December 1,2006 sierra research Mr. Michael Tollstrup 1801 J Street Sacramento, CA 9581 4 California Air Resources Board 1-el: (91 6) 444-6666 1001 "I" Street Fa: (91 6) 444-8373 P.O. Box 2815 Ann Arbor, MI lel: (734) 761 -6666 Sacramento, CA 95812 Fa: (734) 761 -6755 Subject: Crane Owners Comments on the Emergency Amendments to the Portable Equipment Registration Program and Portable Diesel Engine Airborne Toxic Control Measure Dear Mr. Tollstrup: On behalf of the Mobile Crane Operators Group (MCOG) and the Crane Owners Association (COA), collectively the "Crane Owners," we are pleased to submit the following comments for consideration in the adoption of emergency amendments to the Portable Equipment Registration Program (PEW) and the Portable Diesel Airborne Toxic Control Measure (Portable ATCM). We understand that CARB seeks to pursue adoption of these amendments during the December 7,2006 Board meeting to be held in Bakersfield. MCOG and COA are trade organizations representing approximately 20 member crane rental companies that own and operate approximately 1,000 cranes statewide. While the Crane Owners are supportive of ARB'S efforts to improve air quality through the reduction of emissions of precursors to ozone and particulate matter (including Diesel particulate matter), we are concerned that both the current PERP requirements, and the changes under consideration by ARB, will leave Crane Owners with equipment that, while essential to building and maintaining California's infrastructure, will be unusable in California. Therefore, we are submitting the following comments and proposal pertaining to the crane rental industry, and request their inclusion into the formal regulatory language. 1. Allow PERP Registration of Certain Nonresident Tier 1 and Newer Crane Upper Engines Under the "Regulatory Concepts" discussed during the November 20, 2006 public consultation meeting, CARB proposed to "open" the PERP for Tier 1 and Tier 2 engines that have demonstrated California residency during the period commencing on March 4, 2004, and ending on October 1,2006. To demonstrate residency, the owner would be required to produce purchase, service, or jobsite Michael Tollstrup -2-December 1,2006 documentation. This "open" period will continue until January 1,2010, provided the above residency requirement is satisfied. We are assuming that it is CARB's intent to harmonize the language of the Portable Diesel Engine ATCM accordingly. We recognize that the proposed amendments will address the registration of any unregistered Tier 1 or higher, portable (upper) crane engines currently operating within California. However, CARB's current proposal continues to prohibit the purchase of used dual-engine cranes from out-of-state (or from within California when residency cannot be established). This prohibition would persist, even if portable crane engines purchased fiom out-of-state were retrofitted with Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies (VDECS), or if repowering such equipment were infeasible. The ability to purchase used cranes is the lifeblood of the crane industry. A substantial fiaction of cranes added to crane fleets are purchased as used equipment. Crane upper engines are typically small in size (450 HP), yet are associated with some of the most expensive equipment units contained in the PEW. For example, a new all-terrain crane may have a purchase price in excess of two million dollars. The purchase price is reduced by as much as 50% for a comparable used crane (5-10 years old). Therefore, the inability of an owner to purchase a used crane has an indirect economic cost of over one million dollars. Although this cost is great, the emissions benefit fiom a Tier 3 engine compared to a Tier 1 engine is minimal, mainly because these portable engines are small and have low annual hours of operation. For other (non-crane) types of portable equipment, a possible solution could be repowering the unit with a new (Tier 3) engine. As the attached letter from Liebherr Cranes, Inc. demonstrates, however, repowering of crane upper engines is largely infeasible and potentially illegal. As the crane upper engine is part of the counterweight, a small weight change resulting from an upper engine repower could have a significant effect on a crane's lifting capacity and interfere with the electronic controls programmed into the crane's positioning system. For this reason (and possibly others), altering or repowering a crane upper engine is expressly prohibited by crane manufacturers. We have attached pages fiom the operatiodsafety manuals of three other manufacturers to illustrate this point. We believe that this is the reason that the "lattice boom crane" exemption was added into the Portable ATCM. At that time, it was believed that this issue affected only cranes with lattice booms; however, it is now understood that this affects all dual engine cranes, regardless of boom type. A manufacturer's prohibition on altering cranes affects the certification of the crane required under federal Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. These regulations state: Michael Tollstmp -3-December 1,2006 No modzjcations or additions which afect the capacity of safe operation of the equipment shall be made by the employer without the manufacturer's written approval. If such mod$cations or changes are made, the capacity, operation, and maintenance instruction plates, tags, or decals shall be changed accordingly. In no case shall the original safety factor of the equipment be reduced. [40 CFR 1926.550(a)(16)] The above OSHA regulation does allow for the possibility of repowering or retrofitting a crane upper engine if manufacturer's approval is granted. Therefore, the Crane Owners are proposing that the following two categories of crane upper engines be eligible for PEW registrations, under the following limited conditions: Crane Upper Engines Equipped with a Level 3 VDECS Any crane upper engine, including Tier 0 and nonresident engines, may be registered if a Level 3 VDECS has been installed and is properly operating. Tier 1 and Newer Nonresident Crane Upper Enyines Tier 1 and newer nonresident crane upper engines may be registered if both of the following conditions are met. Nonresident, Tier 0 crane upper engines would not be eligible unless they have been retrofitted with a Level 3 Verified Diesel Emission Control System (VDECS), as described above. The applicant must demonstrate that it is not feasible to repower the crane upper engine. This demonstration may include a statement of prohibition fiom the manufacturer or a statement of infeasibility fiom a replacement engine dealer. The applicant must demonstrate that it is not feasible to retrofit the crane upper engine with a Level 3 VDECS. This demonstrationmust include either an