notice, the Board proposed

that vehicle engines which had a federal peak opacity

certification value over 35

 would have to meet a snap idle

opacity value of 55.

 All others would have to meet a snap idle

opacity of 40.

 This meant,

 in effect, that nearly all vehicle

engines would be required to meet the more stringent 40

 snap

idle opacity standard.

 Representatives of the EMA, Caterpillar,

Navistar and the Bosch Corporation all testified~thatthe snap

idle test for all engines certified prior to 1991 should be 55.

Likewise, all those certified in 1991 or subsequent years should

be tested against a 40

 standard.

 (See Generally, R.1 at 53-54,

123,

 207,

 295—96. R.2 at 16,

 24).

 They asserted that all engines

are tested and certified according to federal standards using a

different procedure.

 Since the federal smoke certification uses

a dynamometer test rather than the snap idle procedure, the

•industry maintains that two different procedures are used to

measure the same event; and because one test is for certification

and the other is for enforcement, the opacity standards based on

these two procedures should comport with one another.

 An engine

 which was designed for one standard should therefore not have to

perform above that standard ten years thereafter.

In order to insure that our standard correlates with federal

certification requirements, the trucking industry has urged that

a 55

 opacity be imposed for all engine families prior to 1991.

At hearing, Glenn Keller of the

EMA

testified in support of this

standard.

 (R.l at 76-78).

 This position was reiterated by

Navistar, Caterpillar, the Illinois Trucking Association and the

American Trucking Association.

 Mr. Keller felt that if a more

stringent standard was necessary,

 it could be adopted at a later

time after the existing program has had time to stabilize.

 (R.1

12 7—403

6

at 79—80).

 Even with this standard, under a worst case scenario,

Navistar alleges that 2-1/2

 of the existing vehicles would still

fail the test.

In reviewing the entire record, we have concluded that 55

opacity is the appropriate standard for pre-1991 engines using

the snap idle test.

 Accordingly, the Board will change the

proposal to reflect that all pre—1991 engines will be subject to

the 55

 standard.

 In the future,

 if this Board is provided with

information which justifies an amendment, the standard can be

modified.

 There is some indication federal standards may be made

 more stringent in 19941.

As a final note with regard to opacity, there seems to be a

general misunderstanding of what the 55

 standard represents.

The Board wishes to emphasize that the opacity measurement used

for comparison with the 55

 opacity standard articulated in the

rule is not that which a citizen would see on the street, but is

instead that which is detected via an opacimeter during a snap

idle procedure.

 Using this test,

 a driver “guns” the engine

three times and opacity is measured as the average of the peak

opacity recorded during each of the three snap idle cycles.

 Thus

it is very different from normal emissions.

 Many of the public

comments also misunderstood the 55

 standard.

 It is important to

note that any truck that is continuously emitting more than 20

opacity will almost certainly fail the 55

 snap idle procedure.

In effect, this represents a more stringent change from the

Board’s present

30

 opacity standard.

B. Enforcement Structure

In our First Notice proposal, the Board placed inspection

and enforcement authority with the Illinois State Police.

 This

was done for two reasons.

 First, our inquiry hearings, which led

to First Notice, were primarily concerned with ascertaining the

health effects of diesel smoke and obtaining information in

regards to a viable opacity standard.

 Second, our proposal

attempted to incorporate many parts of the California rule.

 Accordingly, we did not focus on enforcement at the inquiry

stage.

 As we pointed out in our First Notice Opinion, the

Agency and the Illinois State Police were inserted, but the

extent of their participation was, at that point,

 largely

unknown.

In our hearings following the proposal, both the State

Police and the Agency participated.

 Stating that regulations in

1Mr. Keller testified that the federal certification standards

in effect for 1991 were tighter than those between 1974 and 1990.

Mr.

 Keller

 further testified that

 those

 standards will be even

tighter by 1994.

 (R.1 at 63.)

