Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
1
40
CFR
Part
87
[
AMS­
FRL­____­_]

Control
of
Air
Pollution
From
Aircraft
and
Aircraft
Engines;
Emission
Standards
and
Test
Procedures
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
Notice
of
Proposed
Rulemaking
(
NPRM).

SUMMARY:
In
this
action,
we
are
proposing
to
amend
the
existing
United
States
regulations
governing
the
exhaust
emissions
from
new
commercial
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines.
Under
the
authority
of
section
231
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA),
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
is
proposing
new
emission
standards
for
oxides
of
nitrogen
(
NOx)
for
newly
certified
commercial
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines
with
rated
thrust
greater
than
26.7
kilonewtons
(
kN).

This
action
proposes
to
adopt
standards
equivalent
to
the
latest
(
effective
in
2004)
NOx
standards
of
the
United
Nations
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
and
thereby
bring
the
United
States
emission
standards
into
alignment
with
the
internationally
adopted
standards.
In
addition,
today's
action
also
would
amend
the
test
procedures
for
gaseous
exhaust
emissions
to
correspond
to
recent
amendments
to
the
ICAO
test
procedures
for
these
emissions.

After
December
31,
2003,
the
proposed
NOx
standards
would
apply
to
newly
certified
gas
turbine
engines
 
those
engines
designed
and
certified
after
the
effective
date
of
the
proposed
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
2
regulations
(
for
purposes
of
this
notice,
the
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
means
the
date
of
type
certification).
Since
the
proposed
NOx
standards
would
apply
to
only
newly
certified
gas
turbine
engines,
newly
manufactured
engines
(
those
engines
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
proposed
regulations)
would
not
have
to
meet
these
standards.

Moreover,
all
engines
currently
being
built
would
not
have
to
comply
with
the
NOx
emission
standards
that
EPA
is
adopting
today.

Today's
proposed
amendments
to
the
emission
test
procedures
are
those
recommended
by
ICAO
and
are
widely
used
by
the
aircraft
engine
industry.
Thus,
today's
action
would
establish
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
standards,
requirements,
and
test
procedures.
Since
aircraft
and
aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
there
is
some
significant
commercial
benefit
to
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
emission
standards
and
control
program
requirements
(
i.
e.,
easier
to
qualify
products
for
international
markets
since
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration
(
FAA)
can
certify
engines
for
ICAO
compliance).
In
addition,
today's
action
ensures
that
domestic
commercial
aircraft
would
meet
the
current
international
standards,
and
thus,
the
public
can
be
assured
they
are
receiving
the
air
quality
benefits
of
the
international
standards.

DATES:
Comments:
EPA
requests
comments
on
the
proposed
rulemaking
by
[
insert
DATE
30
days
after
DATE
of
publication
of
this
proposed
rulemaking].
More
information
about
commenting
on
this
action
may
be
found
under
Public
Participation
in
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section
and
section
I.
C.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
3
Hearing:
We
will
hold
a
public
hearing
on
[
DATE]
at
the
________
Hotel,
_________
Street,

Washington,
DC
20460,
Telephone:
(
202)
XXX­
XXXX.
The
hearing
will
start
at
10:
00
a.
m.

local
time
and
continue
until
everyone
has
had
a
chance
to
speak.
If
you
want
to
testify
at
a
hearing,
notify
the
contact
person
listed
below
at
least
ten
days
before
the
hearing.
See
Section
VIII
for
more
information
about
public
hearings.

ADDRESSES:
Comments
may
be
submitted
electronically,
by
mail,
by
facsimile,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
Follow
the
detailed
instructions
as
provided
in
section
I.
C.
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Mr.
Bryan
Manning,
U.
S.
EPA,

Office
of
Transportation
and
Air
Quality,
Assessment
and
Standards
Division,
2000
Traverwood,

Ann
Arbor,
MI
48105.
Telephone
(
734)
214­
4832;
Fax:
(
734)
214­
4816,
E­
mail:

manning.
bryan@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Regulated
entities
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
4
Entities
potentially
regulated
by
this
action
are
those
that
manufacture
and
sell
commercial
aircraft
engines
and
aircraft
in
the
United
States,
and
the
owners/
operators
of
such
aircraft
(
and
accompanying
engines)
in
the
United
States.
Regulated
categories
include:

Category
NAICSa
Codes
SIC
Codesb
Examples
of
potentially
affected
entities
Industry
..........
336412
3724
Manufacturers
of
new
aircraft
engines
Industry
..........
336411
3721
Manufacturers
of
new
aircraft
Industry
..........
481
4512
Scheduled
air
carriers,
passenger
and
freight
a
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)

b
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
system
code
This
table
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
for
readers
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
regulated
by
this
action.
This
table
lists
the
types
of
entities
that
EPA
is
now
aware
could
potentially
be
regulated
by
this
action.
Other
types
of
entities
not
listed
in
the
table
could
also
be
regulated.
To
determine
whether
your
activities
are
regulated
by
this
action,
you
should
carefully
examine
the
applicability
criteria
in
40
CFR
87.20.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
in
the
preceding
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
5
B.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
Of
This
Document
and
Other
Related
Information
?

1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR
2002­
0030.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Air
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
(
EPA/
DC)
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
The
EPA
Docket
Center
Public
Reading
Room
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.

The
telephone
number
for
the
Reading
Room
and
the
Air
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
1742.
You
may
be
charged
a
reasonable
fee
for
photocopying
docket
materials,
as
provided
in
40
CFR
part
2.

2.
Electronic
Access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
"
Federal
Register"
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/.

An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EPA
Dockets.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number.

Certain
types
of
information
will
not
be
placed
in
the
EPA
Dockets.
Information
claimed
as
confidential
business
information
(
CBI)
and
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute,
which
is
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
EPA's
policy
is
that
copyrighted
material
will
not
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
but
will
be
available
only
in
printed,
paper
form
in
the
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
6
official
public
docket.
To
the
extent
feasible,
publicly
available
docket
materials
will
be
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
When
a
document
is
selected
from
the
index
list
in
EPA
Dockets,
the
system
will
identify
whether
the
document
is
available
for
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
section
I.
B.
1.
EPA
intends
to
work
towards
providing
electronic
access
to
all
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.

For
public
commenters,
it
is
important
to
note
that
EPA's
policy
is
that
public
comments,

whether
submitted
electronically
or
in
paper,
will
be
made
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
as
EPA
receives
them
and
without
change,
unless
the
comment
contains
copyrighted
material,
CBI,
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
When
EPA
identifies
a
comment
containing
copyrighted
material,
EPA
will
provide
a
reference
to
that
material
in
the
version
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
The
entire
printed
comment,
including
the
copyrighted
material,
will
be
available
in
the
public
docket.

Public
comments
submitted
on
computer
disks
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
docket
will
be
transferred
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Public
comments
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
Docket
will
be
scanned
and
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Where
practical,
physical
objects
will
be
photographed,
and
the
photograph
will
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
along
with
a
brief
description
written
by
the
docket
staff.

For
additional
information
about
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
visit
EPA
Dockets
online
or
see
67
FR
38102,
May
31,
2002.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
7
C.
How
and
To
Whom
Do
I
Submit
Comments?

You
may
submit
comments
electronically,
by
mail,
by
facsimile,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
identify
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
comment.
Please
ensure
that
your
comments
are
submitted
within
the
specified
comment
period.
Comments
received
after
the
close
of
the
comment
period
will
be
marked
"
late."
EPA
is
not
required
to
consider
these
late
comments.

1.
Electronically.
If
you
submit
an
electronic
comment
as
prescribed
below,
EPA
recommends
that
you
include
your
name,
mailing
address,
and
an
e­
mail
address
or
other
contact
information
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
Also
include
this
contact
information
on
the
outside
of
any
disk
or
CD
ROM
you
submit,
and
in
any
cover
letter
accompanying
the
disk
or
CD
ROM.

This
ensures
that
you
can
be
identified
as
the
submitter
of
the
comment
and
allows
EPA
to
contact
you
in
case
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
or
needs
further
information
on
the
substance
of
your
comment.
EPA's
policy
is
that
EPA
will
not
edit
your
comment,
and
any
identifying
or
contact
information
provided
in
the
body
of
a
comment
will
be
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
EPA
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.

i.
EPA
Dockets.
Your
use
of
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
to
submit
comments
to
EPA
electronically
is
EPA's
preferred
method
for
receiving
comments.
Go
directly
to
EPA
Dockets
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
8
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket,
and
follow
the
online
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
To
access
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
from
the
EPA
Internet
Home
Page,
select
"
Information
Sources,"
"
Dockets,"
and
"
EPA
Dockets."
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
and
then
key
in
Docket
ID
No.
OAR
2002­
0030.
The
system
is
an
"
anonymous
access"
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
know
your
identity,
e­
mail
address,
or
other
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.

ii.
E­
mail.
Comments
may
be
sent
by
electronic
mail
(
e­
mail)
to
aircraft@
epa.
gov,

Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OAR
2002­
0030.
In
contrast
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
is
not
an
"
anonymous
access"
system.
If
you
send
an
e­
mail
comment
directly
to
the
Docket
without
going
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
automatically
captures
your
e­
mail
address.
E­
mail
addresses
that
are
automatically
captured
by
EPA's
e­
mail
system
are
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.

iii.
Disk
or
CD
ROM.
You
may
submit
comments
on
a
disk
or
CD
ROM
that
you
mail
to
the
mailing
address
identified
in
section
I.
C.
2.
These
electronic
submissions
will
be
accepted
in
WordPerfect
or
ASCII
file
format.
Avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.

2.
By
Mail.
Send
your
comments
to:
Air
Docket,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,

Mailcode:
6102T,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC,
20460,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OAR
2002­
0030.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
9
3.
By
Hand
Delivery
or
Courier.
Deliver
your
comments
to:
EPA
Docket
Center,
U.
S.

Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Room
B108,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.

20004,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OAR
2002­
0030.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
Docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
as
identified
in
section
I.
B.
1.

4.
By
Facsimile.
Fax
your
comments
to:
(
202)
566­
1741,
Attention
Docket
ID.
No.

OAR
2002­
0030.

D.
How
Should
I
Submit
CBI
To
the
Agency?

Do
not
submit
information
that
you
consider
to
be
CBI
electronically
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
or
by
e­
mail.
Send
or
deliver
information
identified
as
CBI
only
to
the
contact
person
listed
in
the
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.
You
may
claim
information
that
you
submit
to
EPA
as
CBI
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI
(
if
you
submit
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
as
CBI
and
then
identify
electronically
within
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
the
specific
information
that
is
CBI).

Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
Part
2.

In
addition
to
one
complete
version
of
the
comment
that
includes
any
information
claimed
as
CBI,
a
copy
of
the
comment
that
does
not
contain
the
information
claimed
as
CBI
must
be
submitted
for
inclusion
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
you
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
10
submit
the
copy
that
does
not
contain
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
clearly
that
it
does
not
contain
CBI.
Information
not
marked
as
CBI
will
be
included
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
without
prior
notice.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
CBI
or
the
procedures
for
claiming
CBI,
please
consult
the
person
identified
in
the
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.

E.
What
Should
I
Consider
as
I
Prepare
My
Comments
for
EPA?

You
may
find
the
following
suggestions
helpful
for
preparing
your
comments:

1.
Explain
your
views
as
clearly
as
possible.

2.
Describe
any
assumptions
that
you
used.

3.
Provide
any
technical
information
and/
or
data
you
used
that
support
your
views.

4.
If
you
estimate
potential
burden
or
costs,
explain
how
you
arrived
at
your
estimate.

5.
Provide
specific
examples
to
illustrate
your
concerns.

6.
Offer
alternatives.

7.
Make
sure
to
submit
your
comments
by
the
comment
period
deadline
identified.

8.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
identify
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
response.
It
would
also
be
helpful
if
you
provided
the
name,
date,
and
Federal
Register
citation
related
to
your
comments.

II.
Introduction
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
11
A.
Brief
History
of
EPA's
Regulation
of
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions
Section
231(
a)(
2)(
A)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
directs
the
EPA
Administrator
to
"
issue
proposed
emission
standards
applicablse
to
the
emission
of
any
air
pollutant
from
any
class
or
classes
of
aircraft
or
aircraft
engines
which
in
his
judgment
causes,
or
contributes
to,
air
pollution
which
may
reasonably
be
anticipated
to
endanger
public
health
or
welfare''
(
42
U.
S.
C.

7571(
a)(
2)(
A)).
Under
this
authority
EPA
has
conducted
several
rulemakings
since
1973
establishing
emission
standards
and
related
requirements
for
several
classes
(
commercial
and
general
aviation
engines)
of
aircraft
and
aircraft
engines.
Most
recently,
in
1997
EPA
promulgated
NOx
emission
standards
for
newly
manufactured
gas
turbine
engines
(
those
engines
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations
or
already
certified
engines)
and
for
newly
certified
gas
turbine
engines
(
those
engines
designed
and
certified
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations1).
2
In
addition,
EPA
promulgated
a
carbon
monoxide
(
CO)
emission
standard
for
newly
manufactured
gas
turbine
engines
in
this
same
1997
rulemaking.
At
the
time,
the
1997
rulemaking
established
consistency
between
the
U.
S.
and
international
standards.
(
See
40
CFR
part
87
for
a
description
of
EPA's
aircraft
engine
emission
control
requirements
and
14
CFR
part
1Throughout
this
notice,
the
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
means
the
date
of
type
certification.

2U.
S.
EPA,
"
Control
of
Air
Pollution
from
Aircraft
and
Aircraft
Engines;
Emission
Standards
and
Test
Procedures;"
Final
Rule,
62
FR
25356,
May
8,
1997.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
12
34
for
the
Secretary
of
Transportation's
regulations
for
ensuring
compliance
with
these
standards
in
accordance
with
section
232
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.)

B.
Interaction
With
the
International
Community
Since
publication
of
the
initial
standards
in
1973,
EPA,
together
with
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration
(
FAA),
has
worked
with
the
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO)
on
the
development
of
international
aircraft
engine
emission
standards.
ICAO
was
established
in
1944
by
the
United
Nations
(
by
the
Convention
on
International
Civil
Aviation,

the
"
Chicago
Convention")
"...
in
order
that
international
civil
aviation
may
be
developed
in
a
safe
and
orderly
manner
and
that
international
air
transport
services
may
be
established
on
the
basis
of
equality
of
opportunity
and
operated
soundly
and
economically."
3
ICAO's
responsibilities
include
developing
aircraft
technical
and
operating
standards,
recommending
practices,
and
generally
fostering
the
growth
of
international
civil
aviation.

In
1972
at
the
United
Nations
Conference
on
the
Human
Environment,
ICAO's
position
on
the
human
environment
was
developed
to
be
the
following:
"[
i]
n
fulfilling
this
role
ICAO
is
conscious
of
the
adverse
environmental
impact
that
may
be
related
to
aircraft
activity
and
its
responsibility
and
that
of
its
member
States
to
achieve
maximum
compatibility
between
the
safe
and
orderly
development
of
civil
aviation
and
the
quality
of
the
human
environment."
Also,
in
3ICAO,
"
Convention
on
International
Civil
Aviation,"
Sixth
Edition,
Document
7300/
6,

1980.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
13
1972
ICAO
established
the
position
to
continue
"*
*
*
with
the
assistance
and
cooperation
of
other
bodies
of
the
Organization
and
other
international
organizations
*
*
*
the
work
related
to
the
development
of
Standards,
Recommended
Practices
and
Procedures
and/
or
guidance
material
dealing
with
the
quality
of
the
human
environment
*
*
*."
4
The
United
States
is
one
of
188
participating
member
States
of
ICAO.
5
Under
the
basic
ICAO
treaty
established
in
1944
(
the
Chicago
Convention),
a
participating
nation
which
elects
not
to
adopt
the
ICAO
standards
must
provide
a
written
explanation
to
ICAO
describing
why
a
given
standard
is
impractical
to
comply
with
or
not
in
their
national
interest.
6
ICAO
has
no
4International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Foreword
of
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices,
Environmental
Protection,

Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int)
or
found
in
Docket
OAR
2002­
0030,
Document
__­_­__.

5As
of
June
20,
2002
there
were
188
Contracting
States
according
to
the
ICAO
website
located
at
http://
www.
icao.
int.

6Text
of
Article
38
of
Chicago
Convention:

Any
State
which
finds
it
impracticable
to
comply
in
all
respects
with
any
such
international
standard
or
procedure,
or
to
bring
its
own
regulations
or
practices
into
full
accord
with
any
international
standard
or
procedure
after
amendment
of
the
latter,
or
which
deems
it
necessary
to
adopt
regulations
or
practices
differing
in
any
particular
respect
from
those
established
by
an
international
standard,
shall
give
immediate
notification
to
the
International
Civil
Aviation
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
14
punitive
powers
for
states
that
elect
not
to
adopt
ICAO
standards.
ICAO
standards
require
States
to
provide
written
notification
and
failure
to
provide
such
notification
could
have
negative
consequences
as
detailed
below.

If
a
Contracting
State
files
a
written
notification
indicating
that
it
does
not
meet
ICAO
standards,
other
Contracting
States
are
absolved
of
their
obligations
to
"
recognize
as
valid"
the
certificate
of
airworthiness
issued
by
that
Contracting
States,
since
that
certificate
will
not
have
been
issued
under
standards
"
equal
to
or
above"
ICAO
standards.
In
other
words,
other
Contracting
States
do
not
have
to
allow
aircraft
belonging
to
that
Contracting
State
to
travel
through
their
airspace.
7
Further,
if
it
fails
to
file
a
written
notification,
it
will
be
in
default
of
its
Organization
of
the
differences
between
its
own
practice
and
that
established
by
the
international
standard
.
.
.
.
In
any
such
case,
the
Council
shall
make
immediate
notification
to
all
other
states
of
the
difference
which
exists
between
one
or
more
features
of
an
international
standard
and
the
corresponding
national
practice
of
that
State.

7Text
of
Article
33
of
Chicago
Convention:

Certificates
of
airworthiness
and
certificates
of
competency
and
licenses
issued
or
rendered
valid
by
the
contracting
State
in
which
the
aircraft
is
registered,
shall
be
recognized
as
valid
by
the
other
contracting
States,
provided
that
the
requirements
under
which
such
certificates
or
licenses
were
issued
or
rendered
valid
are
equal
to
or
above
the
minimum
standards
which
may
be
established
from
time
to
time
pursuant
to
this
Convention.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
15
obligations,
and
risks
mandatory
exclusion
of
its
aircraft
from
the
airspace
of
other
Contracting
States
and
the
loss
of
its
voting
power
in
the
Assembly
and
Council.
8
The
ICAO
Council's
Committee
on
Aviation
Environmental
Protection
(
CAEP)

undertakes
ICAO's
technical
work
in
the
environmental
field.
The
CAEP
is
responsible
for
evaluating,
researching,
discussing
and
recommending
measures
to
the
ICAO
Council
that
address
the
environmental
impact
of
international
civil
aviation.
CAEP
is
composed
of
various
Study
Groups,
Work
Groups,
Committees
and
other
contributing
memberships
that
include
atmospheric,
economic,
aviation,
environmental,
and
other
professionals
committed
to
ICAO's
previously
stated
position
regarding
aviation
and
the
environment.
At
CAEP
meetings,
the
United
States
is
represented
by
the
FAA,
which
plays
an
active
role
at
these
meetings
(
see
section
V
for
further
discussion
of
FAA's
role).
EPA
is
a
principal
participant
in
the
development
of
U.
S.
policy
in
ICAO/
CAEP
and
other
international
venues.
(
EPA
assists
and
technically
advises
FAA
on
aviation
emissions
matters.)
If
the
ICAO
Council
adopts
a
CAEP
proposal
to
adopt
a
new
environmental
standard,
it
then
becomes
part
of
the
ICAO
standards
and
recommended
practices
(
Annex
16
to
the
Chicago
Convention).
9
8Articles
87
and
88
of
Chicago
Convention.

9ICAO,
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices,
Environmental
Protection,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int)
or
found
in
Docket
OAR
2002­

0030,
Document
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
16
On
June
30,
1981,
the
ICAO
Council
adopted
its
first
international
standards
and
recommended
practices
covering
aircraft
engine
emissions.
10
These
standards
limit
aircraft
engine
emissions
of
NOx,
CO,
and
hydrocarbons
(
HC),
in
relation
to
other
engine
performance
parameters,
and
are
commonly
known
as
stringency
standards.
On
March
24,
1993,
the
ICAO
Council
approved
a
proposal
adopted
at
the
second
meeting
of
the
CAEP
(
CAEP/
2)
to
tighten
the
original
NOx
standard
by
20
percent
and
amend
the
test
procedures.
At
the
next
CAEP
meeting
(
CAEP/
3)
in
December
1995,
the
CAEP
recommended
a
further
tightening
of
16
percent
and
additional
test
procedure
amendments,
but
on
March
20,
1997
the
ICAO
Council
rejected
this
stringency
proposal
and
approved
only
the
test
procedure
amendments.
At
its
next
meeting
(
CAEP/
4)
in
April
1998,
the
CAEP
adopted
a
similar
16
percent
NOx
reduction
proposal,
which
the
ICAO
Council
approved
on
February
26,
1999.11
The
CAEP/
4
16
percent
10ICAO,
Foreword
of
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices,
Environmental
Protection,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int)
or
found
in
Docket
OAR
2002­
0030,
Document
__­_­__.

11
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993,
Amendment
4
effective
on
July
19,
1999.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
17
NOx
reduction
standard
applies
to
new
engine
designs
certified
after
December
31,
2003
(
applies
only
to
newly
certified
engines).
12
As
discussed
earlier,
in
1997
EPA
amended
its
regulations
to
adopt
the
1981
ICAO
NOx
and
CO
emission
standards,
as
well
as
the
NOx
emission
standards
and
test
procedures
revised
by
ICAO
in
1993.
As
discussed
above,
the
U.
S.
has
an
obligation
under
the
Convention
on
International
Civil
Aviation
to
notify
ICAO
regarding
differences
between
U.
S.
standards
and
ICAO
standards,
and
to
provide
notification
on
the
date
by
which
the
program
requirements
will
be
consistent.
In
response
to
the
recent
actions
by
ICAO
and
for
the
reasons
discussed
below,

EPA
proposes
to
adopt
standards
equivalent
to
ICAO's
1999
amendment
to
the
NOx
emission
standard,
the
test
procedure
changes
approved
by
ICAO
in
1997,
and
other
technical
amendments
to
further
align
EPA
and
ICAO
requirements.

