[Senate Report 110-413]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 870
110th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     110-413

======================================================================



 
             MARINE VESSEL EMISSIONS REDUCTION ACT OF 2007

                                _______
                                

    July 10 (legislative day, July 9), 2008.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mrs. Boxer, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 1499]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 1499) to amend the Clean Air Act to 
reduce air pollution from marine vessels, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                       Purpose of the Legislation

    The Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act is intended to 
reduce emissions of air pollutants from marine vessels that 
contribute to air pollution and failure to meet air quality 
standards in certain areas in the United States.

                    General Statement and Background

    Marine vessels operating in the vicinity of many U.S. ports 
and coastal areas in many cases are a significant source of air 
pollutants contributing to poor air quality and adverse health 
effects. Air pollution from larger ocean-going vessels is 
weakly regulated; these vessels operate under international 
standards that permit use of high-sulfur fuel and do not 
require installation of available emissions control 
technologies.
    Studies have concluded that marine vessel emissions 
contribute to thousands of premature deaths and illnesses in 
the U.S. every year.\1\ Based on data reported by Corbett et 
al. in December 2007,\2\ deaths caused by ship pollution are 
occurring in large numbers in areas all around the country, as 
illustrated on the map below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See Corbett, et al., ``Mortality from Ship Emissions: A Global 
Assessment,'' Environmental Sci. Technol, American Chemical Society, 
42(24), p. 8512-8518, Dec. 15, 2007; Corbett et al., ``Mitigating 
Health Impacts of Ship Pollution through Low Sulfur Fuel Options: 
Initial Comparison of Scenarios,'' Jan. 23, 2008; see also U.S. EPA 
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule, May 2004, EPA420-R-04-032, available 
online at: http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr/420f04032.htm.
    \2\ Corbett, et al., ``Mortality from Ship Emissions: A Global 
Assessment,'' Environmental Sci. Technol, American Chemical Society, 
42(24), p. 8512-8518, Dec. 15, 2007.


    Areas where ship pollution is causing premature deaths, 
disease and health impacts include, but are not limited to, 
ports in the Atlantic seaboard (Ports of New York and New 
Jersey, Wilmington, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Hampton Roads, 
Charleston, Savannah, Jacksonville, Miami), the Gulf Coast 
(Ports of Tampa, Mobile, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Houston and 
Galveston), the Great Lakes (Ports of Chicago and Detroit) and 
the West Coast (Ports of San Diego, Los Angeles and Long Beach, 
Oakland, Portland and Seattle).\3\ In addition to these direct 
health impacts of ship pollution, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency data indicate that more than 40 U.S. ports in these 
regions are located in areas that have failed to meet air 
quality standards for one or more pollutants emitted or caused 
by large ship emissions, including ports in Louisiana, Texas, 
California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, 
Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Delaware.\4\ Accordingly, the 
Committee concluded that ship pollution is a serious national 
threat to health and air quality that requires an urgent 
Federal response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ See supra, notes 1 & 2.
    \4\ U.S. EPA ``Greenbook'' of Clean Air Act Non-attainment Areas, 
available online at: http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/
multipol.html; U.S. EPA Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for 
Control of Emissions from New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or 
Above 30 Liters per Cylinder, November 2007, available online at: 
http://www.epa.gov/OMS/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420f07050.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act amends the Clean 
Air Act by adding new requirements relating to marine vessel 
fuel sulfur content and advanced marine vessel emissions 
controls.
    The Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) is required to promulgate regulations effective as 
of December 31, 2010, requiring that marine vessels operating 
within specified distances from U.S. ports use fuel that 
contains not more than 1,000 parts per million of sulfur, 
unless the Administrator finds that such limitation is not 
feasible, in which case fuel content may not exceed 2,000 parts 
per million of sulfur. The Act provides that certain 
alternative mechanisms may be authorized to comply with the 
fuel sulfur content requirements.
    The Act would further amend the Clean Air Act by adding a 
new subsection relating to advanced marine vessel emission 
controls. It requires the Administrator to promulgate 
regulations establishing standards for emissions of certain air 
pollutants from newly-manufactured and in-use main and 
auxiliary engines in oceangoing marine vessels that enter or 
leave a port or offshore terminal of the United States. The 
regulations would require the greatest degree of emission 
reduction achievable through the application of technology that 
the Administrator determines, with reference to specified 
factors, will be available for the affected engines.
    The Committee is aware that ongoing International Maritime 
Organization negotiations over new marine vessel standards 
under Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention could lead to potential 
improvements in the international regulatory regime. However, 
the precise standards, timing, and other specifics of those 
negotiations have not been finally determined or approved, the 
details of the implementation of such new standards has not yet 
been agreed to or commenced, and the adequacy of any 
international IMO standards to fully protect the United States 
public's health and well being remains uncertain, so the 
Committee believes that this legislation is needed.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 would provide that the Act may be cited as the 
``Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act of 2007''.