127—404

7

the area appear both appropriate and necessary, the State Police

commended the Board for its efforts to address the health and

environmental issues relating to diesel engine exhaust.. (R.2 at

72).

 Jim Redlich, testifying on behalf of the State Police,

supported the concept that opacity standards must be established

and enforced.

 (R. 2 at 72).

 According to Mr. Redlich, however,

the State Police should not be a listed enforcement entity.

The

State Police therefore requested that we remove its name from the

regulation.

 For this reason,

 in addition to the fact that any

person

 c,an bring an enforcement action

 (Ill. Rev. Stat.,

ch.

ill

 1/2, para.

 1031), we will delete any specific reference to

inspection and enforcement mechanisms.

The Board believes that today’s proposal can be enforced in

in several different ways.

 First, any regulations,

 including

diesel opacity can be enforced by any entity filing an

enforcement action before this Board.

 For example,

 local

governments doing truck stop inspections could make violation

determinations and file actions before this Board.

 Second, any

agency of state government could use the technical standards

articulated in this rule to take whatever action is authorized

under their own controlling statutes.

 Third, the new regulatory

language may provide a technical basis for local governments to

adopt standards that could be enforced through the municipal

legal system.

 We note that the Board makes no pronouncements on

local government or municipal powers.

 It is up to the local

government to do by ordinance what its ordinance dictates.

However,

 if a local government chooses to adopt a standard using

today’s Board action as a technical justification,

 it should

adopt the standard articulated by the Board today.

Although the enforcement mechanisms mentioned above are

theoretically possible, the Board notes that the enforcement of

diesel opacity poses some unique problems.

 The enforcement of

today’s proposal requires that vehicles be detained in order to

be tested.

 Consequently, the Board does not anticipate citizen

enforcement actions such as those we see with respect to some of

our other standards

 (e.g. noise).

 There is also a question as to

whether the Agency has the power to stop vehicles.

 Assuming that

it does, however, the Agency may simply not be equipped to

undertake a program so different in scope relative to its

existing operation.

 Ideally,

 enforcement of today’s regulation

would be most effective if those entities already engaged in

traffic stops of motor vehicles were involved.

 In this regard,

it is possible that the Board’s promulgation of an updated

standard may provide a basis for action by the General Assembly

as it pertains to enforcement mechanisms.

C. Penalty Provisions

TEXT FROM HERE ON NOT MODIFIED

127—405

8

C. Penalty Provisions

At First Notice the Board proposed a civil penalty schedule.

Many comments were received on this issue.

 (e.g.,

 Comment 127 by

the Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group).

 The Board finds

merit in those comments and will accordingly delete the civil

penalty schedule.

 The Board notes that civil penalty

determinations can be made utilizing the existing statutory and

regulatory framework.

D. Other Concerns

Mr. Robert Jasmon testified that even if the Board were to

go with the snap idle test and drop the visual opacity measure,

he would have problems with the rule.

 (R.2 at 16).

 First,

Mr.

Jasmon was of the opinion that any regulation with regard to

diesel opacity should be federally promulgated.

 Second, he was

concerned about the safety aspect of stopping and testing trucks.

With respect to a federal rule, the Board is not aware of

any opacity standard for vehicles as they are operating on the

roads of the nation.

 The federal government does issue peak

smoke opacity certifications which are only applicable to newly

manufactured engines.

 An engine family will pass or fail that

certification based upon laboratory dynamometer testing.

In

terms of safety, the availability of portable smoke meters will

greatly simplify the process enumerated in the First Notice

Proposal to nothing more than

 a routine traffic stop.

 Since

trucks are stopped as a matter of course for other reasons,

the

Board does not anticipate that this will be a problem.

 Finally,

since any initial enforcement will necessarily take place on a

local scale, we are confident that those local authorities will

be in a better position to adequately assess the safety issues.

Mr. Fred Serpe of the Illinois Trucking Association raised

the issue of the effective date of the rules.