C.
EPA's
Responsibilities
Under
the
Clean
Air
Act
As
discussed
earlier,
section
231
of
the
CAA
directs
EPA,
from
time
to
time,
to
propose
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
for
any
air
pollutant
that
could
reasonably
endanger
public
health
and
welfare.
In
addition,
EPA
is
required
to
ensure
such
standards'
effective
dates
permit
the
development
of
necessary
technology,
giving
appropriate
consideration
to
compliance
cost.

Also,
EPA
must
consult
with
the
FAA
concerning
aircraft
safety
before
proposing
or
12These
NOx
standards
will
be
interchangeably
be
referred
to
as
the
1998
CAEP/
4
standards
and
the
1999
ICAO
standards
throughout
this
Notice.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
18
promulgating
emission
standards.
(
See
section
V
of
today's
proposal
for
further
discussion
of
EPA's
coordination
with
FAA
and
FAA's
responsibilities
under
the
CAA.)

In
addition,
section
233
of
the
CAA
vests
authority
to
implement
emission
standards
for
aircraft
engines
only
in
EPA.
13
States
are
preempted
from
taking
independent
action.
Thus,

while
many
states
are
implementing
control
programs
to
reduce
mobile
source
emissions,
EPA
has
the
authority
to
establish
an
emission
control
program
for
aircraft
engines.

III.
Environmental
Need
for
Control
As
mentioned
above,
section
231(
a)(
2)(
A)
of
the
CAA
authorizes
the
EPA
Administrator
to,
from
time
to
time,
revisit
emission
standards
for
aircraft
engine
emissions
"*
*
*
which
in
his
judgment
causes,
or
contributes
to
air
pollution
which
may
*
*
*
endanger
public
health
or
welfare."
In
judging
the
need
for
the
NOx
standard
promulgated
in
today's
action,
the
Administrator
has
determined
(
1)
that
the
public
health
and
welfare
is
endangered
in
several
air
quality
regions
by
violation
of
the
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
(
NAAQS)
for
ozone
(
NOx
contributes
to
the
formation
of
ozone);
and
(
2)
that
airports
and
aircraft
are
now
or
are
13CAA
section
233
entitled
"
State
Standards
and
Controls''
states
that
"
No
State
or
political
subdivision
thereof
may
adopt
or
attempt
to
enforce
any
standard
respecting
emissions
of
any
air
pollutant
from
any
aircraft
or
engine
thereof
unless
such
standard
is
identical
to
a
standard
applicable
to
such
aircraft
under
this
part.''
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
19
projected
to
be,
increasing
sources
of
emissions
of
NOx
in
some
of
the
air
quality
control
regions
in
which
the
NAAQS
are
being
violated.

Nationwide,
Our
nationwide
inventory
developed
for
the
recent
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines
and
Fuel
Control
proposed
rule
indicates
that
aircraft
account
for
over
about
1
percent
of
the
NOx
emissions
from
mobile
sources.
14
Commercial
aircraft
emissions
contribute
about
60
from
74
to
14U.
S.
EPA,
"
Draft
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines",
EPA420­
R­
03­
008,
April
2003,
at
Table
3.2­
3.
"
National
Air
Quality
and
Emission
Trends
Report,"
1999,
EPA,
2001,
at
Table
A­
4.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oar/
aqtrnd99/.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
nonroad/.

A
copy
of
this
table
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
AOAR­
20012­
280030,

Document
No.
__­_­__.
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Average
Annual
Emissions,
All
Criteria
Pollutants
Years
Including
1980,
1985,
1989­
2001,"
February
2003.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttnchie1/
trends/.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.

OAR­
2002­
30.
Documentation
for
these
estimates
can
be
accessed
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
chief/
net/
index.
html#
1999:
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Documentation
for
Aircraft,

Commercial
Marine
Vessel,
Locomotive,
and
Other
Nonroad
Components
of
the
National
Emissions
Inventory,
Volume
I
­
Methodology,"
November
11,
2002.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
30.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
20
99
percent
of
the
NOx
aircraft
emissions
in
the
U.
S.
inventories.
15
(
Aircraft
emissions
sources
include
aircraft
types
used
for
public,
private,
and
military
purposes
as
follows:
commercial
aircraft,
air
taxis,
general
aviation,
and
military
aircraft.
16
The
current
nationwide
aircraft
emission
estimates
have
limitations
for
military
aircraft
emissions.
Therefore,
the
estimated
15U.
S.
EPA,
"
Mass
Emission
Data
Files
Used
for
Nonroad
CI
NPRM
Air
Quality
Modeling,"
April
2003.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­
2001­
28.
E.
H.

Pechan
and
Associates,
Inc.,
  
National
Annual
Aircraft
Emissions
by
Subcategory
from
Trends
1995
Report''
(
National
Air
Pollutant
Emission
Trends
1995­­
EPA),
Facsimile
from
Maureen
Mullen
to
Bryan
Manning
of
the
U.
S.
EPA,
August
16,
1996.

16Commercial
aircraft
include
those
aircraft
used
for
scheduled
service
transporting
passengers,
freight,
or
both.
Air
taxis
also
fly
scheduled
service
carrying
passengers,
freight
or
both,
but
usually
are
smaller
aircraft
and
operate
on
a
more
limited
basis
than
commercial
carriers.
General
aviation
includes
most
other
aircraft
used
for
recreational
flying
and
personal
transportation.
Aircraft
that
support
business
travel,
usually
on
an
unscheduled
basis,
are
included
in
the
category
of
general
aviation.
Military
aircraft
cover
a
wide
range
of
sizes,
uses,

and
operating
missions.
While
they
are
often
similar
to
civil
aircraft,
they
are
handled
separately
because
they
typically
operate
exclusively
out
of
military
bases
and
frequently
have
distinctive
flight
profiles.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
21
range
of
commercial
aircraft's
emissions
contribution
to
nationwide
aircraft
NOx
described
above
is
reflective
of
earlier
and
current
estimates
for
military
aircraft
emissions).
17
In
addition,
cCommercial
aircraft
emissions
are
projected
to
be
a
fast
growing
segment
of
the
transportation
sector's
emission
inventory.
This
growth
in
commercial
aircraft
emissions
is
expected
to
occurring
at
a
time
when
other
significant
mobile
and
stationary
sources
are
drastically
reducing
emissions,
thereby
accentuating
the
growth
in
aircraft
emissions.

Nationally,
aircraft
NOx
emissions
are
expected
to
increase
by
approximately
40
percent
from
1996
to
2020
(
commercial
aircraft
would
account
for
about
70
percent
of
aircraft
NOx
emissions
in
202018),
and
aircraft
would
be
projected
to
emit
over
4
percent
of
the
total
U.
S.
mobile
source
NOx
by
2020.19
For
instance,
Ffrom
a
local/
regional
perspective
the
1999
EPA
study,

Evaluation
of
Air
Pollutant
Emissions
from
Subsonic
Commercial
Jet
Aircraft,
reported
that
from
1990
to
2010
increases
in
commercial
aircraft
NOx
emissions
for
the
ten
cities
studied
(
19
17U.
S.
EPA,
Memorandum
to
the
Docket,
.....

18Ibid.

19"
National
Air
Pollutant
Emission
Trends,"
1900­
1996,
EPA,
1997,
at
Table
B­
2.
A
copy
of
this
table
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­

__.
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Draft
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines",
EPA420­
R­
03­
008,
April
2003,
at
Table
3.2­
3.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
nonroad/.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­

2001­
28,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
22
airport
facilities
with
significant
commercial
jet
aircraft
activity
were
identified
within
these
selected
cities)
are
expected
to
range
from
50
to
110
percent.
20
As
an
average
for
the
ten
cities,

commercial
aircraft's
contribution
to
regional
mobile
source
NOx
was
anticipated
to
increase
from
about
2
percent
in
1990
to
about
5
percent
in
2010.
In
addition,
the
study
showed
that
in
2010
commercial
aircraft
are
projected
to
contribute
as
much
as
10
percent
of
total
regional
mobile
source
NOx
emissions
in
at
least
two
of
the
cities
studied.
21
(
The
above
national
and
local/
regional
projections
were
made
prior
to
the
tragic
events
of
September
11,
2001,
and
the
subsequent
economic
downturn.
A
January
2003
report
by
the
Department
of
Transportation
indicated
that
the
combination
of
the
September
11,
2001
terrorist
attacks
and
a
cut­
back
in
business
travel
had
a
significant
and
perhaps
long­
lasting
effect
on
air
20This
study
document
(
EPA420­
R­
99­
013,
April
1999)
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
otaq/
aviation.
htm.
It
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
__­_­__.

21Based
on
the
one­
hour
ozone
standard,
nine
of
the
ten
metropolitan
areas
are
currently
not
in
attainment
of
NAAQS
for
ozone
;
the
tenth
city
has
attained
the
ozone
standard
and
is
considered
an
ozone
"
maintenance"
area.
See
section
III.
A.
1.
of
this
proposal
for
further
discussion
on
the
ozone
NAAQs.
Also,
fFor
more
detailed
information
on
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard,
see
the
following
EPA
website:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
airlinks/
ozpminfo.
html.
EPA
has
not
yet
designated
areas
for
the
8­
hour
standard.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
23
traffic
demand.
22
However,
the
FAA
expects
the
demand
for
air
travel
to
recover,
and
then
continue
a
long­
term
trend
of
annual
growth
in
the
United
States.
23
Recently,
FAA
reported
that
flights
of
commercial
air
carriers
will
increase
by
18
percent
from
2002
to
2010
and
45
percent
from
2002
to
2020.24
For
a
comparison
of
an
earlier
(
pre­
9/
11)
FAA
activity
forecast
to
a
recent
(
post­
9/
11)
forecast,
see
the
below
table.)

22U.
S.
Department
of
Transportation,
Office
of
Inspector
General,
"
Airline
Industry
Metrics,"
CC­
2203­
007,
January
7,
2003.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.

OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

23U.
S.
General
Accounting
Office,
"
Aviation
and
the
Environment:
Strategic
Framework
Needed
to
Address
Challenges
Posed
by
Aircraft
Emissions,"
GAO­
03­
252,
February
2003.

This
document
is
available
at
www.
gao.
gov/
cgi­
bin/
getrpt?
GAO­
03­
252,
and
it
can
also
be
found
in
the
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

24The
flight
forecast
data
is
based
on
FAA's
Terminal
Area
Forecast
System
(
TAFS).

TAFs
is
the
official
forecast
of
aviation
activity
at
FAA
facilities.
This
includes
FAA­
towered
airports,
federally­
contracted
towered
airports,
nonfederal
towered
airports,
and
many
nontowered
airports.
For
detailed
information
on
TAFS
and
the
air
carrier
activity
forecasts
see
the
following
FAA
website:
http://
www.
apo.
data.
faa.
gov/
faatafall.
HTM.
As
of
May
1,
2003,
the
aviation
forecasts
contained
in
TAFS
for
Fiscal
Years
2002­
2020
included
the
impact
of
the
terrorists'
attacks
of
September
11,
2001
and
the
recent
economic
downturn.
However,
these
projections
did
not
fully
reflect
the
ongoing
structural
changes
occurring
within
the
aviation
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
24
FAA
Terminal
Area
Forecast
Summary
Report
of
Nationwide
Air
Carrier
Operations25
Year
Air
Carrier
Operations
12/
14/
00
Forecast
(
pre­
9/
11)
Percent
Change
12/
14/
00
Forecast
between
years
listed
Air
Carrier
Operations
5/
1/
03
Forecast
(
post­
9/
11)
Percent
Change
5/
1/
03
Forecast
between
years
listed
1999
15,127,419
14,776,055
2000
15,476,135
2.3%
15,265,682
3.3%

2001
15,819,505
2.2%
14,807,303
­
3.0%

2002a
16,210,777
2.5%
13,255,837
­
10%

2005
17,455,705
7.6%
13,918,058
5.0%

2010
19,664,128
14%
15,608,349
13%

2015
22,004,067
12%
17,372,200
11%

2020
N/
Ab
­­
19,249,778
11%

industry.
A
copy
of
the
May
1,
2003
forecast
summary
report
for
air
carrier
activity
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030
Document
No.
__­_­__.

25A
copy
of
FAA's
12/
14/
00
forecast
summary
report
(
from
TAFS)
for
air
carrier
activity
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
25
aThe
change
in
operations
from
2000
to
2002
was
+
4.7%
for
the
12/
14/
00
forecast,
and
it
was
­
13%
for
the
5/
1/
03
forecast.

bN/
A
=
Not
available
Air
pollutants
resulting
from
airport
operations
are
emitted
from
several
types
of
sources:

aircraft
main
engines
and
auxiliary
power
units
(
APUs);
ground
support
equipment
(
GSE)
,

which
include
vehicles
such
as
aircraft
tugs,
baggage
tugs,
fuel
trucks,
maintenance
vehicles,

and
other
miscellaneous
vehicles
used
to
support
aircraft
operations;
ground
access
vehicles
(
GAV),
which
include
vehicles
from
off­
site
used
by
passengers,
employees,
freight
operators,

and
other
persons
utilizing
an
airport.
EPA's
previous
estimates
show
aircraft
engines
comprise
approximately
45
percent
of
total
air
pollutant
emissions
from
airport
operations;
GAV
account
for
another
45
percent,
and
APUs
and
GSE
combined
make
up
the
remaining
10
percent.
26
Since
26The
California
FIP,
signed
by
the
Administrator
2/
14/
95,
is
located
in
EPA
Air
Docket
A­
94­
09,
item
number
V­
A­
1.
The
FIP
was
vacated
by
an
act
of
Congress
before
it
became
effective.

In
addition,
the
1997
EPA
Draft
Final
Report
entitled,
"
Analysis
of
Techniques
to
Reduce
Air
Emission
at
Airports"
(
prepared
by
Energy
and
Environmental
Analysis,
Inc),
it
was
estimated
that
for
the
four
airports
studied
(
which
are
large
air
traffic
hubs)
on
average
aircraft
compromise
approximately
35
percent
of
NOx
emissions
from
airport
operations;
GAV
account
for
another
35
percent,
and
APUs
and
GSE
contribute
about
15
percent
each
for
the
remaining
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
26
EPA
has
established
stringent
emission
standards
for
GAVs
and
other
motor
vehicles
that
will
be
manufactured
and
introduced
into
commerce
in
future
years,
overall
emissions
from
these
vehicles
will
continue
to
decline
for
many
years.

The
emissions
from
aircraft
engines
that
are
being
directly
controlled
by
the
standards
proposed
in
this
rulemaking
are
NOx.
As
discussed
later
in
this
section,
NOx
emissions
at
low
altitude
also
react
in
the
atmosphere
to
form
secondary
particulate
matter
(
PM2.5),
27
which
is
namely
ammonium
nitrate,
and
thus,
secondary
PM
would
be
effected
as
a
consequence
of
the
proposed
standards.
Adopting
standards
equivalent
to
the
latest
ICAO
NOx
emission
standards
and
the
related
ICAO
test
procedures
would
help
in
achieving
and/
or
maintaining
compliance
with
the
NAAQS
for
ozone
(
O3)
and
PM.

There
are
about
111
million
people
living
in
counties
with
monitored
concentrations
exceeding
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS
,
and
over
65
million
people
living
in
counties
with
monitored
PM2.5
levels
exceeding
the
PM2.5
NAAQS.
Figure
III.­
1
illustrates
the
widespread
nature
of
these
problems.
Shown
in
this
figure
are
counties
exceeding
either
or
both
of
the
two
NAAQS
plus
mandatory
Federal
Class
I
areas,
which
have
particular
needs
for
reductions
in
atmospheric
haze.
A
discussion
of
the
adverse
effects
on
public
health
and
welfare
associated
with
these
pollutants
is
provided
below.

30
percent.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­

__.

27As
described
later
in
section
III.
A.
2.,
fine
particles
refer
to
those
particles
with
an
aerodynamic
diameter
less
than
or
equal
to
a
nominal
2.5
micrometers
(
also
known
as
PM2.5).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
27
A.
Public
Health
Impacts
1.
Ozone
a.
What
are
the
health
effects
of
ozone
pollution?

Grou
nd­
level
ozone
pollution
(
sometimes
called
"
smog")
is
formed
by
the
reaction
of
nitrogen
oxides
(
NOx)
and
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
in
the
atmosphere
in
the
presence
of
heat
and
FIGURE
III­
1
­­
AIR
QUALITY
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
28
sunlight.
28
Ozone
can
irritate
the
respiratory
system,
causing
coughing,
throat
irritation,
and/
or
uncomfortable
sensation
in
the
chest.
29,
30
Ozone
can
reduce
lung
function
and
make
it
more
difficult
to
breathe
deeply,
and
breathing
may
become
more
rapid
and
shallow
than
normal,

thereby
limiting
a
person's
normal
activity.
Ozone
also
can
aggravate
asthma,
leading
to
more
asthma
attacks
that
require
a
doctor's
attention
and/
or
the
use
of
additional
medication.
In
addition,
ozone
can
inflame
and
damage
the
lining
of
the
lungs,
which
may
lead
to
permanent
changes
in
lung
tissue,
irreversible
reductions
in
lung
function,
and
a
lower
quality
of
life
if
the
inflammation
occurs
repeatedly
over
a
long
time
period
(
months,
years,
a
lifetime).
People
who
are
of
particular
concern
with
respect
to
ozone
exposures
include
children
and
adults
who
are
active
outdoors.
Those
people
particularly
susceptible
to
ozone
effects
are
people
with
respiratory
disease,
such
as
asthma,
and
people
with
unusual
sensitivity
to
ozone,
and
children.

28U.
S.
EPA,
"
Nitrogen
Oxides:
Impacts
on
Public
Health
and
the
Environment,"
EPA
452/
R­
97­
002,
August
1997.
A
copy
of
this
document
is
available
in
Docket
No.
OAR
2002­

0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

29U.
S.
EPA
(
1996).
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Ozone
and
Related
Photochemical
Oxidants,

EPA/
600/
P­
93/
004aF.
Docket
No.
A­
99­
06.
Document
Nos.
II­
A­
15
to
17.

30U.
S.
EPA.
(
1996).
Review
of
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
for
Ozone,

Assessment
of
Scientific
and
Technical
Information,
OAQPS
Staff
Paper,
EPA­
452/
R­
96­
007.

Docket
No.
A­
99­
06.
Document
No.
II­
A­
22.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
29
Beyond
its
human
health
effects,
ozone
has
been
shown
to
injure
plants,
which
has
the
effect
of
reducing
crop
yields
and
reducing
productivity
in
forest
ecosystems.
31,
32
The
8­
hour
ozone
standard,
established
by
EPA
in
1997,
is
based
on
well­
documented
science
demonstrating
that
more
people
are
experiencing
adverse
health
effects
at
lower
levels
of
exertion,
over
longer
periods,
and
at
lower
ozone
concentrations
than
addressed
by
the
one­
hour
ozone
standard.
(
See,
e.
g.,
62
FR
38861­
62,
July
18,
1997).
The
8­
hour
standard
addresses
ozone
exposures
of
concern
for
the
general
population
and
populations
most
at
risk,
including
children
active
outdoors,
outdoor
workers,
and
individuals
with
pre­
existing
respiratory
disease,

such
as
asthma.

There
has
been
new
research
that
suggests
additional
serious
health
effects
beyond
those
that
had
been
known
when
the
8­
hour
ozone
health
standard
was
set.
Since
1997,
over
1,700
new
health
and
welfare
studies
relating
to
ozone
have
been
published
in
peer­
reviewed
journals.
33
Many
of
these
studies
have
investigated
the
impact
of
ozone
exposure
on
such
health
31U.
S.
EPA
(
1996).
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Ozone
and
Related
Photochemical
Oxidants,

EPA/
600/
P­
93/
004aF.
Docket
No.
A­
99­
06.
Document
Nos.
II­
A­
15
to
17.

32U.
S.
EPA.
(
1996).
Review
of
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
for
Ozone,

Assessment
of
Scientific
and
Technical
Information,
OAQPS
Staff
Paper,
EPA­
452/
R­
96­
007.

Docket
No.
A­
99­
06.
Document
No.
II­
A­
22.

33New
Ozone
Health
and
Environmental
Effects
References,
Published
Since
Completion
of
the
Previous
Ozone
AQCD,
National
Center
for
Environmental
Assessment,
Office
of
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
30
effects
as
changes
in
lung
structure
and
biochemistry,
inflammation
of
the
lungs,
exacerbation
and
causation
of
asthma,
respiratory
illness­
related
school
absence,
hospital
and
emergency
room
visits
for
asthma
and
other
respiratory
causes,
and
premature
mortality.
EPA
is
currently
in
the
process
of
evaluating
these
and
other
studies
as
part
of
the
ongoing
review
of
the
air
quality
criteria
and
NAAQS
for
ozone.
A
revised
Air
Quality
Criteria
Document
for
Ozone
and
Other
Photochemical
Oxidants
will
be
prepared
in
consultation
with
EPA's
Clean
Air
Science
Advisory
Committee
(
CASAC).
Key
new
health
information
falls
into
four
general
areas:

development
of
new­
onset
asthma,
hospital
admissions
for
young
children,
school
absence
rate,

and
premature
mortality.

Aggravation
of
existing
asthma
resulting
from
short­
term
ambient
ozone
exposure
was
reported
prior
to
the
1997
decision
and
has
been
observed
in
studies
published
subsequently.
34,
35
Research
and
Development,
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711
(
7/
2002)
Docket
No.
A­
2001­
11.
Document
No.
IV­
A­
19.

34Thurston,
G.
D.,
M.
L.
Lippman,
M.
B.
Scott,
and
J.
M.
Fine.
1997.
Summertime
Haze
Air
Pollution
and
Children
with
Asthma.
American
Journal
of
Respiratory
Critical
Care
Medicine,

155:
654­
660.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

35Ostro,
B,
M.
Lipsett,
J.
Mann,
H.
Braxton­
Owens,
and
M.
White
(
2001)
Air
pollution
and
exacerbation
of
asthma
in
African­
American
children
in
Los
Angeles.
Epidemiology
12(
2):
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
31
In
particular,
a
relationship
between
long­
term
ambient
ozone
concentrations
and
the
incidence
of
new­
onset
asthma
in
adult
males
(
but
not
in
females)
was
reported
by
McDonnell
et
al.