Section 2. Findings

    Section 2 sets forth Congress's findings that:
    (1) emissions of air pollutants from marine vessels 
contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution in many 
areas in the United States;
    (2) current levels of control on those emissions are not 
adequate to protect air quality and public health;
    (3) to protect air quality and public health, efforts by 
State and local governments to control emissions from marine 
vessels must be augmented by the Federal Government;
    (4) although the Environmental Protection Agency may 
require additional controls on domestic and international 
marine vessels entering United States ports, significant 
emission reductions must be achieved in the near future; and
    (5) it is urgent and necessary to require the Administrator 
of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish standards 
to reduce emissions of air pollutants from marine vessels in a 
sufficient period of time to allow all areas in the United 
States to meet air quality standards in accordance with 
applicable deadlines.

Section 3. Marine Vessel Fuel Sulfur

    Section 3 would amend Section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 
U.S.C. Sec. 7545) and insert a new subsection (p) entitled 
``Marine Vessel Fuel Sulfur.''
    The EPA Administrator would be required to promulgate 
regulations, effective beginning on December 31, 2010, that 
require all marine vessels (a) within 200 miles of the west 
coast of the continental United States; and (b) within such 
distance of the east coast or gulf coast of the United States, 
or the shoreline of the Great Lakes or St. Lawrence Seaway, as 
the Administrator determines to be appropriate for the purpose 
of protecting public health and the environment, to use fuel 
containing not more than 1,000 parts per million of sulfur in 
the main and auxiliary engines of the vessels.
    The regulations would apply to all marine vessels, 
including any vessel flagged in a country other than the United 
States, at any time at which the vessels are, on entering or 
leaving a port or offshore terminal of the United States, 
within the specified distances from the United States' coasts.
    Section 3 would authorize the Administrator to promulgate 
an interim requirement, pursuant to which marine vessel fuel 
sulfur content in excess of 1,000 parts per million would be 
permitted if the Administrator determines that compliance with 
the 1,000 parts per million requirement is not technically 
feasible by December 31, 2010. However, vessels operating under 
the interim requirement would be required to use fuel that 
contains the lowest quantity of sulfur that is technically 
feasible by that date, and in no event a quantity of sulfur in 
excess of 2,000 parts per million. They would be required to 
achieve compliance with 1,000 parts per million standard on the 
earliest practicable date by which compliance is technically 
feasible.
    Section 3 would further authorize the Administrator to 
provide for an alternative mechanism of compliance if the 
Administrator determines that: (a) The marine vessel employs a 
control technology that reduces emissions from the vessel of 
sulfur oxides and particulate matter to at least the same 
degree as the reduction that would be achieved by the vessel 
through compliance with the applicable fuel sulfur content 
limitation; and (b) the emission reductions achieved are in 
addition to any reductions required to achieve compliance with 
an applicable engine emission standard issued by the 
Administrator or the head of another Federal agency.
    Finally, section 3 clarifies that nothing in the bill 
limits or otherwise affects any authority to regulate fuels or 
fuel additives for use in marine vessels or any other nonroad 
vehicle or engine under this Act or any other provision of law.