 Mr. Serpe was

concerned that some lead time be established.

 (R.1 at 108-109.)

Citing storm water run-off regulations now applicable to most

trucking firms, Mr. Serpe was troubled by the possibility that

 the industry may not know how the proposed rule would apply to

them.

 (R.l at 140-142.)

 Mr. Serpe stated that many companies are

not even aware they fall under the .storm water regulations and

the same could be true for the diesel rule without lead-time in

conjunction with an outreach program.

 We find this argument to

be unpersuasive.

 First,

 any vehicle emission which comports with

federal requirements should not exceed 55

 opacity in a snap idle

test.

 This is universally accepted by the regulated community.

(R.l at 73.)

 Second, the regulation articulated today conforms

to the existing Illinois regulatory framework, with numerical

limitations that substantially comport with federal requirements,

thus the need for an extended effective date is minimized or

eliminated.

 In sum, the industry should have ample time to

127—406

9

conform to what is essen~tiallyan already existing standard.

In terms of repairs, Mr. Adams of Bosch and Mr. Schey of

Diesel Injection Service advocated that repair centers be

designated.

 They found troublesome the possibility that

unqualified technicians might benefit from working on vehicles

which violated the standard.

 They urged the Board to designate

qualified stations which meet manufacturers’ requirements for

training.

 This the Board declines to do.

 While we are

 sympathetic to these concerns, we will not endorse certain

mechanics over others.

 Apart from the legality of such a rule,

our main emphasis remains that trucks in violation come into

compliance.

 Accordingly, this request will not be incorporated

into the rule.

Finally,

 the EMA, the RTA, the Illinois Steel Group and the

John Deere Company all commented as to whether the Board’s intent

was to regulate off-road vehicles.

 Citing Section 240.140, these

commenters pointed out that “on—road” should be inserted to avoid

the potential regulation of farm implements and other machinery

which was not intended to be regulated.

 We agree.

 Accordingly,

we have added the requested language so as to clarify the

provision.

DELAY

PRIOR TO SECOND NOTICE SUBMISSION

Today’s action represents a substantial reduction in scope

from that proposed at first notice.

 The Board believes that

today’s action represents a resolution of nearly all conflicts

identified in testimony and comments received during the First

Notice period.

 Today’s action is in substantial conformity with

the existing regulations, but updates those regulations for

standards and test protocols.

 As a result, the Board believes an

additional First Notice is not necessary.

Nonetheless, this regulatory language does represent a

change from First Notice such that the Board would benefit from

review by the participants.

 Accordingly, the Board will withhold

sending this matter to the Joint Committee on Administrative

Rules until December 19.

 Any person who identifies an error or

problem with the present regulatory language is free to file a

written statement with the Board.

 That written statement must be

received in the Board’s office not later than 4:30 p.m. on

Friday, December 13,

 1991.

 Any such written statement should

clearly articulate the proposed regulatory language of concern,

specify the difficulty,

 and suggest alternative language or

concepts to be employed that will remedy the problem.

ORDER

127—407

10

The Board directs the Clerk to file these amendments and

additions with the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules for

Second Notice.

TITLE 35:

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE B:

 AIR POLLUTION

CHAPTER

I:

 POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

SUBCHAPTER k:

 EMISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS

FOR MOBILE SOURCES

PART 240

MOBILE SOURCES

SUBPART A:

 DEFINITIONS

AND

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section

240.101

 Preamble

240.102

 Definitions

240.103

 Prohibitions

240.104

 Inspection

240.105

 Penalties

240.106

 Determination of Violation

 240.107

 Incorporations by Reference

SUBPART B:

 EMISSIONS

Section

240.121

 Smoke Emissions

240.122

 Diesel Engine Emission Standards for Locomotives

240.123

 Liquid Petroleum Gas Fuel Systems

240.124

 Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards

240.125

 Compliance Determination

SUBPART

C:

 HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL SMOKE OPACITY STANDARDS

AND

TEST PROCEDURES

Section

240.140

 Applicability

240.141

 Heavy Duty Diesel Smoke Opacity Standards and Test

Procedures

240.Appendix A

 Rule into Section Table

240.Appendix B

 Section into Rule Table

AUTHORITY:

 Implementing Sections 9,

 10 and 13 and authorized by

Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act

 (Ill.