(
1999).
36
Subsequently,
an
additional
study
suggests
that
incidence
of
new
diagnoses
of
asthma
in
children
is
associated
with
heavy
exercise
in
communities
with
high
concentrations
(
i.
e.,

mean
8­
hour
concentration
of
59.6
ppb)
of
ozone.
37
This
relationship
was
documented
in
children
who
played
3
or
more
sports
and
thus
had
higher
exposures
and
was
not
documented
in
those
children
who
played
one
or
two
sports.
The
larger
effect
of
high
activity
sports
than
low
activity
sports
and
an
independent
effect
of
time
spent
outdoors
also
in
the
higher
ozone
communities
strengthened
the
inference
that
exposure
to
ozone
may
modify
the
effect
of
sports
on
the
development
of
asthma
in
some
children.

200­
208.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­

_­__.

36McDonnell,
W.
F.,
D.
E.
Abbey,
N.
Nishino
and
M.
D.
Lebowitz.
1999.
"
Long­
term
ambient
ozone
concentration
and
the
incidence
of
asthma
in
nonsmoking
adults:
the
ahsmog
study."
Environmental
Research.
80(
2
Pt
1):
110­
121.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

37McConnell,
R.;
Berhane,
K.;
Gilliland,
F.;
London,
S.
J.;
Islam,
T.;
Gauderman,
W.
J.;

Avol,
E.;
Margolis,
H.
G.;
Peters,
J.
M.
(
2002)
Asthma
in
exercising
children
exposed
to
ozone:

a
cohort
study.
Lancet
359:
386­
391.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­

____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
32
Previous
studies
have
shown
relationships
between
ozone
and
hospital
admissions
in
the
general
population.
A
study
in
Toronto
reported
a
significant
relationship
between
1­
hour
maximum
ozone
concentrations
and
respiratory
hospital
admissions
in
children
under
the
age
of
two.
38
Given
the
relative
vulnerability
of
children
in
this
age
category,
we
are
particularly
concerned
about
the
findings.

Increased
respiratory
disease
that
are
serious
enough
to
cause
school
absences
have
been
associated
with
1­
hour
daily
maximum
and
8­
hour
average
ozone
concentrations
in
studies
conducted
in
Nevada39
in
kindergarten
to
6th
grade
and
in
Southern
California
in
grades
4­

through
6.40
These
studies
suggest
that
higher
ambient
ozone
levels
may
result
in
increased
school
absenteeism.

38Burnett,
R.
T.;
Smith_
Doiron,
M.;
Stieb,
D.;
Raizenne,
M.
E.;
Brook,
J.
R.;
Dales,
R.

E.;
Leech,
J.
A.;
Cakmak,
S.;
Krewski,
D.
(
2001)
Association
between
ozone
and
hospitalization
for
acute
respiratory
diseases
in
children
less
than
2
years
of
age.
Am.
J.
Epidemiol.
153:
444­

452.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

39Chen,
L.;
Jennison,
B.
L.;
Yang,
W.;
Omaye,
S.
T.
(
2000)
Elementary
school
absenteeism
and
air
pollution.
Inhalation
Toxicol.
12:
997­
1016.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

40Gilliland,
FD,
K
Berhane,
EB
Rappaport,
DC
Thomas,
E
Avol,
WJ
Gauderman,
SJ
London,
HG
Margolis,
R
McConnell,
KT
Islam,
JM
Peters
(
2001)
The
effects
of
ambient
air
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
33
The
air
pollutant
most
clearly
associated
with
premature
mortality
is
PM,
with
dozens
of
studies
reporting
such
an
association.
However,
repeated
ozone
exposure
is
a
possible
contributing
factor
for
premature
mortality,
causing
an
inflammatory
response
in
the
lungs
which
may
predispose
elderly
and
other
sensitive
individuals
to
become
more
susceptible
to
otherstressors,
such
as
PM.
41,
42,
43
Although
the
findings
have
been
mixed,
the
findings
of
three
pollution
on
school
absenteeism
due
to
respiratory
illnesses
Epidemiology
12:
43­
54.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

41Samet
JM,
Zeger
SL,
Dominici
F,
Curriero
F,
Coursac
I,
Dockery
DW,
Schwartz
J,

Zanobetti
A.
2000.
The
National
Morbidity,
Mortality
and
Air
Pollution
Study:
Part
II:

Morbidity,
Mortality
and
Air
Pollution
in
the
United
States.
Research
Report
No.
94,
Part
II.

Health
Effects
Institute,
Cambridge
MA,
June
2000.
(
Docket
Number
A­
2000­
01,
Document
Nos.
IV­
A­
208
and
209)

42Devlin,
R.
B.;
Folinsbee,
L.
J.;
Biscardi,
F.;
Hatch,
G.;
Becker,
S.;
Madden,
M.
C.;

Robbins,
M.;
Koren,
H.
S.
(
1997)
Inflammation
and
cell
damage
induced
by
repeated
exposure
of
humans
to
ozone.
Inhalation
Toxicol.
9:
211­
235.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

43Koren
HS,
Devlin
RB,
Graham
DE,
Mann
R,
McGee
MP,
Horstman
DH,
Kozumbo
WJ,
Becker
S,
House
DE,
McDonnell
SF,
Bromberg,
PA.
1989.
Ozone­
induced
inflammation
in
the
lower
airways
of
human
subjects.
Am.
Rev.
Respir.
Dies.
139:
407­
415.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
34
recent
analyses
suggest
that
ozone
exposure
is
associated
with
increased
mortality.
Although
the
National
Morbidity,
Mortality,
and
Air
Pollution
Study
(
NMMAPS)
did
not
report
an
effect
of
ozone
on
total
mortality
across
the
full
year,
the
investigators
who
conducted
the
NMMAPS
study
did
observe
an
effect
after
limiting
the
analysis
to
summer
when
ozone
levels
are
highest.
44,45
Similarly,
other
studies
have
shown
associations
between
ozone
and
mortality.
46,
47
44Samet
JM,
Zeger
SL,
Dominici
F,
Curriero
F,
Coursac
I,
Dockery
DW,
Schwartz
J,

Zanobetti
A.
2000.
The
National
Morbidity,
Mortality
and
Air
Pollution
Study:
Part
II:

Morbidity,
Mortality
and
Air
Pollution
in
the
United
States.
Research
Report
No.
94,
Part
II.

Health
Effects
Institute,
Cambridge
MA,
June
2000.
(
Docket
Number
A­
2000­
01,
Documents
No.
IV­
A­
208
and
209)

45Samet
JM,
Zeger
SL,
Dominici
F,
Curriero
F,
Coursac
I,
Zeger,
S.
Fine
Particulate
Air
Pollution
and
Mortality
in
20
U.
S.
Cities,
1987
­
1994.
The
New
England
Journal
of
Medicine.

Vol.
343,
No.
24,
December
14,
2000.
P.
1742­
1749.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

46Thurston,
G.
D.;
Ito,
K.
(
2001)
Epidemiological
studies
of
acute
ozone
exposures
and
mortality.
J.
Exposure
Anal.
Environ.
Epidemiol.
11:
286­
294.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

47Touloumi,
G.;
Katsouyanni,
K.;
Zmirou,
D.;
Schwartz,
J.;
Spix,
C.;
Ponce
de
Leon,
A.;

Tobias,
A.;
Quennel,
P.;
Rabczenko,
D.;
Bacharova,
L.;
Bisanti,
L.;
Vonk,
J.
M.;
Ponka,
A.

(
1997)
Short­
term
effects
of
ambient
oxidant
exposure
on
mortality:
a
combined
analysis
within
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
35
Specifically,
Toulomi
et
al.
(
1997)
found
that
1­
hour
maximum
ozone
levels
were
associated
with
daily
numbers
of
deaths
in
4
cities
(
London,
Athens,
Barcelona,
and
Paris),
and
a
quantitatively
similar
effect
was
found
in
a
group
of
four
additional
cities
(
Amsterdam,
Basel,

Geneva,
and
Zurich).

In
all,
the
new
studies
that
have
become
available
since
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
was
adopted
in
1997
continue
to
demonstrate
the
harmful
effects
of
ozone
on
public
health,
and
the
need
to
attain
and
maintain
the
NAAQS.

b.
Current
and
projected
8­
hour
ozone
levels
The
current
primary
and
secondary
ozone
NAAQS
is
0.12
ppm
daily
maximum
1­
hour
concentration,
not
to
be
exceeded
more
than
once
per
year
on
average.
EPA
is
replacing
the
previous
1­
hour
ozone
standard
with
a
new
8­
hour
standard.
The
new
standard
is
set
at
a
concentration
of
0.08
parts
per
million
(
ppm),
and
the
measurement
period
is
8
hours.
Areas
are
allowed
to
disregard
their
three
worst
measurements
every
year
and
average
performance
over
three
years
to
determine
if
they
meet
the
standard.
That
is,
the
standard
is
set
by
the
4th
highest
maximum
8­
hour
concentration.

As
shown
earlier
(
Figure
III­
1)
unhealthy
ozone
concentrations
exceeding
the
level
of
the
8­
hour
standard
(
i.
e.,
not
requisite
to
protect
the
public
health
with
an
adequate
margin
of
safety)

the
APHEA
project.
Am.
J.
Epidemiol.
146:
177­
185.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
36
occur
over
wide
geographic
areas,
including
most
of
the
nation's
major
population
centers.

These
monitored
areas
include
much
of
the
eastern
half
of
the
U.
S.
and
large
areas
of
California.

Based
upon
data
from
1999
­
2001,
there
are
291
counties
where
111
million
people
live
that
are
measuring
values
that
violate
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS.
48
An
additional
37
million
people
live
in
155
counties
that
have
air
quality
measurements
within
10
percent
of
the
level
of
the
standard.
49
These
areas,
though
currently
not
violating
the
standard,
would
also
benefit
from
the
additional
emission
reductions
from
this
proposed
rule.

From
air
quality
modeling
performed
for
the
recent
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines
and
Fuel
Control
proposed
rule,
50
we
anticipate
that
without
emission
reductions
beyond
those
already
required
under
promulgated
regulation
and
approved
State
Implementation
Plans
(
SIPs),
ozone
48Additional
counties
may
have
levels
above
the
NAAQS
but
do
not
currently
have
monitors.

49Memorandum
to
Docket
A­
2001­
11
from
Fred
Dimmick,
Group
Leader,
Air
Trends
Group,
"
Summary
of
Currently
Available
Air
Quality
Data
and
Ambient
Concentrations
for
Ozone
and
Particulate
Matter,"
December
3,
2002,
Air
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.

XX­
B­
XX.

50See
the
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
"
Draft
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines",
EPA420­
R­
03­
008,
April
2003.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
nonroad/.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­
2001­
28,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
37
nonattainment
will
likely
persist
into
the
future.
With
reductions
from
programs
already
in
place,
the
number
of
counties
violating
the
ozone
8­
hour
standard
is
expected
to
decrease
in
2020
to
30
counties
where
43
million
people
are
projected
to
live.
Thereafter,
exposure
to
unhealthy
levels
of
ozone
is
expected
to
begin
to
increase
again.
In
2030
the
number
of
counties
violating
the
ozone
8­
hour
NAAQS
is
projected
to
increase
to
32
counties
where
47
million
people
are
projected
to
live.
In
addition,
in
2030,
82
counties
where
44
million
people
are
projected
to
live
will
be
within
10
percent
of
violating
the
ozone
8­
hour
NAAQS.

EPA
is
still
developing
for
the
implementation
process
for
bringing
the
nation's
air
into
attainment
with
the
ozone
8­
hour
NAAQS.
EPA's
current
plans
call
for
designating
ozone
8­

hour
nonattainment
areas
in
April
2004.
EPA
is
planning
to
propose
that
States
submit
SIPs
that
address
how
areas
will
attain
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
within
three
years
after
nonattainment
designation
regardless
of
their
classification.
EPA
is
also
planning
to
propose
that
certain
SIP
components,
such
as
those
related
to
reasonably
available
control
technology
(
RACT)
and
reasonable
further
progress
(
RFP)
be
submitted
within
2
years
after
designation.
We
therefore
anticipate
that
States
will
submit
their
attainment
demonstration
SIPs
by
April
2007.
Section
172(
a)(
2)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
requires
that
SIP
revisions
for
areas
that
may
be
covered
only
under
subpart
1
of
part
D,
Title
I
of
the
Act
demonstrate
that
the
nonattainment
areas
will
attain
the
ozone
8­
hour
standard
as
expeditiously
as
practicable
but
no
later
than
five
years
from
the
date
that
the
area
was
designated
nonattainment.
However,
based
on
the
severity
of
the
air
quality
problem
and
the
availability
and
feasibility
of
control
measures,
the
Administrator
may
extend
the
attainment
date
"
for
a
period
of
no
greater
than
10
years
from
the
date
of
designation
as
nonattainment."
Based
on
these
provisions,
we
expect
that
most
or
all
areas
covered
under
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
38
subpart
1
will
attain
the
ozone
standard
in
the
2007
to
2014
time
frame.
For
areas
covered
under
subpart
2,
the
maximum
attainment
dates
provided
under
the
Act
range
from
3
to
20
years
after
designation,
depending
on
an
area's
classification.
Thus,
we
anticipate
that
areas
covered
by
subpart
2
will
attain
in
the
2007
to
2014
time
period.

EPA
is
still
developing
the
implementation
process
for
bringing
the
nation's
air
into
attainment
with
the
ozone
8­
hour
NAAQS.
On
June
2,
2003
(
68
FR
32802),
EPA
issued
a
proposal
for
the
implementation
process
to
bring
the
nation's
air
into
attainment
with
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS.
51
The
proposal
seeks
comment
on
options
for
planning
and
control
requirements,
along
with
options
for
making
the
transition
from
the
1­
hour
ozone
standard
to
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard.
The
proposal
does
not
designate
nonattainment
area
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS;
EPA's
current
plans
calls
for
designating
8­
hour
ozone
nonattainment
areas
in
April
2004,
under
a
separate
process.
EPA
has
proposed
that
States
submit
SIPs
that
address
how
areas
will
attain
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
within
3
years
after
nonattainment
designation
for
moderate
and
above
areas
classified
under
subpart
2
and
for
some
areas
classified
under
subpart
1.
EPA
is
also
proposing
that
marginal
areas
and
some
areas
designated
under
subpart
1
(
i.
e.,

those
with
early
attainment
dates)
will
not
be
required
to
submit
attainment
demonstrations
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard.
We
therefore
anticipate
that
States
will
submit
their
attainment
demonstration
SIPs
by
April
2007.

51A
copy
of
this
proposed
rule
entitled,
"
Proposed
Rule
to
Implement
the
8­
Hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard."
is
available
at:

http://
www.
epa.
gov/
airlinks/
airlinks4.
html
or
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
naaqs/
ozone/
o3imp8hr.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
39
The
Act
contains
two
sets
of
requirements
 
­
subpart
1
and
subpart
2
 
­
that
establish
requirements
for
State
plans
implementing
the
national
ozone
air
quality
standards
in
nonattainment
areas.
(
Both
are
found
in
title
I,
part
D.)
Subpart
1
contains
general
requirements
for
SIPs
for
nonattainment
areas
for
any
pollutant
 
­
including
ozone­­
governed
by
a
NAAQS.

Subpart
2
provides
more
specific
requirements
for
ozone
nonattainment
SIPs.
Under
subpart
1
of
part
D,
Title
I
of
the
Act
demonstrate
that
the
nonattainment
areas
will
attain
the
ozone
8­
hour
standard
as
expeditiously
as
practicable
but
no
later
than
five
years
from
the
date
that
the
area
was
designated
nonattainment.
However,
based
on
the
severity
of
the
air
quality
problem
and
the
availability
and
feasibility
of
control
measures,
the
Administrator
may
extend
the
attainment
date
"
for
a
period
of
no
greater
than
10
years
from
the
date
of
designation
as
nonattainment."

Based
on
these
provisions,
we
expect
that
most
or
all
areas
covered
under
subpart
1
will
attain
the
ozone
standard
in
the
2007
to
2014
time
frame.
For
areas
covered
under
subpart
2,
the
maximum
attainment
dates
provided
under
the
Act
range
from
3
to
20
years
after
designation,

depending
on
an
area's
classification.
Thus,
we
anticipate
that
areas
covered
by
subpart
2
will
attain
in
the
2007
to
2024
time
period.

Since
the
emission
reductions
expected
from
this
proposed
rule
would
occur
during
the
time
period
when
areas
will
need
to
attain
the
standard
under
either
option,
projected
reductions
in
aircraft
engine
emissions
would
assist
States
in
their
effort
to
meet
the
new
NAAQS.
Such
reductions
would
help
them
attain
and
maintain
the
8­
hour
NAAQS.

2.
Particulate
Matter
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
40
NOx
emitted
at
low
altitude
is
also
a
precursor
in
the
formation
of
some
nitrate
particulate
matter
(
PM)
in
the
atmosphere
(
mostly
ammonium
nitrate).
52,53
Essentially
all
nitrate
PM
is
of
such
a
diameter
that
it
is
respirable
in
humans.
As
discussed
earlier,
aircraft
account
for
over
1
percent
of
the
total
U.
S.
mobile
source
NOx
emissions,
and
aircraft's
contribution
to
nationwide
secondary
PM
from
U.
S.
mobile
source
NOx
is
expected
to
relatively
similar.
54
Particulate
matter
represents
a
broad
class
of
chemically
and
physically
diverse
substances.
It
can
be
principally
characterized
as
discrete
particles
that
exist
in
the
condensed
(
liquid
or
solid)
phase
spanning
several
orders
of
magnitude
in
size.
PM10
refers
to
particles
with
an
aerodynamic
diameter
less
than
or
equal
to
a
nominal
10
micrometers.
Fine
particles
refer
to
52Secondary
PM
is
formed
when
NOx
reacts
with
ammonia
in
the
atmosphere
to
yield
ammonium
nitrate
particulate.

53U.
S.
EPA,
"
Nitrogen
Oxides:
Impacts
on
Public
Health
and
the
Environment,"
EPA
452/
R­
97­
002,
August
1997.
A
copy
of
this
document
is
available
in
Docket
No.
OAR
2002­

0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

54"
Benefits
of
Mobile
Source
NOx
Related
Particulate
Matter
Reductions,"
Systems
Applications
International,
EPA
Contract
No.
68­
C5­
0010,
WAN
1­
8,
October
1996.
A
copy
of
this
document
is
available
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
This
report
concluded
that,
as
a
national
average,
each
100
tons
of
NOx
emissions
will
result
in
about
4
tons
of
secondary
PM
(
conversion
rate
was
about
0.04).
This
conversion
rate
varies
from
region
to
region,
and
is
greatest
in
the
West.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
41
those
particles
with
an
aerodynamic
diameter
less
than
or
equal
to
a
nominal
2.5
micrometers
(
also
known
as
PM2.5),
and
coarse
fraction
particles
are
those
particles
with
an
aerodynamic
diameter
greater
than
2.5
microns,
but
less
than
or
equal
to
a
nominal
10
micrometers.
Ultrafine
PM
refers
to
particles
with
diameters
of
less
than
100
nanometers
(
0.1
micrometers).
The
health
and
environmental
effects
of
PM
are
associated
with
fine
PM
fraction
and,
in
some
cases,
to
the
size
of
the
particles.
Specifically,
larger
particles
(>
10

m)
tend
to
be
removed
by
the
respiratory
clearance
mechanisms
whereas
smaller
particles
are
deposited
deeper
in
the
lungs.

Also,
particles
scatter
light
obstructing
visibility.

The
emission
sources,
formation
processes,
chemical
composition,
atmospheric
residence
times,
transport
distances
and
other
parameters
of
fine
and
coarse
particles
are
distinct.
Fine
particles
are
directly
emitted
from
combustion
sources
and
are
formed
secondarily
from
gaseous
precursors
such
as
oxides
of
nitrogen
(
NOx).
Fine
particles
are
generally
composed
of
sulfate,

nitrate,
chloride,
ammonium
compounds,
organic
carbon,
elemental
carbon,
and
metals.
Aircraft
engines
emit
NOx
which
react
in
the
atmosphere
to
form
secondary
PM2.5
(
namely
ammonium
nitrate).
Combustion
of
coal,
oil,
diesel,
gasoline,
and
wood,
as
well
as
high
temperature
process
sources
such
as
smelters
and
steel
mills,
produce
emissions
that
contribute
to
fine
particle
formation.
In
contrast,
coarse
particles
are
typically
mechanically
generated
by
crushing
or
grinding.
They
include
resuspended
dusts
and
crustal
material
from
paved
roads,
unpaved
roads,

construction,
farming,
and
mining
activities.
These
coarse
particles
can
be
either
natural
in
source
such
as
road
dust
or
anthropogenic.
Fine
particles
can
remain
in
the
atmosphere
for
days
to
weeks
and
travel
through
the
atmosphere
hundreds
to
thousands
of
kilometers,
while
coarse
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
42
particles
deposit
to
the
earth
within
minutes
to
hours
and
within
tens
of
kilometers
from
the
emission
source.

The
relative
contribution
of
various
chemical
components
to
PM2.5
varies
by
region
of
the
country.
Data
on
PM2.5
composition
are
available
from
the
EPA
Speciation
Trends
Network
in
2001
and
the
Interagency
Monitoring
of
PROtected
Visual
Environments
(
IMPROVE)
network
in
1999
covering
both
urban
and
rural
areas
in
numerous
regions
of
the
U.
S.
These
data
show
that
nitrates
formed
from
NOx
also
play
a
major
role
in
the
western
U.
S.,
especially
in
the
California
area
where
it
is
responsible
for
about
a
quarter
of
the
ambient
PM2.5
concentrations.

a.
Health
Effects
of
PM2.5
Scientific
studies
show
ambient
PM
is
associated
with
a
series
of
adverse
health
effects.