Section 4. Advanced Marine Vessel Emission Controls

    Section 4 would add a new subsection (d) to Section 213 of 
the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7547), entitled ``Advanced 
Marine Vessel Emission Controls''.
    Section 4 would require the Administrator to promulgate, 
and from time to time revise, regulations that establish 
standards for emissions of oxides of nitrogen, particulate 
matter, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide from newly-
manufactured and in-use main and auxiliary engines in 
oceangoing marine vessels that enter or leave a port or 
offshore terminal of the United States.
    The standards promulgated would require, effective 
beginning on January 1, 2012, that the engines achieve the 
greatest degree of emission reduction achievable through the 
application of technology that the Administrator determines 
will be available for the affected engines. In promulgating 
these standards, the Administrator would be directed to take 
into consideration: (a) whether the engine is newly-
manufactured or in-use (and, if the engine is in-use, the age 
of the engine); (b) the cost of applying an emission reduction 
technology in a period of time sufficient to achieve compliance 
with the standard; (c) noise, energy, and safety factors 
associated with the application of the technology; and (d) the 
feasibility, benefits, and costs of requiring--(i) the maximum 
level of control required by regulations applicable to on-road, 
nonroad, and stationary engines; and (ii) the maximum level of 
control achieved by sources from which control technologies may 
be transferred, including sources that use advanced 
aftertreatment technologies.
    Section 4 provides that if the Administrator determines, 
after consideration of the factors described, that a maximum 
level of control will not be technically achievable by January 
1, 2012, the Administrator shall promulgate standards that 
require the maximum level of control that the Administrator 
determines will be technically achievable by that date, and 
that in that event the Administrator shall promulgate 
additional standards that require, effective beginning on 
January 1, 2016, (a) the maximum level of control or (b) if the 
Administrator determines, after consideration of the factors 
described, that a maximum level of control is not technically 
achievable by January 1, 2016, the maximum level of control 
that the Administrator determines will be technically 
achievable by that date.
    Section 4 requires that standards applicable to marine 
engines and marine vessels promulgated under that Section would 
be applicable to vessels that enter or leave a port or offshore 
terminal of the United States, including vessels flagged in any 
country other than the United States.
    Section 4 provides for enforcement at the discretion of the 
Administrator, of any standard established relating to in-use 
engines, against: (a) the owner or operator of an in-use 
engine; (b) any person that rebuilds or maintains an in-use 
engine; or (c) such other person as the Administrator 
determines to be appropriate.
    Finally, section 4 makes it clear that nothing in the bill 
limits or otherwise affects any authority to regulate emissions 
of engines in marine vessels under this Act or any other 
provision of law.

                          Legislative History

    S. 1499 was introduced by Senators Boxer and Feinstein on 
May 24, 2007. Additional cosponsors are Senators Cardin, 
Carper, Clinton, Warner and Whitehouse. The bill was read twice 
and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public 
Works. The Committee met on May 21, 2008, when S. 1499 was 
ordered reported favorably without amendment by a voice vote.

                                Hearings

    On August 9, 2007, the Senate Committee on Environment and 
Public Works held a field hearing in San Pedro, California, on 
``Port Pollution and the Need for Additional Controls on Large 
Ships.'' On February 14, 2008, the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works held a hearing on S. 1499.