 Rev.

 Stat.

1989,

ch.

 111—1/2, pars.

 1009,

 1010,

 1013 and 1027).

SOURCE:

 Adopted as Chapter 2:

 Air Pollution,

 Part Vii:

 Mobile

Sources, filed and effective April

14,

 1972; codified at

 7 Ill.

127—408

11

Reg. 13628; amended in R85—25, at 10 Ill. Reg.

 11277, effective

June 16,

 1986; amended in R90-20 at

—

 Ill. Reg.

effective _______________________________

SUBPART A:

 DEFINITIONS

AND

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section 240.102

 Definitions

All tern~swhich appear in this Part have the definitions

specified in this Part and 35 Ill.

 Adin. Code 201 and 211. Where

conflicting definitions occur the definitions of this Section

apply

 in this Part.

“Diesel Engine”:

 All types of internal—combustion engines

in which air is compressed to a temperature sufficiently

high to ignite fuel injected directly into the cylinder

area.

“Diesel Locomotive”:

 A diesel engine vehicle designed to

move cars on a railway.

“Driver”:

 The same meaning as defined in the Illinois

Vehicle Code.

 Ill. Rev.

 Stat. 1989.

 ch. 95—1/2, par.

 116.l,

“Fleet”:

 Five or more vehicles.

“Full Power Position”:

 The throttle position at which the

engine fuel delivery is at maximum flow.

“Heavy Duty Vehicle”:

 A motor vehicle ratcd at more than

3000 pound3 grosa vehicle wcightA vehicle with 8,000 pounds

or greater manufacturer’s maximum gross vehicle weight

rating

 (GVWR).

“High Idle”:

 That portion of a two—speed idle test

conducted with the engine operating at a speed of

approximately 2500 PPM.

“Idle Mode”:

 That portion of a vehicle emission test

procedure conducted with the engine disconnected from an

external load and operating at minimum throttle.

“Light Duty Truck”:

 A motor vehicle rated at 8000 pounds

gross vehicle weight or less, which is designed for carrying

more than 10 persons or designed for the transportation of

property, freight or cargo,

 or is a derivative of such a

vehicle.

“Light Duty Vehicle”:

 A passenger car designed to carry not

more than 10 persons.

127—409

12

“Model Year”:

 The year of manufacture of a motor vehicle

based upon the annual production period as designated by the

manufacturer and indicated on the title and registration of

the vehicle.

 If the manufacturer does not designate a

production period for the vehicle, then “model year” means

the calendar year of manufacture.

“Motor Vehicle”:

 As used in this section “motor vehicle”

shall have the same meaning as in the Illinois Vehicle Code

(lid. Rev. Stat. l985~,ch.

 95 1/2, par.

 1—146).

“Opacity”:

 A condition which rendera material partially of

wholly impervious to the transmittance of light,

 and causes

the obstruction of an observcr’s vj.cwThat fraction of light.

expressed in percent, which when transmitted from a source

through a smoke—obscured path,

 is prevented from reaching

the observer or instrument receiver.

“Persona Liable”:

 All persona owning, operating or in

charge or control of any equipment who shall cause

 or permit

or participate in any violation of these rules and

regulations either a~owner, operator, lessee or lessor.

“Smokemeter or Opacimeter”:

 An optical instrument designed

to measure the opacity of smoke or diesel exhaust gases

using the light extinction method.

“Snap idle Cycle”:

 Rapidly depressing the accelerator pedal

from normal idle to the full nower position, holding the

pedal

 in the position for no longer than ten seconds or

until the engine reaches maximum speed. and fully releasing

the pedal so that the engine decelerates to normal idle.