analysis of availableVDECS at the time of application, a statement of prohibition fiom the crane manufacturer, or a statement of infeasibility from the VDECS manufacturer. The applicant must demonstrate that the purchase of a new crane would not be cost effective. The cost effectiveness of the incremental reductions will be determined according to the methodology described in CARB's 2005 Carl Moyer Program Guidelines, with the exception that the cost effectiveness thresholds will be set at the NOx, ROC, and PMloBACT cost effectiveness levels used in stationary source permitting by the home district of the crane. The most similar crane commercially availablemay be substituted if a comparablenew crane is no longer manufactured. Assumptions on annual hours of use will become PEW conditions. Michael Tollstrup -4-December 1,2006 2. Allow PERP Registration of Resident Tier 0 Engines For 3 Years The current proposal does not allow the registration of any Tier 0 engines, regardless if California residency can be established. While it is unfortunate that many owners failed to register or permit their portable engines during previous "open" periods of the PERP, we believe it is overly punitive to force thls equipment out of service immediately. Under the existing Portable ATCM, Tier 0 portable engines are allowed to operate through December 3 1,2009. After this date, they must be retired fiom service in California. A process was also established whereby Tier 0 lattice boom crane engines may continue to operate until 2020 if CARB approval is granted. As the Portable ATCM facilitates the retiring of most Tier 0 engines by 2010, the PERP regulation should be harmonized to allow continued operation for the same time period. We believe it is obvious and essential to allow these engines into the "system" now, if their retirement is to be mandated in three years. Given the compliance history of the PERP, we believe that continued exclusion of Tier 0 engines may increase their persistence rate in the fleet after 2010. Every effort to identify and register Tier 0 portable engines should be made at this time. Furthermore, the registration of resident lattice boom cranes that have been granted CARB-approval for use until 2020 should be allowed to maintain their PERP registration over the same period. We believe that a residency requirement should be established for any Tier 0 engines in this category prior to issuance of a PERP. This would prevent the importation of Tier 0 engines fiom out of state. 3. Eliminate Penalties for Portable Engines Operating in Areas where a District Permit to Operate Has Not Been Required Under District Rules, such as the BAAQMD and SBCAPCD It is an oversimplification of the regulatory landscape to assume that every unregisteredJunpermittedportable engine has been operating in violation of air district permitting regulations and therefore should be subject to penalties. The rules and regulations of the Bay Area AQMD contain explicit exemptions for portable engines operating in a broad range of situations. Specifically, BAAQMD Regulation 2-1, Sections 113 & 114 exempt portable engines from permit requirements if they operate at a location for less than 72 hours; meet the Vehicle Code definition of "special construction equipment"; perform road construction, widening, or rerouting activities; or perform building construction activities at any source not otherwise requiring a permit. In combination, these provisions exempt most portable engines from permit requirements in the nine-county BAAQMD, which includes the Cities of San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland- the third, fourth, and eighth largest cities in the state. Michael Tollstrup -5-December 1,2006 Additionally, Santa Barbara County APCD Rule 202, Section F contains permitting exemptions for portable engines used in construction. This would include most crane engines. Additional exemptions contained in the rule apply to temporary sources operating less than 60 days. We therefore request that, because of the exemptions for portable equipment contained in district rules, no penalties be assessed for PEW applications where the home district is the BAAQMD or the SBCAPCD. Registration of these engines would be entirely voluntary due to no underlying district permit requirement. This provision in no way would limit a district or CARB fiom issuing a violation or penalties for engines operating in violation of the requirement for a district permit. The Crane Owners appreciate CARB's consideration of these comments in the amendment of the PEW and the Portable Diesel Engine ATCM. Feel fiee to contact me at (916) 444-6666 if you require any fhther information concerning the issues addressed herein. Sincerely, "9- Gary Ruben tein Encl. cc: Seth Hamrnond, MCOG Michael Vlarning, COA LIEBHERR CRANES, Inc. 4100 Chestnut Ave., P 0Drawer "OM,Newport News, VA 23605 Question #5 Engine replacement: There are two types of engine replacements that must be addressed: Lower, (carrier engine) & Upper, (superstructure engine) Lower: For the purposes of this question, Iwill only address AT cranes, (All Terrain), but most of the caveats we mention below apply to most two-engine cranes. Items to be considered when replacing a carrier engine in an AT crane are overall engine measurements, air supply, waterlcooling systems, PTO drives. All terrain cranes are manufactured with a narrow frame which limits the type of engine that can be installed. If all above factors are met the next problem is the electronics. An older AT crane with a Tier 1 or 2 engine does not have the necessary electronics to accept a Tier 3 engine. It may be possible to get ,the engine to run, but the emissions would not be controlled. Estimated cost for engine only replacement would be $750,000 to 950,000. Upper: Liebherr, as I am sure all other AT manufacturers, would not allow a user to replace an upper engine. The upper enqine is a part of the crane counterweiqht svstem. At the time the crane is manufactured, it is load tested with assigned counterweights (including the weight of the engine). The computer (LICCON in the case of Liebherr) is programmed for a specific load at a specific radius. Any change to the counterweights (including engine) would result in a red flag of the crane, meaning the manufacturer would advise the user the crane is no longer safe to operate. Enforcement for the manufacture is difficult. Other agencies such as OSHA, Caltrans would be advised. As with the lower engine, additional cooling, exhaust, air, PTO drive & electronics are necessary. Liebherr does not have replacement engines for older model cranes and thus we have no estimate of cost for this operation. Tier 3 engines are installed in new model cranes only. W. John Bray Sales Manager -West LIEBHERR Cranes, Inc.