                            Roll Call Votes

    The Committee on Environment and Public Works met to 
consider S. 1499 on May 21, 2008. A quorum of the Committee 
being present, S. 1499 was reported favorably without amendment 
by a voice vote, with Senator Alexander requesting that he be 
recorded as voting aye. An amendment offered by Senator Vitter, 
which would have modified the findings in the bill and replaced 
the regulatory provisions of the bill with a provision 
requiring that EPA issue a rule ``relating to marine vessel 
fuel sulfur in accordance with the standards and timing 
requirement established in Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention,'' 
failed by roll call vote, 8-11. (Ayes--Alexander, Barrasso, 
Bond, Craig, Inhofe, Isakson, Vitter, Voinovich. Nays--Baucus, 
Cardin, Carper, Clinton, Klobuchar, Lautenberg, Lieberman, 
Sanders, Warner, Whitehouse, Boxer).

                      Regulatory Impact Statement

    In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the committee notes that the 
Congressional Budget Office has found that ``EPA already 
regulates marine fuel emissions, and either that agency or the 
USCG must enforce such regulations. The two agencies are 
currently carrying out those responsibilities.'' CBO also has 
found that S. 1499 contains no intergovernmental mandates and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.

                          Mandates Assessment

    In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Public Law 104-4), the Committee agrees with the Congressional 
Budget Office that S. 1499 contains no intergovernmental 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the 
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget 
Office:

S. 1499--Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act of 2007

    As ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Environment 
and Public Works on May 21, 2008.
    S. 1499 would limit the sulfur content in marine fuel and 
set emissions standards for vessels in U.S. waters. Under 
current law, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the 
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) enforce similar, but less stringent, 
standards on marine fuels.
    Based on information from EPA, CBO estimates that 
implementing S. 1499 would have no significant impact on the 
federal budget because EPA already regulates marine fuel 
emissions, and either that agency or the USCG must enforce such 
regulations. The two agencies are currently carrying out those 
responsibilities. Enacting this legislation would not affect 
revenues or direct spending.
    S. 1499 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined 
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no 
costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    CBO has determined that S. 1499 would impose private-sector 
mandates, as defined in UMRA, and that the aggregate cost of 
those mandates would exceed the annual threshold established in 
UMRA ($136 million in 2008, adjusted annually for inflation). 
The bill would direct EPA to issue regulations requiring marine 
vessels to use low-sulfur fuel when entering or leaving a U.S. 
port or offshore terminal beginning on December 31, 2010. Based 
on information from EPA, CBO estimates that the cost of 
complying with a low-sulfur fuel requirement could be about 
$500 million in the first year and that the cost would increase 
in subsequent years. The bill also would direct EPA to set 
standards for emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, 
carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbons from new and in-use main and 
auxiliary engines of oceangoing vessels that enter or leave a 
U.S. port or offshore terminal. The bill would direct EPA to 
set emissions standards that would be comparable to standards 
for other on-road, nonroad, and stationary engines. The cost to 
comply with the mandate would depend on requirements 
established by EPA.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Susanne S. 
Mehlman and Jeffrey LaFave (for federal costs), and Amy Petz 
(for the private-sector impact). This estimate was approved by 
Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