“Test Procedure”:

 The preparation, preconditioning sequence

and smoke opacity measurement processes using the snap idle

cycle for determining compliance with Section 240.141.

“Two-Speed Idle Test”:

 A vehicle emission test procedure

consisting of the measurements of exhaust emission in high

idle and idle modes.

(Source:

 Amended at

—

 Ill. Reg.

____________,

 effective

Section 240.107

 Incorporations by Reference

The following materials are incorporated by reference and include

no later editions or amendments:

~j

 Society of Automotive Engineers

 (SAEY, 400 Commonwealth

Drive, Warrendale, PA

 15096: Report J255a Diesel

Engine Smoke Measurement

 (August,

 1978).

127—410

13

~j

 International Standards Organization (ISO). Case

Postale

56.

1211

Geneve

20,

Switzerland:

ISO

393

(Working Draft, January 1991).

 Also available from

American National Standards Institute

 (ANSI),

 11 West

42nd Street, New York, NY

 10036.

(Source:

 Added at

 Ill. Reg

effective

SUBPART

EMISSIONS

Section 240.122

 Diesel Engine Emission Standards

Locomotives

a)

 The visible emission sth~

apply to diesel enginco.

in Cection 240.121 shall not

b)

 With the exception of subsection

 (e), diesel engines

manufactured before January 1,

 1970,

 shall not be operated

in such a manner as to emit smoke which is

equal

to or

greater than 30

 opacity except for individual smoke puffs.

Individual puffs of smoke shall not exceed 15 seconds in

duration.

e~

I)

 Die3cl engines shall be opernt~rionly on the specific

rueia as specified in the engine manuracturers

specifications for that specific engine, or on fuels

exceeding engine manufacturers’ specifications.

2)

Persona

liable

for

operating

diesel

engine

fleets

wholly

within

standard

metropolitan

stati3tical

areas

~hn1 1

fnrni~h

ti-b

t~h~

Pnu-irnnma~r~i-n1

Prnt~r~t—ii-~n~r~~rtr~’u’

once

each

year,

proof

that

the

fuel

purcnase

their

operations

conform

subsecti~...

n public highways in Illinoi

shall

conform

3~~j

 No person shall cause or allow the emission of smoke from

any

 diesel locomotive in the State of Illinois to exceed

thirty

percent

(30)

opacity.

~2-)-~j Subsection

(e)

(1)j~j

shall

not

apply

to:

~)-fl

Smoke

resulting

from

starting

cold

locomotive:

for

period

time

not

exceed

minutes.

127—411

All

dic3el

cngine3

operated

~and

(c)

(1).

14

B)-21

 Smoke emitted while accelerating under load from a

throttle

setting

other

than

idle

higher

throttle

setting:

for

period

time

not

exceed

seconds.

~3-fl

Smoke emitted upon locomotive loading following idle:

for a period of time not to exceed 2 minutes.

D~)-j) Smoke emitted during locomotive testing,

 maintenance,

adjustment, rebuilding, repairing or breaking in:

for

a period of time not to exceed

 3 consecutive minutes

and an aggregate of 10 minutes in any 60 minute period.

E)-~jSmoke emitted by a locomotive which because of its age

of design makes replacement or retrofit parts necessary

to achieve smoke reduction unavailable.

 These

locomotives shall be retired at the earliest possible

time.

(Source:

 Amended at

—

 Ill. Reg.

____________,

effective

_________________________________________

.)

SUBPART C:

 HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL SMOKE OPACITY STANDARDS

AND

TEST

PROCEDURES

Section

240.140

Applicability

This Subpart applies to all on-road diesel-powered vehicles with

a 8,000 pounds or greater manufacturer’s maximum gross vehicle

weight rating

 (GVWR)

operating in the State of Illinois.

(Source:

 Added at

—

Ill.