These
health
effects
are
discussed
in
detail
in
the
EPA
Criteria
Document
for
PM
as
well
as
the
draft
updates
of
this
document
released
in
the
past
year.
55,
56
55U.
S.
EPA
(
1996.)
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Particulate
Matter
­
Volumes
I,
II,
and
III,

EPA,
Office
of
Research
and
Development.
Report
No.
EPA/
600/
P­
95/
001a­
cF.
This
material
is
available
electronically
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
oarpg/
ticd.
html.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

56U.
S.
EPA
(
2002).
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Particulate
Matter
­
Volumes
I
and
II
(
Third
External
Review
Draft)
This
material
is
available
electronically
at
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
43
As
described
in
these
documents,
health
effects
associated
with
short­
term
variation
in
ambient
particulate
matter
(
PM)
have
been
indicated
by
epidemiologic
studies
showing
associations
between
exposure
and
increased
hospital
admissions
for
ischemic
heart
disease,

heart
failure,
respiratory
disease,
including
chronic
obstructive
pulmonary
disease
(
COPD)
and
pneumonia.
Short­
term
elevations
in
ambient
PM
have
also
been
associated
with
increased
cough,
lower
respiratory
symptoms,
and
decrements
in
lung
function.
Short­
term
variations
in
ambient
PM
have
also
been
associated
with
increases
in
total
and
cardiorespiratory
daily
mortality.
Studies
examining
populations
exposed
to
different
levels
of
air
pollution
over
a
number
of
years,
including
the
Harvard
Six
Cities
Study
and
the
American
Cancer
Society
Study
suggest
an
association
between
exposure
to
ambient
PM2.5
and
premature
mortality,
including
deaths
attributed
to
lung
cancer.
57,
58
Two
studies
further
analyzing
the
Harvard
Six
Cities
http://
cfpub.
epa.
gov/
ncea/
cfm/
partmatt.
cfm.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

57Dockery,
DW;
Pope,
CA,
III;
Xu,
X;
et
al.
(
1993)
An
association
between
air
pollution
and
mortality
in
six
U.
S.
cities.
N
Engl
J
Med
329:
1753­
1759.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

58Pope,
CA,
III;
Thun,
MJ;
Namboordiri,
MM;
et
al.
(
1995)
Particulate
air
pollution
as
a
predictor
of
mortality
in
a
prospective
study
of
U.
S.
adults.
Am
J
Respir
Crit
Care
Med
151:
669­

674.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­

__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
44
Study's
air
quality
data
have
also
established
a
specific
influence
of
mobile
source­
related
PM2.5
on
daily
mortality59
and
a
concentration­
response
function
for
mobile
source­
associated
PM2.5
and
daily
mortality.
60
b.
Current
and
Projected
Levels
There
are
NAAQS
for
both
PM10
and
PM2.5.
Violations
of
the
annual
PM2.5
standard
are
much
more
widespread
than
are
violations
of
the
PM10
standards.
Figure
III­
1
at
the
beginning
of
this
air
quality
section
highlighted
monitor
locations
measuring
concentrations
above
the
level
of
the
NAAQS.
As
can
be
seen
from
that
figure,
high
ambient
levels
are
widespread
throughout
the
country.
Today's
proposed
aircraft
NOx
standards
should
contribute
to
attainment
and
maintenance
of
the
existing
PM
NAAQS
since
NOx
contributes
to
the
secondary
formation
of
PM2.5.

59Laden
F;
Neas
LM;
Dockery
DW;
et
al.
(
2000)
Association
of
fine
particulate
matter
from
different
sources
with
daily
mortality
in
six
U.
S.
cities.
Environ
Health
Perspect
108(
10):
941­
947.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

60Schwartz
J;
Laden
F;
Zanobetti
A.
(
2002)
The
concentration­
response
relation
between
PM(
2.5)
and
daily
deaths.
Environ
Health
Perspect
110(
10):
1025­
1029.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
45
The
NAAQS
for
PM2.5
were
established
by
EPA
in
1997
(
62
Fed.
Reg.,
38651,
July
18,

1997).
The
short
term
(
24­
hour)
standard
is
set
at
a
level
of
65

g/
m3
based
on
the
98th
percentile
concentration
averaged
over
three
years.
(
This
air
quality
statistic
compared
to
the
standard
is
referred
to
as
the
"
design
value.")
The
long­
term
standard
specifies
an
expected
annual
arithmetic
mean
not
to
exceed
15
ug/
m3
averaged
over
three
years.

Current
PM2.5
monitored
values
for
1999­
2001,
which
cover
counties
having
about
75
percent
of
the
country's
population,
indicate
that
at
least
65
million
people
in
129
counties
live
in
areas
where
annual
design
values
of
ambient
fine
PM
violate
the
PM2.5
NAAQS.
There
are
an
additional
9
million
people
in
20
counties
where
levels
above
the
NAAQS
are
being
measured,

but
there
are
insufficient
data
at
this
time
to
calculate
a
design
value
in
accordance
with
the
standard,
and
thus
determine
whether
these
areas
are
violating
the
PM2.5
NAAQS.
In
total,
this
represents
37
percent
of
the
counties
and
64
percent
of
the
population
in
the
areas
with
monitors
with
levels
above
the
NAAQS.
61
Furthermore,
an
additional
14
million
people
live
in
41
counties
that
have
air
quality
measurements
within
10
percent
of
the
level
of
the
standard.
These
areas,
although
not
currently
violating
the
standard,
would
also
benefit
from
the
additional
reductions
from
this
proposed
rule
in
order
to
help
ensure
long
term
maintenance.

The
air
quality
modeling
performed
for
the
recent
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines
and
Fuel
Control
proposed
rule
also
indicates
that
similar
conditions
are
likely
to
continue
to
exist
in
the
61Memorandum
to
Docket
A­
2001­
11
from
Fred
Dimmick,
Group
Leader,
Air
Trends
Group,
"
Summary
of
Currently
Available
Air
Quality
Data
and
Ambient
Concentrations
for
Ozone
and
Particulate
Matter,"
December
3,
2002,
Air
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
46
future
in
the
absence
of
additional
controls.
62
For
example,
in
2020
based
on
emission
controls
currently
adopted,
we
project
that
66
million
people
will
live
in
79
counties
with
average
PM2.5
levels
above
15
ug/
m3.
In
2030,
the
number
of
people
projected
to
live
in
areas
exceeding
the
PM2.5
standard
is
expected
to
increase
to
85
million
in
107
counties.
An
additional
24
million
people
are
projected
to
live
in
counties
within
10
percent
of
the
standard
in
2020,
which
will
increase
to
64
million
people
in
2030.

While
the
final
implementation
process
for
bringing
the
nation's
air
into
attainment
with
the
PM2.5
NAAQS
is
still
being
completed
in
a
separate
rulemaking
action,
the
basic
framework
is
well
defined
by
the
statute.
EPA's
current
plans
call
for
designating
PM2.5
nonattainment
areas
in
late­
2004.
Following
designation,
Section
172(
b)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
allows
states
up
to
three
years
to
submit
a
revision
to
their
state
implementation
plan
(
SIP)
that
provides
for
the
attainment
of
the
PM2.5
standard.
Based
on
this
provision,
states
could
submit
these
SIPs
as
late
as
the
end
of
2007.
Section
172(
a)(
2)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
requires
that
these
SIP
revisions
demonstrate
that
the
nonattainment
areas
will
attain
the
PM2.5
standard
as
expeditiously
as
practicable
but
no
later
than
five
years
from
the
date
that
the
area
was
designated
nonattainment.

However,
based
on
the
severity
of
the
air
quality
problem
and
the
availability
and
feasibility
of
control
measures,
the
Administrator
may
extend
the
attainment
date
"
for
a
period
of
no
greater
62See
the
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
"
Draft
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines",
EPA420­
R­
03­
008,
April
2003.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
nonroad/.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­
2001­
28,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
47
than
10
years
from
the
date
of
designation
as
nonattainment."
Therefore,
based
on
this
information,
we
expect
that
most
or
all
areas
will
need
to
attain
the
PM2.5
NAAQS
in
the
2009
to
2014
time
frame,
and
then
be
required
to
maintain
the
NAAQS
thereafter.

B.
Other
Environmental
Effects
The
following
section
presents
information
on
four
categories
of
public
welfare
and
environmental
impacts
related
to
NOx
and
fine
PM
emissions:
acid
deposition,
eutrophication
of
water
bodies,
plant
damage
from
ozone,
visibility
impairment,
and
climate
change.

1.
Acid
Deposition
Acid
deposition,
or
acid
rain
as
it
is
commonly
known,
occurs
when
NOx
and
SO2
react
in
the
atmosphere
with
water,
oxygen,
and
oxidants
to
form
various
acidic
compounds
that
later
fall
to
earth
in
the
form
of
precipitation
or
dry
deposition
of
acidic
particles.
63
It
contributes
to
damage
of
trees
at
high
elevations
and
in
extreme
cases
may
cause
lakes
and
streams
to
become
so
acidic
that
they
cannot
support
aquatic
life.
In
addition,
acid
deposition
accelerates
the
decay
63Much
of
the
information
in
this
subsection
was
excerpted
from
the
EPA
document,

Human
Health
Benefits
from
Sulfate
Reduction,
written
under
Title
IV
of
the
1990
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments,
U.
S.
EPA,
Office
of
Air
and
Radiation,
Acid
Rain
Division,
Washington,
DC
20460,
November
1995.
Available
in
Docket
A­
2000­
01,
Document
No.
II­
A­
32.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
48
of
building
materials
and
paints,
including
irreplaceable
buildings,
statues,
and
sculptures
that
are
part
of
our
nation's
cultural
heritage.
To
reduce
damage
to
automotive
paint
caused
by
acid
rain
and
acidic
dry
deposition,
some
manufacturers
use
acid­
resistant
paints,
at
an
average
cost
of
$
5
per
vehicle­­
a
total
of
$
80­
85
million
per
year
when
applied
to
all
new
cars
and
trucks
sold
in
the
U.
S.

Acid
deposition
primarily
affects
bodies
of
water
that
rest
atop
soil
with
a
limited
ability
to
neutralize
acidic
compounds.
The
National
Surface
Water
Survey
(
NSWS)
investigated
the
effects
of
acidic
deposition
in
over
1,000
lakes
larger
than
10
acres
and
in
thousands
of
miles
of
streams.
It
found
that
acid
deposition
was
the
primary
cause
of
acidity
in
75
percent
of
the
acidic
lakes
and
about
50
percent
of
the
acidic
streams,
and
that
the
areas
most
sensitive
to
acid
rain
were
the
Adirondacks,
the
mid­
Appalachian
highlands,
the
upper
Midwest
and
the
high
elevation
West.
The
NSWS
found
that
approximately
580
streams
in
the
Mid­
Atlantic
Coastal
Plain
are
acidic
primarily
due
to
acidic
deposition.
Hundreds
of
the
lakes
in
the
Adirondacks
surveyed
in
the
NSWS
have
acidity
levels
incompatible
with
the
survival
of
sensitive
fish
species.
Many
of
the
over
1,350
acidic
streams
in
the
Mid­
Atlantic
Highlands
(
mid­
Appalachia)
region
have
already
experienced
trout
losses
due
to
increased
stream
acidity.
Emissions
from
U.
S.
sources
contribute
to
acidic
deposition
in
eastern
Canada,
where
the
Canadian
government
has
estimated
that
14,000
lakes
are
acidic.
Acid
deposition
also
has
been
implicated
in
contributing
to
degradation
of
high­
elevation
spruce
forests
that
populate
the
ridges
of
the
Appalachian
Mountains
from
Maine
to
Georgia.
This
area
includes
national
parks
such
as
the
Shenandoah
and
Great
Smoky
Mountain
National
Parks.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
49
A
study
of
emissions
trends
and
acidity
of
water
bodies
in
the
Eastern
U.
S.
by
the
General
Accounting
Office
(
GAO)
found
that
from
1992
to
1999
sulfates
declined
in
92
percent
of
a
representative
sample
of
lakes,
and
nitrate
levels
increased
in
48
percent
of
the
lakes
sampled.
64
The
decrease
in
sulfates
is
consistent
with
emissions
trends,
but
the
increase
in
nitrates
is
inconsistent
with
the
stable
levels
of
nitrogen
emissions
and
deposition.
The
study
suggests
that
the
vegetation
and
land
surrounding
these
lakes
have
lost
some
of
their
previous
capacity
to
use
nitrogen,
thus
allowing
more
of
the
nitrogen
to
flow
into
the
lakes
and
increase
their
acidity.
Recovery
of
acidified
lakes
is
expected
to
take
a
number
of
years,
even
where
soil
and
vegetation
have
not
been
"
nitrogen
saturated,"
as
EPA
called
the
phenomenon
in
a
1995
study.
65
This
situation
places
a
premium
on
reductions
of
NOx
(
and
SOx)
from
all
sources,

including
aircraft
engines,
in
order
to
reduce
the
extent
and
severity
of
nitrogen
saturation
and
acidification
of
lakes
in
the
Adirondacks
and
throughout
the
U.
S.

The
NOx
reductions
from
today's
action
would
help
reduce
acid
rain
and
acid
deposition,

thereby
helping
to
reduce
acidity
levels
in
lakes
and
streams
throughout
the
country
and
help
accelerate
the
recovery
of
acidified
lakes
and
streams
and
the
revival
of
ecosystems
adversely
64Acid
Rain:
Emissions
Trends
and
Effects
in
the
Eastern
United
States,
US
General
Accounting
Office,
March,
2000
(
GOA/
RCED­
00­
47).
Available
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,
Document
No.
IV­
G­
159.

65Acid
Deposition
Standard
Feasibility
Study:
Report
to
Congress,
EPA
430R­
95­
001a,

October,
1995.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
50
affected
by
acid
deposition.
Reduced
acid
deposition
levels
will
also
help
reduce
stress
on
forests,
thereby
accelerating
reforestation
efforts
and
improving
timber
production.

Deterioration
of
our
historic
buildings
and
monuments,
and
of
buildings,
vehicles,
and
other
structures
exposed
to
acid
rain
and
dry
acid
deposition
also
will
be
reduced,
and
the
costs
borne
to
prevent
acid­
related
damage
may
also
decline.
While
the
reduction
in
nitrogen
acid
deposition
would
be
roughly
proportional
to
the
reduction
in
NOx
emissions
the
precise
impact
of
today's
action
would
differ
across
different
areas.

2.
Eutrophication
and
Nitrification
Eutrophication
is
the
accelerated
production
of
organic
matter,
particularly
algae,
in
a
water
body.
This
increased
growth
can
cause
numerous
adverse
ecological
effects
and
economic
impacts,
including
nuisance
algal
blooms,
dieback
of
underwater
plants
due
to
reduced
light
penetration,
and
toxic
plankton
blooms.
Algal
and
plankton
blooms
can
also
reduce
the
level
of
dissolved
oxygen,
which
can
also
adversely
affect
fish
and
shellfish
populations.

In
1999,
NOAA
published
the
results
of
a
five
year
national
assessment
of
the
severity
and
extent
of
estuarine
eutrophication.
An
estuary
is
defined
as
the
inland
arm
of
the
sea
that
meets
the
mouth
of
a
river.
The
138
estuaries
characterized
in
the
study
represent
more
than
90
percent
of
total
estuarine
water
surface
area
and
the
total
number
of
U.
S.
estuaries.
The
study
found
that
estuaries
with
moderate
to
high
eutrophication
conditions
represented
65
percent
of
the
estuarine
surface
area.
Eutrophication
is
of
particular
concern
in
coastal
areas
with
poor
or
stratified
circulation
patterns,
such
as
the
Chesapeake
Bay,
Long
Island
Sound,
or
the
Gulf
of
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
51
Mexico.
In
such
areas,
the
"
overproduced"
algae
tends
to
sink
to
the
bottom
and
decay,
using
all
or
most
of
the
available
oxygen
and
thereby
reducing
or
eliminating
populations
of
bottomfeeder
fish
and
shellfish,
distorting
the
normal
population
balance
between
different
aquatic
organisms,
and
in
extreme
cases
causing
dramatic
fish
kills.

Severe
and
persistent
eutrophication
often
directly
impacts
human
activities.
For
example,
losses
in
the
nation's
fishery
resources
may
be
directly
caused
by
fish
kills
associated
with
low
dissolved
oxygen
and
toxic
blooms.
Declines
in
tourism
occur
when
low
dissolved
oxygen
causes
noxious
smells
and
floating
mats
of
algal
blooms
create
unfavorable
aesthetic
conditions.
Risks
to
human
health
increase
when
the
toxins
from
algal
blooms
accumulate
in
edible
fish
and
shellfish,
and
when
toxins
become
airborne,
causing
respiratory
problems
due
to
inhalation.
According
to
the
NOAA
report,
more
than
half
of
the
nation's
estuaries
have
moderate
to
high
expressions
of
at
least
one
of
these
symptoms
 
an
indication
that
eutrophication
is
well
developed
in
more
than
half
of
U.
S.
estuaries.

In
recent
decades,
human
activities
have
greatly
accelerated
nutrient
inputs,
such
as
nitrogen
and
phosphorous,
causing
excessive
growth
of
algae
and
leading
to
degraded
water
quality
and
associated
impairments
of
freshwater
and
estuarine
resources
for
human
uses.
66
Since
1970,
eutrophic
conditions
worsened
in
48
estuaries
and
improved
in
14.
In
26
systems,

66Deposition
of
Air
Pollutants
to
the
Great
Waters,
Third
Report
to
Congress,
June,
2000.

Available
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,
Document
No.
IV­
A­
06.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
52
there
was
no
trend
in
overall
eutrophication
conditions
since
1970.67
On
the
New
England
coast,
for
example,
the
number
of
red
and
brown
tides
and
shellfish
problems
from
nuisance
and
toxic
plankton
blooms
have
increased
over
the
past
two
decades,
a
development
thought
to
be
linked
to
increased
nitrogen
loadings
in
coastal
waters.
Long­
term
monitoring
in
the
U.
S.,

Europe,
and
other
developed
regions
of
the
world
shows
a
substantial
rise
of
nitrogen
levels
in
surface
waters,
which
are
highly
correlated
with
human­
generated
inputs
of
nitrogen
to
their
watersheds.

Between
1992
and
1997,
experts
surveyed
by
National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration
(
NOAA)
most
frequently
recommended
that
control
strategies
be
developed
for
agriculture,
wastewater
treatment,
urban
runoff,
and
atmospheric
deposition.
68
In
its
Third
Report
to
Congress
on
the
Great
Waters,
EPA
reported
that
atmospheric
deposition
contributes
67Deposition
of
Air
Pollutants
to
the
Great
Waters,
Third
Report
to
Congress,
June,
2000.

Great
Waters
are
defined
as
the
Great
Lakes,
the
Chesapeake
Bay,
Lake
Champlain,
and
coastal
waters.
The
first
report
to
Congress
was
delivered
in
May,
1994;
the
second
report
to
Congress
in
June,
1997.
Available
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,
Document
No.
IV­
A­
06.

68Bricker,
Suzanne
B.,
et
al.,
National
Estuarine
Eutrophication
Assessment,
Effects
of
Nutrient
Enrichment
in
the
Nation's
Estuaries,
National
Ocean
Service,
National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration,
September,
1999.
Available
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,
Document
No.

IV­
G­
145.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
53
from
2
to
38
percent
of
the
nitrogen
load
to
certain
coastal
waters.
69
A
review
of
peer
reviewed
literature
in
1995
on
the
subject
of
air
deposition
suggests
a
typical
contribution
of
20
percent
or
higher.
70
Human­
caused
nitrogen
loading
to
the
Long
Island
Sound
from
the
atmosphere
was
estimated
at
14
percent
by
a
collaboration
of
federal
and
state
air
and
water
agencies
in
1997.71
The
National
Exposure
Research
Laboratory,
US
EPA,
estimated
based
on
prior
studies
that
20
to
35
percent
of
the
nitrogen
loading
to
the
Chesapeake
Bay
is
attributable
to
atmospheric
deposition.
72
The
mobile
source
portion
of
atmospheric
NOx
contribution
to
the
Chesapeake
Bay
was
modeled
at
about
30
percent
of
total
air
deposition.
73
69Deposition
of
Air
Pollutants
to
the
Great
Waters,
Third
Report
to
Congress,
June,
2000.

Available
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,
Document
No.
IV­
A­
06.

70Valigura,
Richard,
et
al.,
Airsheds
and
Watersheds
II:
A
Shared
Resources
Workshop,

Air
Subcommittee
of
the
Chesapeake
Bay
Program,
March,
1997.
Available
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,

Document
No.
IV­
G­
144.

71The
Impact
of
Atmospheric
Nitrogen
Deposition
on
Long
Island
Sound,
The
Long
Island
Sound
Study,
September,
1997.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­

____­
XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

72Dennis,
Robin
L.,
Using
the
Regional
Acid
Deposition
Model
to
Determine
the
Nitrogen
Deposition
Airshed
of
the
Chesapeake
Bay
Watershed,
SETAC
Technical
Publications
Series,
1997.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.

__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
54
Deposition
of
nitrogen
from
aircraft
engines
contributes
to
elevated
nitrogen
levels
in
waterbodies.
The
NOx
reductions
from
the
proposed
standards
would
help
reduce
the
airborne
nitrogen
deposition
that
contributes
to
eutrophication
of
watersheds,
particularly
in
aquatic
systems
where
atmospheric
deposition
of
nitrogen
represents
a
significant
portion
of
total
nitrogen
loadings.

3.
Plant
Damage
from
Ozone
Ground­
level
ozone
can
also
cause
adverse
welfare
effects.
Specifically,
ozone
enters
the
leaves
of
plants
where
it
interferes
with
cellular
metabolic
processes.
This
interference
can
be
manifest
either
as
visible
foliar
injury
from
cell
injury
or
death,
and/
or
as
decreased
plant
growth
and
yield
due
to
a
reduced
ability
to
produce
food.
With
fewer
resources,
the
plant
reallocates
existing
resources
away
from
root
storage,
growth
and
reproduction
toward
leaf
repair
and
maintenance.
Plants
that
are
stressed
in
these
ways
become
more
susceptible
to
disease,
insect
attack,
harsh
weather
and
other
environmental
stresses.
Because
not
all
plants
are
equally
sensitive
to
ozone,
ozone
pollution
can
also
exert
a
selective
pressure
that
leads
to
changes
in
plant
community
composition.

73Dennis,
Robin
L.,
Using
the
Regional
Acid
Deposition
Model
to
Determine
the
Nitrogen
Deposition
Airshed
of
the
Chesapeake
Bay
Watershed,
SETAC
Technical
Publications
Series,
1997.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­
XX,
Document
No.