        MINORITY VIEWS OF SENATORS INHOFE, VITTER, AND VOINOVICH

    S. 1499, the Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act of 2007, 
should be opposed and returned to the Environment and Public 
Works Committee by the full Senate because this legislation 
enforces a national solution to a problem than can and should 
be enforced locally. The legislation would require oceangoing 
vessels which use U.S. ports to significantly lower the sulfur 
content of their fuel.
    Specifically, S. 1499 would require fuel sulfur content to 
drop from an average level of 27,000 parts per million to 1,000 
parts per million, along with requiring emissions reductions 
from both new and existing engines beginning in 2012 by 
requiring use of the most advanced available technologies. This 
bill imposes a national standard that forces ports with clean 
air to comply with rules that are needed for dirty ports. 
Although California port pollution has exacerbated its 
continued nitrogen oxide and particulate matter problems, most 
American ports do not have air quality issues. This legislation 
would penalize all American ports, regardless of their air 
quality standards, and impose an unfair economic burden on 
ports without poor air quality.
    If enacted, this law would disrupt U.S. international 
competitiveness by raising the costs of exporting goods and 
lessening export capability, regardless of whether those goods 
are shipped on U.S. or foreign vessels. Rate-sensitive cargo, 
such as grain, could be particularly affected. U.S. ports 
situated within close proximity to international ports may be 
disproportionately affected. These forced emissions reductions 
would also require vessels to pay high costs for engine 
upgrades and control technology.
    Additionally, there is no certainty that appropriate 
technology can be adopted within the time-frame of this 
legislation. A letter from the Engine Manufacturers Association 
on May 19, 2008 opposing S. 1499, states that ``the ability of 
fuel produces to supply sufficient quantities of 1,000 ppm 
sulfur fuel and the feasibility of ship owners and operators to 
make the needed physical changes to ships to use such a fuel by 
the December 2010 date have not been analyzed or demonstrated 
(and certainly seems unlikely).'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Engine Manufacturers Association, Letter to Senators Boxer and 
Inhofe. Re: Position of the Engine Manufacturers Association on Senate 
Bill 1499, the Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act of 2007. May 19, 
2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to potentially unachievable time-frames for 
emission reductions, efforts to reduce emissions from 
oceangoing vessels within the international trading community 
are already underway. The United States, which has signed onto 
the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution 
from Ships of 1973 (MARPOL 73/78), has ratified Annex VI-
regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships. 
Necessary implementing legislation has been passed by both the 
House and the Senate. Joe Accardo, Jr., Executive Director of 
the Ports Association of Louisiana suggested in his testimony 
to the Environment and Public Works Committee on February 14, 
2008 that ``if the ultimate goal of Congress is to achieve the 
more restrictive standards proposed in S. 1499, we recommend 
that this be achieved through amendments to Annex VI.'' The 
U.S. EPA has been a strong leader in proposing stricter 
emissions standards for oceangoing vessels under the MARPOL 
Treaty Annex VI regulations.
    In conclusion, S. 1499 would harm American shipping, from 
our ports to our vessels. If this solution is not going to be 
fixed locally, Congress should encourage adoption of the 
international action agreed to in MARPOL Annex VI. The 
stringent action and expedited compliance periods called for in 
this legislation will ensure greater harm to the American 
economy.
                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill 
as reported are shown as follows: Existing law proposed to be 
omitted is enclosed in [black brackets], new matter is printed 
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown 
in roman:
                              ----------                              


CLEAN AIR ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    Sec. 101. (a) The Congress finds--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                          REGULATION OF FUELS

    Sec. 211. (a) The Administrator may by regulation designate 
any fuel or fuel additive (including any fuel or fuel additive 
used exclusively in nonroad engines or nonroad vehicles) and, 
after such date or dates as may be prescribed by him, no 
manufacturer or processor of any such fuel or additive may 
sell, offer for sale, or introduce into commerce such fuel or 
additive unless the Administrator has registered such fuel or 
additive in accordance with subsection (b) of this section.
    (b)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (o) Renewable Fuel Program.--
          (1) Definitions.--In this section:
                  (A) Cellulosic biomass ethanol.--The term 
                ``cellulosic biomass ethanol'' means ethanol 
                derived from any lignocellulosic or 
                hemicellulosic matter that is available on a 
                renewable or recurring basis, including--
                          (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