Reg.

____________,

 effective

_________________________________________

.)

Section 240.141

 Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Smoke Opacity

Standards and Test Procedures

~j

 The standard for heavy-duty diesel vehicle smoke

opacity is as follows:

jj

 No 1991 or later model year heavy-duty diesel-

powered vehicle with a federal peak smoke engine

certification operating on the rdadways within the

State of Illinois shall exceed forty percent

 (40)

peak smoke opacity when tested in accordance with

subsections

(b)

and

 (c).

21

 Except for subsection

 (a) (1). no heavy-duty

diesel—powered vehicle operating on the roadways

yithin the

 State

 of Illinois shall exceed fifty-

five percent

 pe~ksmoke opacity when tested

in accordance with subsections

 (b) and

 (c).

127—4 12

15

~j

 The smoke opacity measurement shall be carried out

using a light-extinction tv~eopacimeter capable of

measuring and recording opacity continuously during the

snap idle testing cycle.

 A strip chart recorder or an

eauivalent or better recording device shall be used in

concert with the opacimeter to record opacity

 continuously, including peak values.

 The opacimeter

shall be capable of providing opacity readings with

sufficient resolution to obtain 0.5 second—averaged

values.

 The peak 0.5 second—averaged value shall be

used for showing compliance with the standard in

subsection

 (a).

 Where the response time of the

instrument is such that opacity is being measured at

smaller than 0.5 second intervals,

 the meter shall have

the capability of providing or allowing the calculation

of 0.5 second—averaged values.

fl

 The opacimeter shall be either an in-line full-

flow opacimeter; end-of-line or plume tv~efull-

flow opacimeter;

 or a sampling type partial flow

opacimeter.

 The opaciineter and recording devices

shall be calibrated according to manufacturers’s

specifications.

 Corrections for the effect of

exhaust stack diameter shall apply to opacity

measurements made using an end-of—line full—flow

opacimeter; and

21

 The opacimeter and recorder shall com~lvwith

specifications in the International Standards

Organization ISO 393 and in Society of Automotive

Engineers

 (SAE)

 report number J255a entitled

“Diesel Engine Smoke Measurement”, incorporated by

reference in Section 240.107.

çj

 The test procedure using the snap idle cycle shall

consist of preparation, preconditioning,

 and testing

phases.

fl

the

preparation

phase,

the

vehicle

shall

placed at rest, the transmission shall be placed

in neutral,

 and the vehicle wheels shall be

properly restrained to prevent any rolling motion.

In the event of a roadside test,

 it shall be

acceptable under this Section for the driver to

apply the brakes during the test.

21

 In the preconditioning phase,

 the vehicle shall be

put through a snap idle cycle three or more times

until successive measured smoke opacity readings

are within ten percent

 (10)

 of each other.

The

opacimeter shall be rechecked prior to the

12 7—413

16

preconditioning sequence to determine that its

zero and span setting are adiusted to

manufacturer’ s specifications.

fl

 In the testing phase, the vehicle shall be ~ut

through the snap idle cycle three times.

~j

 The smoke opacity shall be measured during

the preconditioning and testing phases with

an opacimeter meeting the requirements of

subsection

 (b) and shall be recorded

continuously on the recorder during each snap

idle cycle.

 The maximum 0.5 second

 averaged

value recorded during each snap idle cycle

shall be the smoke opacity reading.

~

 The average of the three smoke opacity

readings shall be used to determine

compliance with the opacity standard in

subsection

 (a).

(Source:

 Added at

 Ill. Reg.

____________,

 effective.

ORDERED.

I,

 Dorothy M. Gunn,

 Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby tea4~y~

 that the

ab~y

Opinion and Order was

adopted on the

 c’c’

/~

 day of

/

 199.

 by a

vote of

_____________.

 //~/

Dorothy

p3~’nn, Clerk

Illinois

Pc~/lution

 Control

 Board

127—414