__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
55
Since
plants
are
at
the
center
of
the
food
web
in
many
ecosystems,
changes
to
the
plant
community
can
affect
associated
organisms
and
ecosystems
(
including
the
suitability
of
habitats
that
support
threatened
or
endangered
species
and
below
ground
organisms
living
in
the
root
zone).
Given
the
range
of
plant
sensitivities
and
the
fact
that
numerous
other
environmental
factors
modify
plant
uptake
and
response
to
ozone,
it
is
not
possible
to
identify
threshold
values
above
which
ozone
is
toxic
and
below
which
it
is
safe
for
all
plants.
However,
in
general,
the
science
suggests
that
ozone
concentrations
of
0.10
ppm
or
greater
can
be
phytotoxic
to
a
large
number
of
plant
species,
and
can
produce
acute
foliar
injury
responses,
crop
yield
loss
and
reduced
biomass
production.
Ozone
concentrations
below
0.10
ppm
(
0.05
to
0.09
ppm)
can
produce
these
effects
in
more
sensitive
plant
species,
and
have
the
potential
over
a
longer
duration
of
creating
chronic
stress
on
vegetation
that
can
lead
to
effects
of
concern
such
as
reduced
plant
growth
and
yield,
shifts
in
competitive
advantages
in
mixed
populations,
and
decreased
vigor
leading
to
diminished
resistance
to
pests,
pathogens,
and
injury
from
other
environmental
stresses.

Studies
indicate
that
these
effects
described
here
are
still
occurring
in
the
field
under
ambient
levels
of
ozone.
The
economic
value
of
some
welfare
losses
due
to
ozone
can
be
calculated,
such
as
crop
yield
loss
from
both
reduced
seed
production
(
e.
g.,
soybean)
and
visible
injury
to
some
leaf
crops
(
e.
g.,
lettuce,
spinach,
tobacco)
and
visible
injury
to
ornamental
plants
(
i.
e.,
grass,
flowers,
shrubs),
while
other
types
of
welfare
loss
may
not
be
fully
quantifiable
in
economic
terms
(
e.
g.,
reduced
aesthetic
value
of
trees
growing
in
Class
I
areas).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
56
As
discussed
earlier,
aircraft
engine
emissions
of
NOx
contribute
to
ozone.
The
proposed
standards
would
aid
in
the
reduction
of
ozone
and,
therefore,
help
reduce
crop
damage
and
stress
from
ozone
on
vegetation.

4.
Visibility
The
secondary
PM
NAAQS
is
designed
to
protect
against
adverse
welfare
effects
which
includes
visibility
impairment.
In
1997,
EPA
established
the
secondary
PM2.5
NAAQS
as
equal
to
the
primary
(
health­
based)
NAAQS
of
15
ug/
m3
(
based
on
a
3­
year
average
of
the
annual
mean)
and
65
ug/
m3
(
based
on
a
3­
year
average
of
the
98th
percentile
of
the
24­
hour
average
value)
(
62
FR
38669,
July
18,
1997).
EPA
concluded
that
PM2.5
causes
adverse
effects
on
visibility
in
various
locations,
depending
on
PM
concentrations
and
factors
such
as
chemical
composition
and
average
relative
humidity.
In
1997,
EPA
demonstrated
that
visibility
impairment
is
an
important
effect
on
public
welfare
and
that
unacceptable
visibility
impairment
is
experienced
throughout
the
U.
S.,
in
multi­
state
regions,
urban
areas,
and
remote
federal
Class
I
areas.
In
many
cities
having
annual
mean
PM2.5
concentrations
exceeding
annual
standard,

improvements
in
annual
average
visibility
resulting
from
the
attainment
of
the
annual
PM2.5
standard
are
expected
to
be
perceptible
to
the
general
population.
Based
on
annual
mean
monitored
PM2.5
data,
many
cities
in
the
Northeast,
Midwest,
and
Southeast
as
well
as
Los
Angeles
would
be
expected
to
experience
perceptible
improvements
in
visibility
if
the
PM2.5
annual
standard
were
attained.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
57
Furthermore,
in
setting
the
PM2.5
NAAQS,
EPA
acknowledged
that
levels
of
fine
particles
below
the
NAAQS
may
also
contribute
to
unacceptable
visibility
impairment
and
regional
haze
problems
in
some
areas,
and
section
169
of
the
Act
provides
additional
authorities
to
remedy
existing
impairment
and
prevent
future
impairment
in
the
156
national
parks,
forests
and
wilderness
areas
labeled
as
mandatory
Federal
Class
I
areas
(
62
FR
38680­
81,
July
18,

1997).

Visibility
can
be
defined
as
the
degree
to
which
the
atmosphere
is
transparent
to
visible
light.
74
Fine
particles
with
significant
light­
extinction
efficiencies
include
organic
matter,

sulfates,
nitrates,
elemental
carbon
(
soot),
and
soil.
Size
and
chemical
composition
of
particles
74National
Research
Council,
1993.
Protecting
Visibility
in
National
Parks
and
Wilderness
Areas.
National
Academy
of
Sciences
Committee
on
Haze
in
National
Parks
and
Wilderness
Areas.
National
Academy
Press,
Washington,
DC.
This
document
is
available
on
the
internet
at
http://
www.
nap.
edu/
books/
0309048443/
html/.
See
also
U.
S.
EPA
Air
Quality
Criteria
Document
for
Particulate
Matter
(
1996)
(
available
on
the
internet
at
http://
cfpub.
epa.
gov/
ncea/
cfm/
partmatt.
cfm)
and
Review
of
the
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
for
Particulate
Matter:
Policy
Assessment
of
Scientific
and
Technical
Information.

These
documents
can
be
found
in
Docket
A­
99­
06,
Documents
No.
II­
A­
23
and
IV­
A­
130­
32.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
58
strongly
affects
their
ability
to
scatter
or
absorb
light.
Nitrates
typically
contribute
1
to
6
percent
of
average
light
extinction
on
haziest
days
in
rural
Eastern
U.
S.
locations.
75
Visibility
is
important
because
it
directly
affects
people's
enjoyment
of
daily
activities
in
all
parts
of
the
country.
Individuals
value
good
visibility
for
the
well­
being
it
provides
them
directly,
both
in
where
they
live
and
work,
and
in
places
where
they
enjoy
recreational
opportunities.
Visibility
is
also
highly
valued
in
significant
natural
areas
such
as
national
parks
and
wilderness
areas,
because
of
the
special
emphasis
given
to
protecting
these
lands
now
and
for
future
generations.

To
quantify
changes
in
visibility,
we
compute
a
light­
extinction
coefficient,
which
shows
the
total
fraction
of
light
that
is
decreased
per
unit
distance.
Visibility
can
be
described
in
terms
of
visual
range
or
light
extinction
and
is
reported
using
an
indicator
called
deciview.
76
In
75US
EPA
Trends
Report
2001.
This
document
is
available
on
the
internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
airtrends/.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­____­

XX,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

76Visual
range
can
be
defined
as
the
maximum
distance
at
which
one
can
identify
a
black
object
against
the
horizon
sky.
It
is
typically
described
in
miles
or
kilometers.
Light
extinction
is
the
sum
of
light
scattering
and
absorption
by
particles
and
gases
in
the
atmosphere.
It
is
typically
expressed
in
terms
of
inverse
megameters
(
Mm­
1),
with
larger
values
representing
worse
visibility.
The
deciview
metric
describes
perceived
visual
changes
in
a
linear
fashion
over
its
entire
range,
analogous
to
the
decibel
scale
for
sound.
A
deciview
of
0
represents
pristine
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
59
addition
to
limiting
the
distance
that
one
can
see,
the
scattering
and
absorption
of
light
caused
by
air
pollution
can
also
degrade
the
color,
clarity,
and
contrast
of
scenes.

In
addition,
visibility
impairment
can
be
described
by
its
impact
over
various
periods
of
time,
by
its
source,
and
the
physical
conditions
in
various
regions
of
the
country.
Visibility
impairment
can
be
said
to
have
a
time
dimension
in
that
it
might
relate
to
short­
term
excursions
or
to
longer
periods
(
e.
g.,
worst
20
percent
of
days
and
annual
average
levels).
Anthropogenic
contributions
account
for
about
one­
third
of
the
average
extinction
coefficient
in
the
rural
West
and
more
than
80
percent
in
the
rural
East.
In
the
Eastern
U.
S.,
reduced
visibility
is
mainly
attributable
to
secondarily
formed
particles,
particularly
those
less
than
a
few
micrometers
in
diameter.
While
secondarily
formed
particles
still
account
for
a
significant
amount
in
the
West,

primary
emissions
contribute
a
larger
percentage
of
the
total
particulate
load
than
in
the
East.

Furthermore,
it
is
important
to
note
that
even
in
those
areas
with
relatively
low
concentrations
of
anthropogenic
fine
particles,
such
as
the
Colorado
Plateau,
small
increases
in
anthropogenic
fine
particulate
concentrations
can
lead
to
significant
decreases
in
visual
range.

This
is
one
of
the
reasons
mandatory
Federal
Class
I
areas
have
been
given
special
consideration
under
the
Clean
Air
Act.
77
conditions.
Under
many
scenic
conditions,
a
change
of
1
deciview
is
considered
perceptible
by
the
average
person.

77The
Clean
Air
Act
designates
156
national
parks
and
wilderness
areas
as
mandatory
Federal
Class
I
areas
for
visibility
protection.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
60
Taken
together
with
other
programs,
reductions
from
this
proposal
would
help
to
improve
visibility
across
the
nation,
including
mandatory
Federal
Class
I
areas.

5.
Climate
Change
In
addition,
NOx
at
cruise
altitudes
from
subsonic
aircraft
is
considered
to
be
a
precursor
of
tropospheric
ozone
and
a
contributor
to
greenhouse
gas.
78
The
NOx
emissions
from
subsonic
aircraft
in
1992
were
estimated
to
have
increased
ozone
at
cruise
altitudes
by
up
to
6
percent
in
northern
mid­
latitudes.
This
ozone
increase
may
rise
to
about
13
percent
by
2050.79
C.
Other
Criteria
Pollutants
Affected
by
This
NPRM
The
standards
being
proposed
today
would
also
help
reduce
levels
of
nitrogen
dioxide
(
NO2),
for
which
NAAQS
have
been
established.
Currently,
every
area
in
the
United
States
has
been
designated
to
be
in
attainment
with
the
NO2
NAAQS.

78Intergovernmental
Panel
on
Climate
Change
(
World
Meteorological
Organization/
United
Nations
Environment
Program),
"
Aviation
and
the
Global
Atmosphere,''

1999.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
at
the
Cambridge
University
Press'
web
site
at
www.
cup.
org
or
Docket
No.
OAR
2002­
0030,
Document
No,
__
­_­__.

79Ibid.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
61
IV.
Description
of
Action
Under
the
authority
of
section
231
of
the
CAA,
EPA
today
proposes
to
adopt
standards
equivalent
to
ICAO's
February
1999
NOx
emission
standards
(
these
NOx
standards
were
adopted
at
CAEP/
4
in
1998
and
approved
by
the
ICAO
Council
in
1999)
and
March
1997
test
procedure
amendments.
Today's
proposed
emission
standards
and
test
procedure
amendments
apply
to
commercial
aircraft
engines;
no
general
aviation
or
military
engines
are
covered
by
today's
proposal.
The
commercial
aircraft
engines
subject
to
today's
proposed
NOx
standards
are
those
gas
turbine
engines
that
are
newly
certified
(
and
designed)
after
the
effective
date
of
the
proposed
regulations.
(
Newly
manufactured
or
already
certified
engines
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
proposed
regulations
would
not
have
to
meet
these
standards.)
For
the
sake
of
consistency
and
harmonization,
the
effective
dates
below
for
the
proposed
NOx
standards
are
identical
with
those
of
the
ICAO
1999
NOx
standards.
The
proposed
NOx
emission
standards,

test
procedure
amendments,
and
their
effective
dates
are
described
below.

A.
What
Emission
Standards
Are
Under
Consideration?

As
discussed
earlier
in
sections
II
and
III
of
today's
notice,
section
231(
a)(
2)(
A)
of
the
CAA
authorizes
EPA
to
establish
emission
standards
for
aircraft
engine
emissions
"...
which
in
[
her]
judgment
causes,
or
contributes
to,
air
pollution
which
may
reasonably
be
anticipated
to
endanger
public
health
or
welfare."
The
Administrator
may
revise
such
standards
from
"
time
to
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
62
time."
CAA
section
231(
b)
requires
that
any
emission
standards
provide
sufficient
lead
time
"
to
permit
the
development
and
application
of
the
requisite
technology,
giving
appropriate
consideration
to
the
cost
of
compliance
within
such
period."

Today's
rule
proposes
near­
term
standards
that
would
go
into
effect
in
2004
to
ensure
future
engines
do
not
jeopardize
recent
or
past
technology
gains.
These
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
international
consensus
emissions
standards
for
aircraft
engines
adopted
by
ICAO's
CAEP
in
1998.80
EPA
intends
to
promulgate
these
standards
by
January
2004
in
order
to
be
consistent
with
U.
S.
obligations
under
ICAO.
At
the
same
time,
EPA
anticipates
establishing
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
the
future.
EPA
will
participate
at
CAEP/
6
(
sixth
meeting
of
CAEP),
which
is
scheduled
in
February
2004,
to
establish
more
stringent
international
consensus
emission
standards
for
aircraft
engines.
Such
standards
would
likely
be
a
central
consideration
in
a
future
EPA
regulation
of
aircraft
engine
emissions.

We
believe
this
two­
step
approach
is
the
most
appropriate
means
to
address
emissions
from
aircraft
engines
in
this
rulemaking.
It
would
codify
current
practice,
with
no
significant
lead
time,
as
a
near­
term
approach.
81
EPA
has
authority
to
revise
emission
standards
from
"
time
80ICAO,
CAEP,
Fourth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
April
6­
8,
1998,
Report,
Document
9720,
CAEP/
4.

81As
described
later,
more
information
and
greater
lead
time
would
be
necessary
to
require
more
stringent
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
63
to
time".
EPA
intends
to
address
more
stringent
emission
standards
requiring
more
lead
time
in
a
future
rulemaking
(
see
section
IV.
A.
5.
for
further
discussion
of
future
standards).

1.
Today's
Proposed
NOx
Standards
EPA
proposes
to
adopt
standards
equivalent
to
ICAO's
1999
NOx
emission
standards
for
newly
certified
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines
(
turbofan
and
turbojet
engines)
of
rated
thrust
or
output
greater
than
26.7
kilonewtons
(
kN)
with
compliance
dates
as
follows:
82
For
engines
of
a
type
or
model
of
which
that
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
was
after
December
31,
2003:

a)
for
engines
with
a
pressure
ratio
of
30
or
less:

1)
for
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
89.0
kN:

NOx
=
(
19
+
1.6(
rated
pressure
ratio))
g/
kN(
rated
output)

2)
for
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89.0
kN:

NOx
=
(
37.572
+
1.6(
rated
pressure
ratio)
­
0.2087(
rated
output))
g/
kN(
rated
output)

b)
for
engines
with
a
pressure
ratio
of
more
than
30
but
less
than
62.5:

1)
for
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
89.0
kN:

82This
proposal
includes
standards
for
low­,
mid­,
and
high­
thrust
engines
(
see
below
for
further
discussion
of
the
different
standards
based
on
the
thrust
of
the
engines)
.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
64
NOx
=
(
7
+
2.0(
rated
pressure
ratio))
g/
kN(
rated
output)

2)
for
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89.0
kN:

NOx
=
(
42.71
+
1.4286(
rated
pressure
ratio)
­
0.4013(
rated
output)
+

0.00642(
rated
pressure
ratio

rated
output))
g/
kN(
rated
output)

c)
for
engines
with
a
pressure
ratio
of
62.5
or
more:

NOx
=
(
32
+
1.6(
rated
pressure
ratio))
g/
kN(
rated
output).

The
NOx
emission
standards
presented
above
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
NOx
standards
that
have
an
implementation
date
of
December
31,
2003.83
2.
Proposed
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Mid­
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
EPA
is
proposing
to
adopt
NOx
standards
for
newly
certified
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
(
those
engines
designed
and
certified
after
the
effective
date
of
the
proposed
regulations,

83)
ICAO's
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
became
effective
July
19,
1999,
and
applicable
as
of
November
4,
1999.
December
31,
2003
is
the
implementation
date
for
these
standards.

However,
for
the
purpose
of
this
Notice
the
effective
date
is
considered
the
implementation
date.

(
ICAO,
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices,

Environmental
Protection,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993
 
Amendment
4,

July
19,
1999.)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
65
which
have
a
rated
output
or
thrust
greater
than
89
kN)
that
generally
represent
about
a
16
percent
reduction
(
or
increase
in
stringency)
from
the
existing
standard.
(
See
section
IV.
A.
1(
a)(
1)
and
IV.
A.
1(
b)(
1)
above
for
the
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines.)
More
specifically,
at
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
30
the
proposed
NOx
standards
represent
a
16
percent
reduction
from
the
existing
standard.
At
rated
pressure
ratios
of
10
and
20
,
the
proposed
standards
correspond
to
27
and
20
percent
reductions,
respectively.
In
addition,
at
rated
pressure
ratios
of
40
and
50,
the
proposed
NOx
standards
signify
9
and
4
percent
reductions,
respectively.

Also,
the
proposed
and
existing
standards
are
equivalent
at
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
62.5.
See
Figure
IV­
1
in
section
IV.
B.
for
a
comparison
of
the
proposed
NOx
standards
(
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
standards)
to
the
existing
standards
(
equivalent
to
CAEP/
2
standards)
.

3.
Proposed
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­
Thrust
Engines
For
newly
certified
low­
thrust
engines
(
engines
with
a
thrust
or
rated
output
of
more
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89.0
kN),
EPA
is
today
proposing
to
adopt
near­
term
NOx
standards
that
are
different
than
the
standards
proposed
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
(
engines
with
thrust
greater
than
89.0
kN).
84
In
addition
to
rated
pressure
ratio,
the
proposed
standards
for
low­

84
Today's
proposed
NOx
standards
for
low
thrust
or
small
engines
specify
that
engines
with
a
rated
output
or
thrust
at
26.7
kN
meet
the
existing
standard,
and
engines
with
a
rated
output
at
89
kN
meet
the
proposed
(
or
CAEP/
4)
standards.
For
engines
with
rated
outputs
or
thrust
levels
between
26.7
and
89
kN,
a
linear
interpolation
was
made
between
the
low
range
of
the
existing
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
66
thrust
engines
would
also
be
dependent
on
an
engine's
thrust
or
rated
output.
85
(
See
section
IV.
A.
1(
a)(
2)
and
IV.
A.
1(
b)(
2)
for
a
description
of
these
different
standards.)
For
example,
at
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
30
and
a
thrust
of
58
kN
(
thrust
level
in
the
middle
of
26.7
kN
and
89
kN),

these
proposed
standards
are
an
8
percent
reduction
(
or
increase
in
stringency)
from
the
existing
standard
compared
to
a
16
percent
reduction
for
the
proposed
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines.
86
standard
and
the
high
range
of
the
proposed
standard
based
upon
the
rated
output
to
determine
the
proposed
NOx
limits
for
such
engines.
Thus,
thrust
dependent
standards
are
being
proposed
for
engines
with
rated
output
or
thrust
between
26.7
kN
and
89
kN.

85The
proposed
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
dependent
only
on
an
engine's
rated
pressure
ratio.

86Additional
examples
of
the
proposed
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines
in
comparison
to
the
proposed
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
provided
below.
At
rated
pressure
ratios
of
10
and
20
with
a
thrust
of
58
kN,
the
proposed
low­
thrust
engine
standards
are
a
14
and
10
percent
reduction
from
the
existing
standard,
respectively.
Whereas,
at
these
same
rated
pressure
ratios,
the
proposed
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
27
and
20
percent
reductions.

In
addition,
at
rated
pressure
ratios
of
40
and
50
with
a
thrust
of
58
kN,
these
low­
thrust
engine
standards
signify
a
5
and
2
percent
reduction
from
the
existing
standard,
respectively.
In
comparison,
at
these
same
rated
pressure
ratios,
the
proposed
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
9
and
4
percent
reductions.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
67
The
existing
standards
were
not
set
at
a
stringency
level
that
created
a
need
for
low­
thrust
engines
to
have
different
requirements,
but
at
the
level
of
NOx
stringency
proposed
today
different
requirements
are
considered
necessary
for
such
engines.
Due
to
their
physical
size,
it
is
difficult
to
apply
the
best
NOx
reduction
technology
to
low
thrust
or
small
engines.
The
difficulty
increases
progressively
as
size
is
reduced
(
from
around
89
kN).
87
For
example,
the
relatively
small
combustor
space
and
section
height
of
these
engines
creates
constraints
on
the
use
of
low
NOx
fuel
staged
combustor
concepts
which
inherently
require
the
availability
of
greater
flow
path
cross­
sectional
area
than
conventional
combustors.
88
Also,
fuel
staged
combustors
need
more
fuel
injectors,
and
this
need
is
not
compatible
with
the
relatively
lower
total
fuel
flows
of
lower
thrust
engines.
(
Reductions
in
fuel
flow
per
nozzle
are
difficult
to
attain
without
having
clogging
problems
due
to
the
small
sizes
of
the
fuel
metering
ports.)
In
addition,

lower
thrust
engine
combustors
have
an
inherently
greater
liner
surface­
to­
combustion
volume
ratio,
and
this
requires
increased
wall
cooling
air
flow.
Thus,
less
air
would
be
available
to
87ICAO/
CAEP,
Report
of
Third
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
December
5­
15,
1995,
Document
9675,
CAEP/
3.
A
copy
of
this
report
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.

__­_­__).

88"
The
burner
section
of
an
aircraft
engine,
which
contains
the
combustion
chamber,
burns
a
mixture
of
fuel
and
air,
and
delivers
the
resulting
gases
to
the
turbine
at
a
temperature
which
will
not
exceed
the
allowable
limit
at
the
turbine
inlet."
(
United
Technologies
Pratt
and
Whitney,

"
The
Aircraft
Gas
Turbine
Engine
and
Its
Operation,"
August
1998.)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
68
obtain
acceptable
turbine
inlet
temperature
distribution
and
for
emissions
control.
89
Since
the
difficulties
increase
progressively
as
engine
thrust
size
is
reduced,
EPA
believes
it
would
be
appropriate
to
make
a
graded
change
in
stringency
of
the
proposed
NOx
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines.