      (p) Marine Vessel Fuel Sulfur--
          (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), not later 
        than December 15, 2008, the Administrator shall 
        promulgate regulations that, effective beginning on 
        December 31, 2010, require marine vessels described in 
        paragraph (2) to use fuel that contains not more than 
        1,000 parts per million of sulfur in the main and 
        auxiliary engines of the vessels.
          (2) Applicability.--The regulations promulgated 
        pursuant to paragraph (1) shall apply to all marine 
        vessels, including any vessel flagged in a country 
        other than the United States, at any time at which the 
        vessels are, on entering or leaving a port or offshore 
        terminal of the United States--
                  (A) within 200 miles of the west coast of the 
                continental United States; and
                  (B) within such distance of the east coast or 
                Gulf coast of the United States, or the 
                shoreline of the Great Lakes or St. Lawrence 
                Seaway, as the Administrator determines to be 
                appropriate for the purpose of protecting 
                public health and the environment.
          (3) Interim requirement--
                  (A) In general.--Notwithstanding the 
                requirement of paragraph (1), the Administrator 
                may promulgate regulations under that paragraph 
                that permit marine vessel fuel sulfur content 
                in excess of 1,000 parts per million if the 
                Administrator determines that compliance with 
                the requirement of paragraph (1) is not 
                technically feasible by December 31, 2010.
                  (B) Regulations.--If the Administrator makes 
                a determination described in subparagraph (A), 
                the Administrator shall promulgate regulations 
                that require marine vessels--
                          (i) beginning on December 31, 2010, 
                        to use fuel that contains--
                                  (I) the lowest quantity of 
                                sulfur that is technically 
                                feasible by that date; and
                                  (II) in no event a quantity 
                                of sulfur in excess of 2,000 
                                parts per million; and
                          (ii) to achieve compliance with the 
                        requirement of paragraph (1) on the 
                        earliest practicable date by which 
                        compliance is technically feasible.
          (4) Alternative compliance mechanism.--The 
        Administrator may provide for an alternative mechanism 
        of compliance under this subsection for a marine vessel 
        if the Administrator determines that--
                  (A) the vessel employs a control technology 
                that reduces emissions from the vessel of 
                sulfur oxides and particulate matter to at 
                least the same degree as the reduction that 
                would be achieved by the vessel through 
                compliance with the applicable fuel sulfur 
                content limitation under this subsection; and
                  (B) the emission reductions achieved as 
                described in subparagraph (A) are in addition 
                to any reductions required to achieve 
                compliance with an applicable engine emission 
                standard issued by the Administrator or the 
                head of another Federal agency.
          (5) No effect on other authority.--Nothing in this 
        subsection limits or otherwise affects any authority of 
        the Administrator to regulate fuels or fuel additives 
        for use in marine vessels or any other nonroad vehicle 
        or engine under this Act or any other provision of law.
  [(r)] (u) Fuel and Fuel Additive Importers and Importation.--
For the purposes of this section, the term ``manufacturer'' 
includes an importer and the term ``manufacture'' includes 
importation.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 213. NONROAD ENGINES AND VEHICLES.