4.
Rationale
of
Proposed
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­,
Mid­,
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
The
proposed
standards
for
low­,
mid­,
and
high­
thrust
engines,
which
are
equivalent
to
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
ensure
that
new
engine
designs
would
incorporate
the
existing
combustor
technology
and
would
not
perform
worse
than
today's
current
engines.
EPA
intends
to
promulgate
these
standards
by
January
2004
in
order
to
be
consistent
with
U.
S.
obligations
under
ICAO.
(
See
section
II.
B
for
a
discussion
of
the
obligation
of
ICAO's
participating
nations).
At
this
time,
there
is
not
sufficient
lead
time
to
require
more
stringent
emission
standards
than
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
emission
standards
by
January
2004.
As
discussed
later
in
section
IV.
A.
5
for
future
standards,
we
are
deferring
action
on
more
stringent
NOx
standards
because
pursuant
to
section
231(
b)
of
the
CAA
we
need
more
time
to
better
understand
the
cost
of
compliance
with
89ICAO/
CAEP
Working
Group
3
(
Emissions),
"
Combined
Report
of
the
Certification
and
Technology
Subgroups,"
section
2.3.6.1,
Presented
by
the
Chairman
of
the
Technology
Subgroup,
Third
Meeting,
Bonn,
Germany,
June
1995.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
69
such
standards,
and
additional
cost
data
is
expected
to
be
available
from
CAEP/
6
in
February
2004
(
see
section
IV.
A.
5
for
further
discussion
regarding
lead
time).

EPA
believes
that
the
proposed
standards
would
not
impose
any
additional
burden
on
manufacturers,
because
manufacturers
are
already
designing
new
engines
to
meet
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards
by
2004
(
see
section
VII
of
today's
notice
for
further
discussion
of
regulatory
impact).
Even
though
the
U.
S.
did
not
immediately
adopt
the
ICAO
NOx
standards
after
1999,
engine
manufacturers
have
continued
to
make
progress
in
reducing
these
emissions.
Today's
proposed
standards
are
aimed
at
assuring
that
this
progress
is
not
reversed
in
the
future.

5.
Future
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­,
Mid­,
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
More
stringent
standards
for
low­,
mid­,
and
high­
thrust
engines
will
be
necessary
in
the
future.
As
discussed
earlier
in
section
III,
the
substantial
growth
in
aircraft
emissions
is
projected
to
occurring
at
a
time
when
other
mobile
source
categories
are
reducing
emissions.
90
90The
projected
growth
in
aircraft
emissions
is
not
simply
from
the
number
of
operations,
but
it
could
also
be
attributed
to
the
change
in
the
types
of
aircraft
being
operated.
For
example,

regional
aircraft
activity
is
growing
(
regional
aircraft
are
generally
referred
to
as
those
aircraft
with
more
than
19
but
fewer
than
100
seats
 
regional
jets
and
turboprops).
In
the
U.
S.,
traffic
flown
by
regional
airlines
increased
about
20
percent
in
1999
and
is
expected
to
grow
approximately
7
percent
annually
during
the
next
ten
years,
compared
to
4
to
6
percent
for
the
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
70
From
1996
to
2020,
aircraft's
contribution
to
the
total
U.
S.
mobile
source
NOx
is
projected
to
increase
from
1.3
percent
to
4.2
percent.
91,
In
addition,
Tthe
1999
EPA
study
of
commercial
aircraft
activity
in
ten
cities
projected
that
the
aircraft
NOx
emissions
would
double
in
some
of
these
cities
by
2010,
and
the
aircraft
component
of
the
regional
mobile
source
NOx
emissions
in
the
ten
cities
would
grow
from
a
range
of
1
to
4
percent
that
existed
in
1990
to
a
range
of
2
to
10
major
airlines.
In
addition,
regional
jets
comprised
about
25
percent
of
the
regional
aircraft
fleet
in
2000,
up
from
only
4.2
percent
in
1996,
and
their
fraction
of
the
fleet
is
expected
to
increase
to
nearly
50
percent
by
2011.
Regional
aircraft
are
40
to
60
percent
less
fuel
efficient
compare
to
larger
narrow­
and
wide­
body
aircraft,
and
regional
jets
are
10
to
60
percent
less
fuel
efficient
than
turboprop
aircraft.
However,
fuel
costs
have
less
of
an
effect
on
the
operating
costs
of
regional
aircraft
compared
to
large
aircraft.
In
addition,
regional
jets
have
historically
operated
at
higher
load
factors
than
turboprops
due
to
their
popularity
with
travelers.
(
R.
Babikian,
S.
P.

Lukachko
and
I.
A.
Waitz,
"
Historical
Fuel
Efficiency
Characteristics
of
Regional
Aircraft
from
Technological,
Operational,
and
Cost
Perspectives,"
Journal
of
Air
Transport
Management,

Volume
8,
No.
6,
pp.
389­
400,
Nov.
2002.
A
copy
of
the
paper
can
be
found
at
http://
web.
mit.
edu/
aeroastro/
www/
people/
iaw/
bio.
html
or
Docket
No.
OAR
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
__­_­__.)

91U.
S.
EPA,
"
Draft
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines",
EPA420­
R­
03­
008,
April
2003,
at
Table
3.2­
3.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
nonroad/.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­

2001­
28,
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
71
percent
in
2010.92
(
As
indicated
earlier,
the
above
projections
were
made
prior
to
the
tragic
events
of
September
11,
2001,
and
the
subsequent
economic
downturn.
A
January
2003
report
by
the
Department
of
Transportation
indicated
that
the
combination
of
the
September
11,
2001
terrorist
attacks
and
a
cut­
back
in
business
travel
had
a
significant
and
perhaps
long­
lasting
effect
on
air
traffic
demand.
However,
the
FAA
expects
the
demand
for
air
travel
to
recover,
and
then
continue
a
long­
term
trend
of
annual
growth
in
the
United
States.)
More
recently,
as
discussed
earlier
FAA
reports
that
flights
(
or
activity)
of
commercial
air
carriers
will
increase
by
18
percent
by
2010
and
45
percent
by
2020.93
Thus,
based
on
these
trends
more
stringent
NOx
92U.
S.
EPA,
"
Evaluation
of
Air
Pollutant
Emissions
from
Subsonic
Commercial
Jet
Aircraft,"

April
1999,
EPA420­
R­
99­
013.

93The
flight
forecast
data
is
based
on
FAA's
Terminal
Area
Forecast
System
(
TAFS).
TAFs
is
the
official
forecast
of
aviation
activity
at
FAA
facilities.
This
includes
FAA­
towered
airports,

federally­
contracted
towered
airports,
nonfederal
towered
airports,
and
many
non­
towered
airports.
For
detailed
information
on
TAFS
and
the
air
carrier
activity
forecasts
see
the
following
FAA
website:
http://
www.
apo.
data.
faa.
gov/
faatafall.
HTM.
As
of
May
1,
2003,
the
aviation
forecasts
contained
in
TAFS
for
Fiscal
Years
2002­
2020
included
the
impact
of
the
terrorists'
attacks
of
September
11,
2001
and
the
recent
economic
downturn.
However,
these
projections
did
not
fully
reflect
the
ongoing
structural
changes
occurring
within
the
aviation
industry.
A
copy
of
the
May
1,
2003
forecast
summary
report
for
air
carrier
activity
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030
Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
72
standards
than
the
proposed
standards
are
needed
in
the
future
to
reduce
aircraft
NOx
emissions
in
nonattainment
areas.

Further
stringency
of
the
NOx
standards
would
reduce
the
expected
growth
in
commercial
aircraft
emissions.
The
importance
of
controlling
aircraft
emissions
has
grown
in
many
areas
(
especially
areas
not
meeting
the
1­
hour
and
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS)
as
controls
on
other
sources
become
more
stringent
and
attainment
of
the
NAAQS's
has
still
not
been
achieved.
(
Many
airports
in
the
U.
S.
are
located
in
nonattainment
areas.
94)
As
activity
increases,
aircraft
are
would
emitting
increasing
amounts
of
NOx
in
many
nonattainment
areas,
and
thus,
aircraft
emissions
would
further
aggravate
the
problems
in
these
areas
(
either
by
emitting
pollutants
directly
within
a
nonattainment
area
or
by
contributing
to
regional
transport
emissions
in
an
area
upwind
of
a
nonattainment
area).
More
stringent
aircraft
engine
NOx
standards
would
assist
in
alleviating
these
problems
in
nonattainment
areas,
and
they
would
aid
in
preventing
future
concerns
in
areas
currently
designated
as
attainment
(
or
maintenance)
areas.
In
addition,

attainment
or
maintenance
of
the
NAAQS
requires
that
aircraft
engines
be
subject
to
a
program
of
control
compatible
with
their
significance
as
pollution
sources.

94For
information
on
the
geographic
location
of
airports,
see
the
following
U.
S.
Department
of
Transportation
(
Bureau
of
Transportation
Statistics)
website:
www.
bts.
gov.
oai.
The
report
or
database
provided
on
the
website
entitled,
"
Airport
Activity
Statistics
of
Certificated
Air
Carriers:
Summary
Tables
2000,"
lists
airports
by
community.
In
addition,
see
the
following
EPA
website
for
information
on
nonattainment
areas
for
criteria
pollutants:

www.
epa.
gov/
oar/
oaqps/
greenbk.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
73
EPA,
therefore,
is
considering
more
stringent
future
standards,
beyond
today's
proposed
standards.
Leading
up
to
CAEP/
6
in
February
2004,
one
of
the
objectives
of
CAEP
(
and/
or
the
international
aviation
community)
is
to
consider
more
stringent
aircraft
engine
standards
than
CAEP/
4
standards
for
all
gaseous
emissions,
especially
NOx.
95
ICAO
CAEP
working
groups
are
currently
assessing
the
technological
feasibility,
economic
reasonableness,
and
environmental
benefit
of
imposing
more
stringent
NOx
emissions
standards
for
aircraft
engines
beyond
that
which
will
become
effective
in
2004
(
CAEP/
4
standards).
Options
being
considered
range
from
5
to
30
percent
more
stringent
with
an
effective
date
as
early
as
2008
to
2012
(
these
options
are
accompanied
by
more
stringent
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines).
96
Based
on
the
results
of
this
assessment,
a
proposal
for
more
stringent
NOx
standards
is
expected
to
be
made
at
CAEP/
6.97
95ICAO,
CAEP,
Fifth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
January
1­
17,
2001,
"
Report
on
Agenda
Item
4,"
CAEP/
5­
WP/
86,
January
17,
2001.
A
copy
of
this
report
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­

0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__).

96ICAO,
CAEP,
Steering
Group
Meeting,
Paris,
France,
September
10­
13,
2002,
"
Summary
of
Discussions
and
Decisions
of
the
Second
Meeting
of
the
Steering
Group,"
September
11,
2002,

CAEP­
SG20022­
SD/
2.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
__­_­__).
Since
this
paper
was
written,
the
working
groups
have
also
decided
to
consider
the
range
of
stringency
options
for
an
effective
date
of
2008.

97ICAO,
CAEP,
Steering
Group
Meeting,
Paris,
France,
September
10­
13,
2002,
"
Summary
of
Discussions
and
Decisions
of
the
First
Meeting
of
the
Steering
Group,"
September
10,
2002,
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
74
(
No
changes
to
the
standards
of
other
pollutants,
hydrocarbons
and
carbon
monoxide,
are
anticipated.)
Activity
is
also
underway
to
identify
and
assess
the
potential
for
long­
term
technology
goals
to
be
established
for
further
emissions
reductions.
98,99
The
aim
of
the
goal
setting
activity
is
to
complement
the
ICAO
CAEP
standard
setting
process
with
information
to
aid
the
engine
and
airframe
manufacturer's
design
process.
The
goals
are
expected
to
take
into
account
the
results
of
recently
completed
emissions
reduction
technology
programs
such
as
those
conducted
by
National
Aeronautics
and
Space
Administration
(
NASA)
and
the
European
Commission
and
the
timeline
necessary
to
carry
those
technologies
from
the
research
phase
CAEP­
SG20022­
SD/
1.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
__­_­__).

98ICAO,
CAEP,
Fifth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
January
1­
17,
2001,
"
Report
on
Agenda
Item
4,"
CAEP/
5­
WP/
86,
January
17,
2001.
A
copy
of
this
report
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­

0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__).

99For
the
purpose
of
setting
long­
term
technology
goals,
activity
on
the
below
tasks
was
initiated
after
CAEP/
5
in
2001,
and
it
is
expected
to
continue
beyond
CAEP/
6.

(
a)
characterize
emissions
performance
of
future
technologies
being
pursued
under
national
and
international
research
programs,
including
technology
readiness;

(
b)
develop
methodologies
for
quantifying
aviation
emissions
inventories;

(
c)
develop
forecasts
of
emission
trends
both
locally
and
globally;
and
(
d)
examine
how
such
goals
might
be
applied
within
the
current
regulatory
regime.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
75
through
commercialization.
100
EPA
is
currently
working
with
FAA
and
CAEP
working
groups
(
as
described
in
section
V)
in
the
evaluation
of
NOx
stringency
options
for
CAEP/
6
and
the
potential
for
long­
term
technology
goals.

Manufacturers
should
be
able
to
achieve
additional
reductions
with
more
lead
time
than
is
provided
by
today's
proposal.
After
CAEP/
6,
we
would
assess
whether
or
not
the
new
international
consensus
and
longer­
term
standards
(
which
are
expected
to
be
adopted)
would
be
stringent
enough
to
protect
the
U.
S.
public
health
and
welfare.
If
so,
we
would
propose
to
adopt
the
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards
soon
thereafter.
EPA
(
or
the
U.
S.)
retains
the
discretion
to
adopt
more
stringent
standards
in
the
future
if
the
international
consensus
standards
ultimately
prove
insufficient
to
protect
U.
S.
air
quality.

Deferring
consideration
of
more
stringent
future
standards
until
after
CAEP/
6
would
allow
us
to
obtain
important
additional
information
on
the
costs
of
such
standards.
101
As
described
earlier
in
this
notice,
section
231
of
the
CAA
authorizes
EPA
from
"
time
to
time"
to
revisit
emission
standards,
and
it
requires
that
any
standards'
effective
dates
permit
the
development
of
necessary
technology,
giving
appropriate
consideration
to
the
cost.
We
are
not
100ICAO,
CAEP,
Fourth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
April
6­
8,
1998,
Report,
Document
9720,

CAEP/
4,
see
Appendix
A
to
the
Report
on
Agenda
Item
4
(
page
4­
A­
1).

101For
low­
thrust
engines,
deferring
regulatory
action
on
more
stringent
future
standards
until
after
CAEP/
6
would
also
enable
us
to
obtain
additional
information
on
the
technological
feasibility
of
such
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
76
proposing
more
stringent
NOx
standards
today
primarily
because
we
need
more
time
to
better
understand
the
cost
of
compliance
of
such
standards,
and
additional
cost
data
is
expected
to
be
available
from
CAEP/
6
in
February
2004.
Producing
(
and/
or
developing)
new
engines
or
engine
technologies
requires
significant
financial
investments
from
engine
manufacturers,
which
takes
time
to
recoup
(
the
amount
of
time
depends
upon
sales
of
engines,
replacement
parts,
etc.).

As
discussed
earlier,
CAEP
working
groups
are
currently
analyzing
the
costs
and
emission
benefits
(
taking
into
account
lead
time)
for
the
options
of
further
NOx
stringency
(
beyond
the
CAEP/
4
standards)
being
considered
for
CAEP/
6.102
After
evaluating
such
information,
we
would
then
be
better
situated
to
make
decisions
on
an
appropriate
level
of
stringency
and
implementation
timing
that
maximizes
emission
reductions
from
aircraft
engines,
taking
into
consideration
cost.

In
addition,
if
we
address
more
stringent
future
standards
in
accordance
with
CAEP/
6
action,
we
would
have
the
benefits
of
harmonizing
with
international
standards.
103
Due
to
the
international
nature
of
the
aviation
industry,
setting
NOx
standards
at
the
appropriate
level
to
meet
U.
S.
air
quality
needs
through
international
consensus
provides
the
potential
for
greater
environmental
benefits.
Aircraft
and
aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
and
they
are
102Specifically,
the
Forecasting
and
Economic
Analysis
Support
Group
(
FESG)
is
conducting
an
analysis
of
the
costs
and
emission
benefits
for
the
further
stringency
options.

103As
discussed
earlier,
the
U.
S.
has
an
obligation
to
be
compatible
with
the
ICAO
program
if
deemed
appropriate.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
77
designed
and
built
to
meet
international
standards.
Adoption
of
international
standards
ensures
emission
reductions
from
domestic
and
foreign
aircraft
in
the
U.
S.
In
addition,
international
consensus
standards
lead
to
air
quality
benefits
in
the
U.
S.
and
throughout
the
world.

B.
Already
Certified,
Newly
Manufactured
Engines
Under
current
rules,
the
proposed
NOx
standards
would
not
apply
to
already
certified,

newly
manufactured
engines
(
in­
production
engines
or
engines
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
proposed
standards),
and
the
rationale
for
not
applying
these
standards
to
already
certified
low­,
mid­,
and
high­
thrust
engines
is
discussed
below.
Nearly
all
already
certified
engines
(
94
percent
of
in­
production
engine
models
in
the
ICAO
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank104)

104
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank,

July
2002.
This
data
bank
is
available
at
http://
www.
QinetiQ.
com/
aviation_
emissions_
databank.

A
copy
of
this
data
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__.

In
addition,
a
copy
of
a
table
including
data
of
engine
NOx
emissions
from
the
ICAO
data
bank
and
their
margin
to
the
proposed
NOx
standards
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
78
currently
meet
or
perform
better
than
the
standards
we
are
proposing
to
adopt
today.
105
(
See
Figure
IV­
1
below
for
a
comparison
of
the
NOx
emission
levels
of
current
in­
production
engines
105116
out
of
124
(
94
percent)
engine
models
that
are
currently
in
production
perform
better
than
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards.
The
8
engine
models
(
which
are
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines)
that
are
not
achieving
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
are
from
three
different
Pratt
and
Whitney
(
PW)

engine
types
or
families
(
engines
and
their
thrust
variants
with
the
same
build
standard).
These
engines
are
the
following:
(
1)
JT8D­
217C
E­
kit
and
JT8D­
219
E­
kit;
(
2)
PW4077D,
PW4084D,

and
PW4090;
and
(
3)
PW4164,
PW4168,
and
PW4168A.
(
See
Figure
IV­
1
below
that
specifically
shows
these
8
in­
production
models
in
relation
to
the
CAEP/
4
or
proposed
NOx
standards.)
For
the
year
2000,
these
8
engine
models
were
found
on
approximately
751
out
of
20,137
(
3.7
percent)
aircraft
owned
by
U.
S.
carriers
and
accounted
for
approximately
1,541,172
out
of
11,505,063
(
13.4
percent)
of
U.
S.
domestic
flights.

[
The
above
reference
for
the
fleet
fraction
is
BACK
Aviation
Solutions,

www.
backaviation.
com/
Information_
Services/
default.
htm..

The
domestic
flight
information
is
based
on
SAGE,
the
System
for
Assessing
Aviation
Emissions.
SAGE
is
an
FAA
model
that
estimates
aircraft
emissions
through
the
full
flight
profile
using
non­
proprietary
input
data,
such
as
BACK,
FAA's
Enhanced
Traffic
Management
System
(
ETMS),
and
the
Official
Airline
Guide
(
OAG).
The
year
2000
air
traffic
movements
database
portion
of
SAGE
was
used
to
estimate
the
number
of
flights
using
the
subject
engines.]
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
79
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards.
106)
At
the
time
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
were
adopted
in
1998,

all
but
11
in­
production
engines
and
5
newly
designed
engine
models
(
these
5
engines
were
in
the
design
and
development
process
in
1998)
had
NOx
emission
levels
that
would
perform
better
than
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
107
Based
on
a
recent
CAEP
working
group
(
specifically,
the
Forecasting
and
Economic
Analysis
Support
Group
­
FESG)
analysis
of
applying
the
CAEP/
4
standards
to
already
certified
engines
(
at
dates
2,
4,
and
6
years
after
the
implementation
date
for
newly
certified
engines),
from
those
16
engine
models
identified
in
1998
today
there
are
only
4
already
certified
engine
models
or
two
engine
families
remaining
that
would
not
meet
the
106
For
Figure
IV­
1,
the
Allison,
Rolls­
Royce,
and
Textron
Lycoming
engines
with
rated
pressure
ratios
less
than
20
and
NOx
levels
above
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
actually
perform
better
than
the
standards,
since
there
are
different
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
for
these
low­
thrust
engines
(
see
section
IV.
A.
31.
ii.
for
further
discussion
of
NOx
standards
for
low
thrust
engines).
(
16
of
the
124
engines,
13
percent
of
engine
models
in
production,
in
Figure
IV­
1
and
the
ICAO
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank
are
low
 
thrust
engines
 
engines
with
thrust
greater
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89
kN.)

107
ICAO,
CAEP/
4,
Working
Paper
4,
"
Economic
Assessment
of
the
EPG
NOx
Stringency
Proposal,"
March
12,
1998,
Presented
by
the
Chairman
of
Forecasting
and
Economic
Analysis
Support
Group
(
FESG),
Agenda
Item
1:
Review
of
proposals
relating
to
NOx
emissions,

including
the
amendment
of
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
See
Table
3.1
of
paper.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
80
CAEP/
4
standards.
108
The
other
engine
models
have
either,
through
additional
testing
or
modifications,
been
improved
to
meet
the
standards
or
the
engines
are
no
longer
inproduction
109
(
There
is
only
one
remaining
newly
designed
engine
model
 
out
of
the
five
identified
in
1998
 
that
may
be
certified
after
2003,
and
thus,
it
would
need
to
meet
the
CAEP/
4
or
proposed
standards
for
newly
certified
engines,
which
are
effective
beginning
in
2004.)
110
108CAEP
Steering
Group
Meeting,
"
FESG
Economic
Assessment
of
Applying
a
Production
Cut­

Off
To
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
Standard",
Presented
by
the
FESG
Co­
Rapporteurs,
Paris,
September
10­
13,
2002
(
CAEP­
SG20022­
WP/
20,
September
12,
2002).
The
remaining
already
certified
engine
models
are
the
JT8D­
217C,
JT8D­
219,
PW4084D,
and
PW4090.

109
Only
the
first
and
second
engine
types
of
the
three
PW
types
described
earlier
would
not
meet
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
if
they
were
applied
to
newly
manufactured
or
already
certified
engines.
The
PW4077D
is
a
derated
version
of
the
PW4084D,
and
it
is
essentially
considered
the
same
engine.
In
addition,
the
PW4077D
has
a
NOx
level
that
is
0.2
percent
greater
than
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
FESG
rounded
this
margin
to
zero
and
considered
the
PW4077D
to
be
meeting
the
NOx
levels
of
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
The
third
engine
type
 
PW4164,
PW4168
and
PW4168A
engines
­­
are
now
certified
with
the
PW
4168
Technologically
Affordable
Low
NOx
(
Talon)
II
engine
combustor
technology,
which
performs
significantly
better
than
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
81
INSERT
FIGURE
IV­
1
The
recent
FESG
analysis
indicates
that
the
environmental
benefit
(
or
NOx
emissions
reduction)
of
applying
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
to
already
certified
engines,
which
would
only
affect
these
4
remaining
engines,
would
be
very
small.
As
mentioned
earlier,
the
remaining
four
already
certified
(
or
in­
production)
engines
that
perform
worse
than
the
CAEP/
4
or
proposed
standards
are
the
following
Pratt
and
Whitney
(
PW)
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines:
JT8D­
217C,

JT8D­
219,
PW4084D,
and
PW4090.
The
in­
production
JT8D­
217C
and
JT8D­
219
engines
could
potentially
apply
to
future
supersonic
business
jets,
and
the
aircraft
application
for
PW4084D
and
4090
engines
would
be
the
Boeing
777­
200s
and
­
300s.
Since
business
jets
have
a
very
low
utilization
(
about
100
to
200
annual
departures
per
aircraft),
the
emission
reductions
from
potential
new
JT8D­
217C
and
JT8D­
219
applications
would
be
very
small
irregardless
of
the
size
of
the
supersonic
business
jet
market.
If
the
potential
JT8D­
217C
and
JT8D­
219
supersonic
business
jets
were
to
capture
the
entire
projected
supersonic
business
jet
market
(
200
110
The
PW
Canada
growth
engine
is
the
one
remaining
newly
designed
engine
model.
The
ICAO
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank
currently
does
not
have
emissions
certification
data
for
such
an
engine,
and
thus,
we
anticipate
that
the
PW
Canada
growth
engine
would
still
be
affected
by
the
proposed
standards.
Yet,
due
to
the
CAEP/
4
standards
already
established,
we
expect
that
PW
Canada
has
already
planned
modifications
for
this
engine
or
any
other
newly
certified
engines
to
meet
today's
proposed
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
82
to
400
aircraft
over
a
10
year
period
or
20
to
40
aircraft
per
year),
the
total
estimated
annual
departures
would
be
about
2,000
to
8,000.
For
the
years
2005
and
2010,
there
are
estimated
to
be
from
23
to
27
million
departures
from
the
global
passenger
aircraft
fleet
(
the
potential
supersonic
business
jet
market
could
potentially
be
about
.01
to
.03
percent
of
these
global
fleet
departures),
so
the
resulting
NOx
emission
benefits
would
be
very
small.
111
In
regard
to
Boeing
777
aircraft
with
PW4084D/
4090
engines,
the
incremental
departures
for
such
aircraft
are
projected
to
be
no
greater
than
0.1
percent
per
year
(
up
to
25,500
departures
in
2010);
therefore,

the
resulting
NOx
emissions
reductions
would
also
be
considered
very
small.
(
The
FESG
assessment
also
showed
that
the
costs
of
applying
the
CAEP/
4
standards
to
already
certified
engines
would
be
relatively
small
on
an
industry
wide
basis.)
112
Consequently,
we
would
expect
there
to
be
minimal
environmental
benefit
to
also
apply
the
proposed
and
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
for
newly
certified
engines
to
already
certified,
newly
manufactured
engines
for
an
effective
date
after
2003
(
the
implementation
date
of
today's
proposed
standards
is
December
31,
2003).

111CAEP
Steering
Group
Meeting,
"
FESG
Economic
Assessment
of
Applying
a
Production
Cut­

Off
To
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
Standard",
Presented
by
the
FESG
Co­
Rapporteurs,
Paris,
September
10­
13,
2002
(
CAEP­
SG20022­
WP/
20,
September
12,
2002).
In
particular,
see
Table
5.1
entitled,
"
Excerpt
from
FESG
CAEP/
5
Traffic
and
Fleet
Mix
Forecast."

112The
costs
of
applying
CAEP/
4
standards
to
already
certified
engines
would
impact
just
one
engine
manufacturer.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
83
Also,
if
an
already
certified
engine
design
meets
the
standards
that
we
are
proposing
today,
then
it
is
unlikely
that
either
existing
or
future
engine
designs
built
to
that
design
or
type
(
derivatives
or
thrust
variants
with
the
same
build
standard)
would
not
meet
these
standards.

When
design
modifications
are
made
to
an
existing
engine
type,
then
this
engine
type
would
likely
need
to
be
re­
certified.
A
re­
certified
engine
type
would
be
required
to
comply
with
the
CAEP/
4
and
new
proposed
NOx
standards.

For
the
remaining
4
engines
(
or
two
engine
families)
being
built
that
do
not
meet
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
Pratt
and
Whitney
has
other
in­
production
engine
models
(
potentially
derived
versions
or
thrust
variants
of
engines
with
the
same
build
standard)
or
replacement/
alternative
engines
that
perform
better
than
the
proposed
NOx
standards
and
that
are
also
similar
in
size
and
aircraft
application.
113
For
example,
the
PW
4098
engine
would
achieve
the
NOx
levels
of
the
proposed
standards,
and
similar
to
the
PW4090
it
is
utilized
on
the
Boeing
777­
200
and
777­
300.

Due
to
the
1998
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards,
Pratt
and
Whitney
has
recently
certified
and
manufactured
these
other
or
replacement
engines.
Also,
based
upon
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
they
have
already
targeted
future
(
after
2003)
engine
designs
for
modification
so
that
newly
certified
or
designed
engines
would
meet
today's
proposed
NOx
standards.
Therefore,
it
appears
unlikely
that
a
substantial
number
of
the
4
remaining
engines
would
be
built
or
sold
in
the
future,
unless
113Although
the
remaining
4
engines
(
or
two
engine
families)
currently
being
built
are
expected
to
still
be
in
production
in
year
2004,
they
would
not
be
required
to
meet
the
proposed
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
84
they
were
produced
as
spare
engines
(
replacement
engines
for
existing
aircraft
instead
of
newly
manufactured
aircraft).

1.
Effect
of
Market
Forces
In
1998,
FESG
indicated
at
CAEP/
4
that
"...
market
forces
and
potential
local/
regional
operating
restrictions
might
encourage
the
manufactures
to
modify
their
existing
products,
so
that
they,
too,
comply
with
the
proposed
stringency."
114
These
modifications
to
in­
production
engines
would
be
considered
"
voluntary
environmental
enhancement."
115
Thus,
there
was
114ICAO,
CAEP/
4,
Working
Paper
4,
"
Economic
Assessment
of
the
EPG
NOx
Stringency
Proposal,"
March
12,
1998,
Presented
by
the
Chairman
of
FESG,
Agenda
Item
1:
Review
of
proposals
relating
to
NOx
emissions,
including
the
amendment
of
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
section
3.3.2
of
the
paper.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.

__­_­__)

115However,
FESG
indicated
that
the
"...
the
development
of
production
engine
emissions
enhancements
would
only
occur
if
the
market
place
showed
enough
interest
in
the
enhancements
or
if
the
failure
to
meet
the
proposed
stringency
became
a
competitive
disadvantage."
(
ICAO,

CAEP/
4,
Working
Paper
4,
"
Economic
Assessment
of
the
EPG
NOx
Stringency
Proposal,"

March
12,
1998,
Presented
by
the
Chairman
of
FESG,
Agenda
Item
1:
Review
of
proposals
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
85
significant
consideration
at
CAEP/
4
given
to
the
effect
that
new
NOx
standards
for
newly
certified
engines
would
potentially
have
on
in­
production
or
already
certified
engines.
Many
parties
within
CAEP
and
its
working
groups
consider
market
forces
to
have
a
real
and
tangible
effect
on
newly
manufactured
or
already
certified
engines,
even
though
such
engines
are
not
required
to
comply
with
the
new
standards.
We
are
unaware
of
any
new
local/
regional
operating
restrictions
being
implemented
throughout
the
world
due
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards.

However,
it
seems
some
market
forces
from
the
CAEP/
4
newly
certified
engine
standards
have
affected
production
engines
since
there
are
now
only
four
in­
production
engine
models
remaining
from
1998
that
would
not
meet
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
The
Agency
solicits
comment
on
the
effect
market
forces
and
potential
local/
regional
operating
restrictions
might
have
on
manufacturers
to
modify
in­
production
or
already
certified
engines.

2.
Impact
of
Existing
Fleet
Aircraft
An
element
of
the
emissions
proposals
made
at
CAEP/
4
was
to
increase
NOx
stringency
as
far
as
possible
without
affecting
the
existing
fleet
aircraft
asset
values,
and
this
was
proposed
to
be
achieved
by
applying
the
new
stringency
to
new
engine
designs
only
(
newly
certified
relating
to
NOx
emissions,
including
the
amendment
of
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
section
5.6.2
of
the
paper.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
86
engines).
116
Two
studies
on
whether
the
financial
value
of
existing
aircraft
assets
were
affected
by
the
CAEP/
2
NOx
standards
were
reviewed
for
CAEP/
4,
and
the
studies
did
not
reveal
any
correlation
between
approval
of
the
CAEP/
2
emissions
standards
and
aircraft
values.
Thus,

FESG
was
unable
to
definitively
assess
the
effect
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
would
have
on
fleet
aircraft
values.
117
(
The
scope
of
the
two
studies
and
their
ground
rules
were
set
by
FESG.)

These
studies
showed
that
a
large
number
of
factors
impact
aircraft
asset
values.

3.
Request
for
Comment
on
Applying
the
Proposed
NOx
standards
to
Already
Certified
Engines
We
are
requesting
comment
on
whether
to
apply
the
proposed
NOx
standards
to
engines
built
to
already
certified
engine
designs.
118
Although
there
is
expected
to
be
minimal
environmental
benefits
(
as
well
as
relatively
small
costs)
from
such
a
requirement,
it
would
116ICAO,
CAEP,
Fourth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
April
6­
8,
1998,
Report,
Document
9720,

CAEP/
4.

117ICAO,
CAEP/
4,
Working
Paper
4,
"
Economic
Assessment
of
the
EPG
NOx
Stringency
Proposal,"
March
12,
1998,
Presented
by
the
Chairman
of
FESG,
Agenda
Item
1:
Review
of
proposals
relating
to
NOx
emissions,
including
the
amendment
of
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
section
4
of
the
paper.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.

__­_­__.

118Spare
engines
for
existing
aircraft
would
not
be
covered
by
such
a
requirement.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
87
ensure
that
manufacturers
could
not
indefinitely
produce
existing
engines
that
do
not
meet
these
standards
(
four
such
in­
production
or
already
certified
engines
models
exist
today).
119
Historically,
EPA
and
ICAO
have
applied
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
to
already
certified
engines
(
or
newly
manufactured
engines).
120
In
addition,
at
this
time
the
mobile
sources
(
including
aircraft
engines)
regulated
under
the
authority
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
Title
II
 
Emission
Standards
for
Moving
Sources)
have
emission
standards
for
newly
manufactured
engines
or
vehicles.
However,
except
for
aircraft
engines,
all
current
CAA
mobile
source
programs
involving
new
emission
standards
apply
to
newly
manufactured
engines
or
vehicles
based
on
the
certification
model
year
(
new
standards
apply
to
newly
and
already
certified
engines
or
vehicles
in
the
same
year).
In
these
programs,
EPA
has
incorporated
emission
averaging
programs
to
make
a
more
orderly
product
phase­
in
and
phase­
out
(
the
average
119Nearly
all
engines
built
to
already
certified
engine
designs
are
likely
to
be
in
compliance
with
the
proposed
NOx
standards.

120EPA
promulgated
a
HC
standard
in
1982
that
applied
to
newly
manufactured
engines
beginning
in
1984.
Also,
the
original
ICAO
NOx,
HC,
and
CO
standards
approved
in
1981
applied
to
newly
manufactured
engines
starting
in
1986.
In
1997,
EPA
adopted
this
CO
standard,
which
was
to
be
implemented
later
that
same
year
for
newly
manufactured
engines.
In
addition,
the
March
24,
1993
ICAO
amendment
to
tighten
the
original
NOx
standard
by
20
percent
(
CAEP/
2
standards),
which
EPA
adopted
in
1997,
applied
to
newly
certified
engines
beginning
in
1996
and
newly
manufactured
engines
in
2000.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
88
emissions
within
a
manufacturer's
product
line
is
required
to
meet
the
applicable
standard,
which
allows
a
manufacturer
to
produce
some
engine
families
with
emission
levels
above
the
standard121).
However,
averaging
is
not
part
of
the
ICAO
protocol,
and
it
is
not
clear
that
it
is
of
any
value
here
since
most
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
proposed
standards.

Nonetheless,
we
solicit
comment
on
whether
EPA
should
consider
applying
the
proposed
standards
to
already
certified
engines,
including
whether
an
emission
averaging
program
for
such
engines
would
be
useful.

As
discussed
earlier,
FESG
and
CAEP
working
groups
(
specifically,
Working
Group
3
­

Emissions
Technical
Issues
Working
Group)
are
currently
considering
applying
the
1998
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
to
engines
built
to
already
certified
engines
designs.
Today,
we
are
requesting
comment
on
whether
to
apply
the
proposed
NOx
standards,
which
are
equivalent
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards,
to
already
certified
engines.
122
Historically,
EPA
and
ICAO
have
applied
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
to
already
certified
engines
(
or
newly
manufactured
engines).
123
Although
there
is
expected
to
be
minimal
environmental
benefits
(
as
well
as
121Typically,
the
calculations
used
for
averaging
are
based
upon
an
engine
families
yearly
production
or
sales
(
among
other
characteristics
­
e.
g.,
average
power
rating
of
engines
families).

122Spare
engines
for
existing
aircraft
would
not
be
covered
by
such
a
requirement.

123EPA
promulgated
a
HC
standard
in
1982
that
applied
to
newly
manufactured
engines
beginning
in
1984.
Also,
the
original
ICAO
NOx,
HC,
and
CO
standards
approved
in
1981
applied
to
newly
manufactured
engines
starting
in
1986.
In
1997,
EPA
adopted
this
CO
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
89
relatively
small
costs)
from
such
a
requirement,
it
would
ensure
that
manufacturers
could
not
indefinitely
produce
existing
engines
that
do
not
meet
these
standards
(
four
such
in­
production
or
already
certified
engines
models
exist
today).
124
The
implementation
dates
being
analyzed
by
FESG
and
Working
Group
3
for
such
a
requirement
for
applying
CAEP/
4
standards
to
already
certified
engines
are
2,
4,
and
6
years
after
December
31,
2003
(
the
implementation
date
for
newly
certified
engines).
Based
on
the
results
of
the
complete
assessment
(
which
are
not
yet
available),
FESG
and
Working
Group
3
are
expected
to
recommend
an
implementation
date
for
applying
the
CAEP/
4
standards
to
already
certified
engines
at
CAEP/
6
in
February
2004
(
a
decision
on
this
date
is
also
expected
at
CAEP/
6).
125
If
this
requirement
and
date
is
accepted
at
CAEP/
6,
EPA
would
plan
to
propose
the
standard,
which
was
to
be
implemented
later
that
same
year
for
newly
manufactured
engines.
In
addition,
the
March
24,
1993
ICAO
amendment
to
tighten
the
original
NOx
standard
by
20
percent
(
CAEP/
2
standards),
which
EPA
adopted
in
1997,
applied
to
newly
certified
engines
beginning
in
1996
and
newly
manufactured
engines
in
2000.

124Nearly
all
engines
built
to
already
certified
engine
designs
are
likely
to
be
in
compliance
with
the
proposed
NOx
standards.

125The
FESG
analysis
mentioned
earlier
(
CAEP­
SG20022­
WP/
20,
September
12,
2002)

addresses
the
impact
of
applying
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
to
already
certified
engines
at
2,
4,

and
6
years
after
the
implementation
date
of
the
CAEP/
4
standards
for
newly
certified
engines.

Yet,
further
assessment
of
the
NOx
emission
reductions
was
requested
by
the
Steering
Group
for
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
90
new
requirement
soon
thereafter
(
see
section
IV.
B.
above
for
a
discussion
of
the
emission
benefit
of
applying
the
proposed
standards
to
already
certified
engines).
We
request
comment
on
applying
standards
for
already
certified
engines
at
a
date
2,
4,
and
6
years
after
the
implementation
date
for
new
designs
(
2006,
2008,
and
2010).
Commenters
suggesting
different
dates
should
specify
the
date(
s)
they
prefer
and,
to
the
extent
possible,
provide
technical
and
other
justification
for
such
suggested
dates.

In
addition,
at
this
time
the
mobile
sources
(
including
aircraft
engines)
regulated
under
the
authority
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
Title
II
 
Emission
Standards
for
Moving
Sources)
have
emission
standards
for
newly
manufactured
engines
or
vehicles.
However,
except
for
aircraft
engines,
all
current
CAA
mobile
source
programs
involving
new
emission
standards
apply
to
newly
manufactured
engines
or
vehicles
based
on
the
certification
model
year
(
new
standards
apply
to
newly
and
already
certified
engines
or
vehicles
in
the
same
year).
In
these
programs,

EPA
has
incorporated
emission
averaging
programs
to
make
a
more
orderly
product
phase­
in
and
phase­
out
(
the
average
emissions
within
a
manufacturer's
product
line
is
required
to
meet
the
applicable
standard,
which
allows
a
manufacturer
to
produce
some
engine
families
with
emission
the
next
meeting
in
mid­
2003.
(
ICAO,
CAEP,
Steering
Group
Meeting,
Paris,
France,

September
10­
13,
2002,
"
Summary
of
Discussions
and
Decisions
of
the
First
Meeting
of
the
Steering
Group,"
September
10,
2002,
CAEP­
SG20022­
SD/
1.
See
page
3.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
91
levels
above
the
standard126).
However,
averaging
is
not
part
of
the
ICAO
protocol,
and
it
is
not
clear
that
it
is
of
any
value
here
since
most
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
proposed
standards.
Nonetheless,
we
solicit
comment
on
whether
an
emission
averaging
program
for
such
engines
would
be
useful.

C.
Amendments
to
Criteria
on
Calibration
and
Test
Gases
for
Gaseous
Emissions
Test
and
Measurement
Procedures
In
today's
proposed
rule,
EPA
proposes
to
incorporate
by
reference
ICAO's
1997
amendments
to
the
criteria
on
calibration
and
test
gases
for
the
test
procedures
of
gaseous
emissions
(
ICAO
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices
Environmental
Protection,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
  
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,''
Second
Edition,
July
1993;

Amendment
3,
March
20,
1997,
Appendices
3
and
5)
in
40
CFR
87.64
.
ICAO's
amendments,

which
became
effective
on
March
20,
1997,
apply
to
subsonic
(
newly
certified
and
newly
manufactured
or
already
certified
engines)
and
supersonic
gas
turbine
engines.
The
proposed
technical
changes
would
correct
a
few
inconsistencies
between
the
specifications
for
carbon
dioxide
(
CO2)
analyzers
(
Attachment
B
of
Appendices
3
and
5)
and
the
calibration
and
test
gases
(
Attachment
D
of
Appendices
3
and
5)
of
gaseous
emissions.
The
test
procedure
amendments
incorporated
by
reference
would
be
effective
60
days
after
the
publication
of
the
final
rule.

126Typically,
the
calculations
used
for
averaging
are
based
upon
an
engine
families
yearly
production
or
sales
(
among
other
characteristics
­
e.
g.,
average
power
rating
of
engines
families).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
92
For
CAEP/
3
in
1995,
the
Russian
Federation
presented
a
working
paper
entitled,

"
Corrections
to
Annex
16,
Volume
II,"
that
stated
the
following:
127
According
to
CAEP/
2
recommendations,
in
the
list
of
calibration
and
test
gases
(
see
the
table
in
Attachment
of
Appendices
3
and
5)
"
CO2
in
N2"
was
replaced
with
"
CO2
in
air"
gas.
At
the
same
time
the
following
sub­
paragraph
was
newly
introduced
into
Attachment
B
(
Appendices
3
and
5)
:

(
g)
The
effect
of
oxygen
(
O2)
on
the
CO2
analyzer
response
shall
be
checked.
For
a
change
from
0
percent
O2
to
21
percent
O2
the
response
of
a
given
CO2
concentration
shall
not
change
by
more
than
2
per
cent
of
reading.
If
this
limit
cannot
be
met
and
appropriate
correction
factor
shall
be
applied.

Since
the
best
way
to
carry
out
this
checking
procedure
is
to
calibrate
the
analyzer
first
with
CO2
in
nitrogen
and
then
with
CO2
in
air,
both
"
CO2
in
N2"
and
"
CO2
in
air"
gases
have
to
be
retained
in
the
list.
It
seems
then
that
"
CO
in
air,"
"
CO2
127Russian
Federation,
"
Corrections
to
Annex
16,
Volume
II,"
Agenda
Item
2:
Review
of
reports
of
working
groups
relating
to
engine
emissions
and
the
development
of
recommendations
to
the
Council
thereon,
Working
Paper
19,
Presented
by
A.
A.
Gorbatko,
November
11,
1995
(
distributed
November
30,
1995),
CAEP/
3,
Montreal,
December
5
to
15,
1995.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
93
in
air,"
"
NO
in
N2"
and
now
"
CO2
in
N2"
have
to
be
replaced
with
"
CO
in
zero
air,"
"
CO2
in
zero
air,"
"
CO2
in
zero
nitrogen"
and
"
NO
in
zero
nitrogen"
just
by
analogy
with
the
gaseous
mixtures
of
different
hydrocarbons
diluted
by
zero
air
and
listed
in
the
same
table.

In
addition,
at
CAEP/
3
the
United
Kingdom
then
presented
a
working
paper
on
this
same
issue.
128
They
indicated
that
CAEP's
Working
Group
3
(
Emissions
Working
Group)
had
accepted
the
above
proposals
of
the
Russian
Federation
paper
on
correcting
inconsistencies
in
the
list
of
calibration
and
test
gases
specified
in
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Attachment
D
to
Appendices
3
and
5,
and
Working
Group
3
had
recommended
that
these
proposals
be
presented
at
CAEP/
3.
The
United
Kingdom
also
recommended
the
adoption
of
these
Russian
Federation
proposals
 
to
utilize
CO2
in
nitrogen
gas
mixture
to
check
the
effect
of
oxygen
on
CO2
analyzers.
In
addition,
they
recommended
the
specification
of
all
calibration
and
test
gases
required
for
all
the
gaseous
emissions
tests
required
in
Annex
16.