  (a) Emissions Standards.--(1) The Administrator shall conduct 
a study of emissions from nonroad engines and nonroad vehicles 
(other than locomotives or engines used in locomotives) to 
determine if such emissions cause, or significantly contribute 
to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to 
endanger public health or welfare. Such study shall be 
completed within 12 months of the date of the enactment of the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
  (2) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) Safe Controls.--Effective with respect to new engines 
or vehicles to which standards under this section apply, no 
emission control device, system, or element of design shall be 
used in such a new nonroad engine or new nonroad vehicle for 
purposes of complying with such standards if such device, 
system, or element of design will cause or contribute to an 
unreasonable risk to public health, welfare, or safety in its 
operation or function. In determining whether an unreasonable 
risk exists, the Administrator shall consider factors including 
those described in section 202(a)(4)(B).
    (d) Advanced Marine Vessel Emission Controls.--
          (1) Standards for oceangoing vessels.--
                  (A) In general.--Not later than December 15, 
                2008, the Administrator shall promulgate, and 
                from time to time revise, regulations that 
                establish standards for emissions of oxides of 
                nitrogen, particulate matter, hydrocarbons, and 
                carbon monoxide from newly-manufactured and in-
                use main and auxiliary engines in oceangoing 
                marine vessels that enter or leave a port or 
                offshore terminal of the United States.
                  (B) Requirement.--The standards under 
                subparagraph (A) shall require, effective 
                beginning on January 1, 2012, that the engines 
                described in that subparagraph achieve the 
                greatest degree of emission reduction 
                achievable through the application of 
                technology that the Administrator determines, 
                in accordance with this paragraph, will be 
                available for the affected engines.
                  (C) Additional factors for consideration.--
                          (i) In general.--In promulgating a 
                        standard under this paragraph, the 
                        Administrator shall take into 
                        consideration--
                                  (I) whether the engine is 
                                newly-manufactured or in-use 
                                (and, if the engine is in-use, 
                                the age of the engine);
                                  (II) the cost of applying an 
                                emission reduction technology 
                                in a period of time sufficient 
                                to achieve compliance with the 
                                standard;
                                  (III) noise, energy, and 
                                safety factors associated with 
                                the application of the 
                                technology; and
                                  (IV) the feasibility, 
                                benefits, and costs of 
                                requiring--
                                          (aa) the maximum 
                                        level of control 
                                        required by regulations 
                                        applicable to on-road, 
                                        nonroad, and stationary 
                                        engines; and
                                          (bb) the maximum 
                                        level of control 
                                        achieved by sources 
                                        from which control 
                                        technologies may be 
                                        transferred, including 
                                        sources that use 
                                        advanced aftertreatment 
                                        technologies.
                          (ii) Determination.--
                                  (I) In general.--If the 
                                Administrator determines, after 
                                consideration of the factors 
                                described in clause (i), that a 
                                maximum level of control 
                                described in clause (i)(IV) 
                                will not be technically 
                                achievable by January 1, 2012, 
                                the Administrator shall 
                                promulgate standards under 
                                subparagraph (A) that require 
                                the maximum level of control 
                                that the Administrator 
                                determines will be technically 
                                achievable by that date.
                                  (II) Additional standards.--
                                If the Administrator makes a 
                                determination under subclause 
                                (I), the Administrator shall 
                                promulgate additional standards 
                                under subparagraph (A) that 
                                require, effective beginning on 
                                January 1, 2016--
                                          (aa) the maximum 
                                        level of control 
                                        described in clause 
                                        (i)(IV); or
                                          (bb) if the 
                                        Administrator 
                                        determines, after 
                                        consideration of the 
                                        factors described in 
                                        clause (i), that a 
                                        maximum level of 
                                        control described in 
                                        subclause (IV) of that 
                                        clause is not 
                                        technically achievable 
                                        by January 1, 2016, the 
                                        maximum level of 
                                        control that the 
                                        Administrator 
                                        determines will be 
                                        technically achievable 
                                        by that date.
          (2) Applicability.--Standards applicable to marine 
        engines and marine vessels promulgated under this 
        section shall be applicable to vessels that enter or 
        leave a port or offshore terminal of the United States, 
        including vessels flagged in any country other than the 
        United States.
          (3) Enforcement.--
                  (A) In general.--The standards established 
                under this subsection shall be enforced in 
                accordance with subsection (f).
                  (B) Enforcement against certain persons.--At 
                the discretion of the Administrator, any 
                standard established under this subsection 
                relating to in-use engines may be enforced 
                against--
                          (i) the owner or operator of an in-
                        use engine;
                          (ii) any person that rebuilds or 
                        maintains an in-use engine; or
                          (iii) such other person as the 
                        Administrator determines to be 
                        appropriate.
          (4) No effect on other authority.--Nothing in this 
        subsection limits or otherwise affects any authority of 
        the Administrator to regulate emissions of engines in 
        marine vessels under this Act or any other provision of 
        law.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

      [(d)] (f) Enforcement.--The standards under this section 
shall be subject to sections 206, 207, 208, and 209, with such 
modifications of the applicable regulations implementing such 
sections as the Administrator deems appropriate, and shall be 
enforced in the same manner as standards prescribed under 
section 202. The Administrator shall revise or promulgate 
regulations as may be necessary to determine compliance with, 
and enforce, standards in effect under this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                  