128United
Kingdom,
"
Amendments
to
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Attachment
D
to
Appendices
3
and
5
(
Calibration
and
Test
Gases),"
Agenda
Item
2:
Review
of
reports
of
working
groups
relating
to
engine
emissions
and
the
development
of
recommendations
to
the
Council
thereon,
Working
Paper
20,
Presented
by
M.
E.
Wright,
November
14,
1995
(
distributed
November
30,
1995),

CAEP/
3,
Montreal,
December
5
to
15,
1995.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­

2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
94
At
CAEP/
3,
the
CAEP
members
agreed
that
the
above
amendments
to
the
calibration
and
test
gases
were
justified,
and
thus,
these
amendments
were
then
adopted.
129
In
today's
notice,

EPA
proposes
to
incorporate
by
reference
the
amendments
to
the
criteria
on
calibration
and
test
gases
for
the
test
procedures
of
gaseous
emissions,
because
the
changes
improve
the
test
procedures
by
correcting
inconsistencies
and
distinguishing
between
calibration
and
test
gases.

The
amendments
would
include
the
following:
(
1)
listing
all
calibration
gases
separately
from
test
gases
for
HC,
CO2,
CO
and
NOx
analyzers,
(
2)
changing
"
N2"
to
"
zero
nitrogen"
in
relation
to
the
test
gases
for
the
HC
and
NOx
analyzers,
(
3)
adding
"
CO2
in
zero
nitrogen"
as
a
test
gas
for
CO2
analyzer,
(
4)
changing
"
air"
to
"
zero
air"
in
relation
to
the
test
gas
for
CO
and
CO2
analyzers,
(
5)
revising
the
accuracy
to
"+
1
percent"
for
the
"
propane
in
zero
air"
test
gas
of
HC
analyzer,
(
6)
amending
the
accuracy
to
"+
1
percent"
for
the
"
CO2
in
zero
air"
test
gas
of
CO2
analyzer,
(
7)
adding
the
accuracy
"+
1
percent"
for
the
"
CO2
in
zero
nitrogen"
test
gas
of
CO2
analyzer,
(
8)
changing
accuracy
to
"+
1
percent"
for
test
gas
of
CO
analyzer,
and
(
9)
revising
accuracy
to
"+
1
percent"
for
test
gas
of
NOx
analyzer.

Manufacturers
are
already
voluntarily
complying
with
ICAO's
1997
amendments
to
the
criteria
on
calibration
and
test
gases
for
the
test
procedures
of
gaseous
emissions.
Thus,
formal
adoption
of
these
ICAO
test
procedure
amendments
would
require
no
new
action
by
manufacturers.
In
addition,
the
existence
of
ICAO's
requirements
would
ensure
that
the
costs
of
129ICAO/
CAEP,
Report
of
Third
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
December
5­
15,
1995,
Document
9675,
CAEP/
3.
A
copy
of
this
report
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.

__­_­__).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
95
compliance
(
as
well
as
the
air
quality
impact)
with
these
test
procedures
would
be
minimal.
(
In
the
1982
and
1997
final
rules
on
aircraft
engine
emissions
[
47
FR
58462,
December
30,
1982
and
62
FR
25356,
May
8,
1997,
respectively],
EPA
incorporated
by
reference
the
then­
existing
ICAO
testing
and
measurement
procedures
for
aircraft
engine
emissions
[
ICAO
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices
Environmental
Protection,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,

"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
First
and
Second
Editions,
Appendices
3
and
5
were
incorporated
by
reference
in
40
CFR
87.64]
in
order
to
eliminate
confusion
over
minor
differences
in
procedures
for
demonstrating
compliance
with
the
U.
S.
and
ICAO
standards.)

D.
Correction
of
Exemptions
for
Very
Low
Production
Models
Because
of
an
editorial
error,
the
section
in
the
aircraft
engine
emission
regulations
regarding
exemptions
for
very
low
production
models
is
incorrectly
specified
(
see
section
40
CFR
part
87.7(
b)(
1)
and
(
2)).
In
the
October
18,
1984
final
rulemaking
(
49
FR
41000),
EPA
intended
to
amend
the
low
production
engine
provisions
of
the
aircraft
regulations
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)

and
deleting
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
b)(
2)
in
order
to
eliminate
the
maximum
annual
production
limit
of
20
engines
per
year.
In
the
revisions
to
paragraph
(
b),
EPA
retained
the
maximum
total
production
limit
of
200
units
for
aircraft
models
certified
after
January
1,
1984.130
For
section
130This
action
was
taken
in
1984
to
provide
greater
flexibility
to
manufacturers
for
scheduling
engine
production
rates
during
the
final
years.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
96
87.7(
b),
EPA
today
proposes
to
correct
this
editorial
error
by
eliminating
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
and
(
b)(
2).

As
discussed
further
in
the
1984
final
rulemaking,
this
proposed
action
would
provide
more
flexibility
for
engine
manufacturers
in
scheduling
during
the
last
few
engine
production
years.
Also,
the
air
quality
impact
of
eliminating
the
annual
production
limit
would
be
very
small.

V.
Coordination
with
FAA
The
requirements
contained
in
the
notice
are
being
proposed
after
consultation
with
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
in
order
to
assure
appropriate
consideration
of
aircraft
safety.
Under
section
232
of
the
CAA,
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
(
DOT),
has
the
responsibility
to
enforce
the
aircraft
emission
standards
established
by
EPA
under
section
231.131
In
addition,
section
231(
b)
of
the
CAA
states
that
"[
a]
ny
regulation
prescribed
under
this
section
*
*
*
shall
take
effect
(
after
consultation
with
the
Secretary
of
Transportation)
to
permit
the
development
and
application
of
the
requisite
technology,
giving
appropriate
consideration
to
the
cost
of
compliance
*
*
*."
As
in
past
rulemakings
and
pursuant
to
the
above
referenced
sections
of
the
CAA,
EPA
has
coordinated
with
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration
(
FAA)
of
the
DOT
with
respect
to
today's
proposal.

131Specifically,
the
FAA
of
the
DOT
has
the
responsibility
to
enforce
the
aircraft
emission
standards
established
by
EPA.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
97
Moreover,
FAA
is
the
official
U.
S.
delegate
to
ICAO.
FAA
agreed
to
the
1997
and
1999
amendments
at
ICAO's
Third
and
Fourth
Meetings
of
the
Committee
on
Aviation
Environmental
Protection
(
CAEP
3
and
4)
after
advisement
from
EPA.
132
FAA
and
EPA
are
both
members
of
the
CAEP's
Working
Group
3
(
among
others),
whose
objective
was
to
evaluate
emissions
technical
issues
and
develop
recommendations
on
such
issues
for
CAEP
3
and
4.
After
assessing
emissions
test
procedure
amendments
and
new
NOx
standards,
Working
Group
3
made
recommendations
to
CAEP
on
these
elements.
These
recommendations
were
then
considered
at
the
CAEP
3
and
4
meetings,
respectively,
prior
to
their
adoption
by
ICAO
in
1997
and
1999.

In
addition,
as
discussed
above,
FAA
would
have
the
responsibility
to
enforce
today's
proposed
requirements.
As
a
part
of
its
compliance
responsibilities,
FAA
conducts
the
emission
tests
or
delegates
that
responsibility
to
the
engine
manufacturer,
which
is
then
monitored
by
the
FAA.
Since
the
FAA
does
not
have
the
resources
or
the
funding
to
test
engines
themselves,

FAA
selects
engineers
at
each
plant
to
serve
as
representatives
(
called
designated
engineering
representatives
(
DERs))
for
the
FAA
while
the
manufacturer
performs
the
test
procedures.

DERs'
responsibilities
include
evaluating
the
test
plan,
the
test
engine,
the
test
equipment,
and
the
final
testing
report
sent
to
FAA.
DERs'
responsibilities
are
determined
by
the
FAA
and
today's
proposal
would
not
affect
their
duties.

132The
Third
Meeting
of
CAEP
(
CAEP/
3)
occurred
in
Montreal,
Quebec
from
December
5
through
15
in
1995.
CAEP/
4
took
place
in
Montreal
from
April
6
through
8,
1998.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
98
VI.
Possible
Future
Aircraft
Aviation
Emissions
Reductions
Controls
(
EPA/
FAA
Voluntary
Aviation
Emissions
Reduction
Initiative)

There
is
growing
interest,
particularly
at
the
state
and
local
level,
in
addressing
emissions
from
aircraft
and
other
aviation­
related
sources.
Such
interest
is
often
related
to
plans
for
airport
expansion
which
is
occurring
across
the
country.
It
is
possible
that
other
controls
approaches
may
provide
effective
avenues
to
achieve
additional
aviation
emissions
reductions,
beyond
EPA
establishing
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
from
aircraft.
The
Agency
invites
encourages
extensive
comment
on
the
potential
approach
for
additional
reductions
discussed
below
and
any
other
approaches.

Concerns
by
state
and
local
air
agencies
and
environmental
and
public
health
organizations
about
aviation
emissions
the
ICAO
standards
(
primarily
CAEP/
4
NOx
standard),

led
to
EPA
and
FAA
signing
a
memorandum
of
understanding
(
MOU)
in
March
1998
agreeing
to
work
to
identify
efforts
that
could
reduce
aviation
aircraft
emissions.
133
Since
that
time
FAA
and
EPA
have
jointly
chaired
a
national
stakeholder
initiative
whose
goal
is
to
develop
a
133FAA
and
EPA,
"
Agreement
Between
Federal
Aviation
Administration
and
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Regarding
Environmental
Matters
Relation
to
Aviation,"
signed
on
March
24,

1998
by
FAA's
Acting
Assistant
Administrator
for
Policy,
Planning,
and
International
Aviation,

Louise
Maillet,
and
EPA's
Acting
Assistant
Administrator
for
Air
and
Radiation,
Richard
Wilson.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­

__)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
99
voluntary
program
to
reduce
pollutants
from
aircraft
and
other
aviation
sources
that
contribute
to
local
and
regional
air
pollution
in
the
United
States.
The
major
stakeholders
participating
in
this
initiative
include
representatives
of
the
aviation
industry
(
passenger
and
cargo
airlines
and
engine
manufacturers),
airports,
state
and
local
air
pollution
control
officials,
environmental
organizations,
and
NASA.

Initially,
the
discussions
with
stakeholders
focused
on
the
prospect
of
aircraft
engine
emission
reduction
retrofit
kits,
which
could
might
be
applied
to
certain
existing
aircraft
engines.
134
However,
as
the
initiative
evolved,
the
focus
was
expanded
by
the
stakeholders
to
identify
strategies
for
various
types
of
ground
service
equipment
(
GSE)
in
use
at
airports
(
e.
g.,

baggage
tugs
and
fuel
trucks),
135
in
addition
to
strategies
to
reduce
aircraft
emissions.
136
Due
to
the
differences
in
time
and
technology
that
it
takes
to
reduce
aircraft
emissions
versus
that
for
134Two
engine
models
were
indeed
certificated
with
emissions
retrofit
kits,
and
a
number
of
these
engines
have
been
purchased
for
aircraft
with
the
retrofit
kits
installed
in
their
stock
configuration.
However,
retrofit
kits
have
not
to
date
provided
widescale
emissions
improvements
because
it
seems
they
may
have
limited
applicability
to
certain
engine
types,
small
emission
benefits,
and
cost
issues.

135The
stakeholders
are
now
considering
the
impact,
operation
and
design
of
GSE
at
airports,

with
projects
being
undertaken
at
several
airports
to
reduce
overall
emissions.

136Operational
strategies,
such
as
reducing
the
time
in
which
aircraft
are
in
idle
and
taxi
modes
and
the
impact
of
auxiliary
power
units
(
APUs)
have
also
been
considered.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
100
GSE,
the
stakeholders
are
seeking
to
reach
a
consensus
on
a
distinctly
two­
step
program
to
voluntarily
achieve
wide­
scale
emissions
reductions
from
GSE
and
aircraft.
Near
term
efforts
will
focus
on
emissions
reductions
from
GSE,
and
long
term
efforts
will
focus
on
reductions
from
aircraft.
137
For
example,
not
only
were
control
strategies
identified
that
could
apply
to
an
aircraft's
main
engines
and
auxiliary
power
unit
(
APU),
but
the
group
also
identified
strategies
for
various
types
of
ground
service
equipment
(
GSE)
in
use
at
airports
(
e.
g.,
baggage
tugs
and
fuel
trucks).
More
recently,
the
stakeholders
agreed
to
attempt
to
reach
consensus
on
a
two­
step
program
S
Near
term:
focused
on
GSE
emissions
reductions
S
Longer
term:
focused
on
aircraft
emissions
reductions
The
stakeholders
are
currently
discussing
a
framework
for
reaching
consensus
on
the
goals
or
targets
for
emissions
reductions,
timing,
accountability,
State
Implementation
Plan
implications
(
including
general
conformity),
and
numerous
other
issues
that
have
been
raised
for
GSE
and
aircraft
emission
reductions.
If
this
initiative
is
successful,
an
agreement
would
be
reached
among
all
the
stakeholders
on
a
national
voluntary
aviation
emissions
reduction
program.
The
mechanism
that
could
be
used
to
codify
or
enforce
an
eventual
agreement
has
yet
to
be
determined.
The
overall
goal
of
the
EPA/
FAA
voluntary
initiative
is
to
develop
a
program
that
will
achieve
significant
national
emission
reductions.

137The
stakeholder
program
for
aircraft
emissions
reductions
is
viewed
as
a
supplement
to
the
traditional
regulatory
approach
of
establishing
engine
emission
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
101
There
is
growing
interest,
particularly
at
the
state
and
local
level,
in
addressing
emissions
from
aircraft
and
other
aviation­
related
sources.
Such
interest
is
often
related
to
plans
for
airport
expansion
which
is
occurring
across
the
country.
Some
state
and
local
agencies
are
already
moving
ahead
to
address
concerns
about
emissions
originating
at
airports.
The
purpose
of
the
EPA/
FAA
voluntary
initiative
is
to
develop
a
program
that
will
achieve
significant
national
emissions
reductions.
It
will
not
attempt
to
assess
or
evaluate
specific
individual
airports,

although
it
may
review
and
use
to
the
extent
possible
emissions
and
other
data
which
may
have
been
generated
by
or
for
an
individual
airport.
It
is
also
important
to
note
that
this
effort
is
focused
on
reductions
in
air
emissions
and
will
not
address
aircraft
noise.

If
the
voluntary
initiative
is
successful
in
its
efforts,
it
may
not
be
necessary
for
state
and
local
authorities
to
take
further
actions
to
reduce
aviation
emissions.
On
the
other
hand,

depending
on
the
extent
of
emissions
reductions
and
when
they
might
be
implemented,
some
areas
may
need
to
seek
further
reductions
from
those
aviation
sources
they
have
authority
to
address.
Obviously,
each
jurisdiction
will
need
to
make
that
assessment
after
they
know
the
benefits
that
will
occur
if
this
national
initiative
is
successful.

VII.
Regulatory
Impacts
Aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
and
thus,
they
are
designed
to
meet
international
standards.
Today's
proposal
would
have
the
benefit
of
establishing
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
emission
standards
and
test
procedures.
Thus,
an
emission
certification
test
which
meets
U.
S.
requirements
would
also
be
applicable
to
all
ICAO
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
102
requirements.
Engine
manufacturers
are
already
developing
improved
technology
in
response
to
the
ICAO
standards
that
match
the
standards
proposed
here,
and
EPA
does
not
believe
that
the
costs
incurred
by
the
aircraft
industry
as
a
result
of
the
existing
ICAO
standards
should
be
attributed
to
today's
proposed
regulations
(
as
discussed
above,
these
standards
only
apply
to
newly
certified
or
designed
engines,
but
not
already
certified,
newly
manufactured
or
inproduction
engines).
Also,
the
test
procedure
amendments
(
revisions
to
criteria
on
calibration
and
test
gases)
necessary
to
determine
compliance
are
already
being
adhered
to
by
manufacturers
during
current
engine
certification
tests.
Therefore,
EPA
believes
that
the
proposed
regulations
would
impose
no
additional
burden
on
manufacturers.

The
existence
of
ICAO's
requirements
results
in
minimal
cost
as
well
as
air
quality
benefits
from
today's
proposed
requirements.
138
Since
aircraft
and
aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
there
is
some
significant
commercial
benefit
to
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
emission
standards
and
control
program
requirements
(
i.
e.,
easier
to
qualify
products
for
international
markets
since
FAA
can
certify
engines
for
ICAO
compliance).

138CAEP's
Forecasting
and
Economic
Analysis
Support
Group
(
FESG)
concluded
at
CAEP/
4
that
their
assessment
of
these
new
NOx
standards
indicates
that
the
direct
costs
of
the
standards
would
be
minimal,
and
the
benefits
would
be
modest.
(
ICAO,
CAEP/
4,
Working
Paper
4,

"
Economic
Assessment
of
the
EPG
NOx
Stringency
Proposal,"
March
12,
1998,
Presented
by
the
Chairman
of
FESG,
Agenda
Item
1:
Review
of
proposals
relating
to
NOx
emissions,
including
the
amendment
of
Annex
16,
Volume
II..
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­

2002­
0030,
Document
No.
__­_­__)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
103
Also,
EPA's
proposed
adoption
of
the
ICAO
standards
and
related
test
procedures
would
be
consistent
with
our
treaty
obligations
and
strengthen
the
U.
S.
position
in
future
ICAO/
CAEP
processes
related
to
emission
standards.

VIII.
Public
Participation
We
request
comment
on
all
aspects
of
this
proposal.
This
section
describes
how
you
can
participate
in
this
process.

A.
How
Do
I
Submit
Comments?

We
are
opening
a
formal
comment
period
by
publishing
this
document.
We
will
accept
comments
during
the
period
indicated
under
DATES
above.
If
you
have
an
interest
in
the
proposed
emission
control
program
described
in
this
document,
we
encourage
you
to
comment
on
any
aspect
of
this
rulemaking.
We
also
request
comment
on
specific
topics
identified
throughout
this
proposal.

Your
comments
will
be
most
useful
if
you
include
appropriate
and
detailed
supporting
rationale,
data,
and
analysis.
Commenters
are
especially
encouraged
to
provide
specific
suggestions
for
any
changes
to
any
aspect
of
the
regulations
that
they
believe
need
to
be
modified
or
improved.
You
should
send
all
comments,
except
those
containing
proprietary
information,
to
our
Air
Docket
(
see
section
I.
C
under
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION)

before
the
end
of
the
comment
period.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
104
If
you
submit
proprietary
information
for
our
consideration,
you
should
clearly
separate
it
from
other
comments
by
labeling
it
"
Confidential
Business
Information."
You
should
also
send
it
directly
to
the
contact
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
instead
of
to
the
public
docket.
This
will
help
ensure
that
no
one
inadvertently
places
proprietary
information
in
the
docket.
If
you
want
us
to
use
your
confidential
information
as
part
of
the
basis
for
the
final
rule,
you
should
send
a
nonconfidential
version
of
the
document
summarizing
the
key
data
or
information.
We
will
disclose
information
covered
by
a
claim
of
confidentiality
only
through
the
application
of
procedures
described
in
40
CFR
part
2.
If
you
don't
identify
information
as
confidential
when
we
receive
it,
we
may
make
it
available
to
the
public
without
notifying
you.

B.
Will
There
Be
a
Public
Hearing?

We
will
hold
a
public
hearing
on
[
DATE]
at
the
________
Hotel,
_________
Street,

Washington,
DC
20460,
Telephone:
(
202)
XXX­
XXXX.
The
hearing
will
start
at
10:
00
a.
m.

local
time
and
continue
until
everyone
has
had
a
chance
to
speak.

If
you
would
like
to
present
testimony
at
the
public
hearing,
we
ask
that
you
notify
the
contact
person
listed
under
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
at
least
ten
days
before
the
hearing.
You
should
estimate
the
time
you
will
need
for
your
presentation
and
identify
any
needed
audio/
visual
equipment.
We
suggest
that
you
bring
copies
of
your
statement
or
other
material
for
the
EPA
panel
and
the
audience.
It
would
also
be
helpful
if
you
send
us
a
copy
of
your
statement
or
other
materials
before
the
hearing.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
105
We
will
make
a
tentative
schedule
for
the
order
of
testimony
based
on
the
notifications
we
receive.
This
schedule
will
be
available
on
the
morning
of
the
hearing.
In
addition,
we
will
reserve
a
block
of
time
for
anyone
else
in
the
audience
who
wants
to
give
testimony.

We
will
conduct
the
hearing
informally,
and
technical
rules
of
evidence
won't
apply.
We
will
arrange
for
a
written
transcript
of
the
hearing
and
keep
the
official
record
of
the
hearing
open
for
30
days
to
allow
you
to
submit
supplementary
information.
You
may
make
arrangements
for
copies
of
the
transcript
directly
with
the
court
reporter.

IX.
Statutory
Authority
The
statutory
authority
for
today's
proposal
is
provided
by
sections
231
and
301(
a)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
as
amended,
42
U.
S.
C.
7571
and
7601.
See
section
III
of
today's
NPRM
for
discussion
of
how
EPA
meets
the
CAA's
statutory
requirements.

X.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
(
58
FR
51735,
October
4,
1993),
the
Agency
must
determine
whether
this
regulatory
action
is
  
significant''
and
therefore
subject
to
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
review
and
the
requirements
of
the
Executive
Order.
The
order
defines
"
significant
regulatory
action"
as
one
that
is
likely
to
result
in
a
rule
that
may:
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
106
(
1)
Have
an
annual
effect
on
the
economy
of
$
100
million
or
more
or
adversely
affect
in
a
material
way
the
economy,
a
sector
of
the
economy,
productivity,
competition,
jobs,
the
environment,
public
health
or
safety,
or
State,
local,
or
tribal
governments
or
communities;

(
2)
Create
a
serious
inconsistency
or
otherwise
interfere
with
an
action
taken
or
planned
by
another
agency;

(
3)
Materially
alter
the
budgetary
impact
of
entitlements,
grants,
user
fees,
or
loan
programs
or
the
rights
and
obligations
of
recipients
thereof;
or
(
4)
Raise
novel
legal
or
policy
issues
arising
out
of
legal
mandates,
the
President's
priorities,
or
the
principles
set
forth
in
the
Executive
Order.

EPA
has
determined
that
this
rule
is
not
a
"
significant
regulatory
action''
under
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
12866
and
is
therefore
not
subject
to
OMB
review.
Today's
action
would
codify
emission
standards
that
manufacturers
currently
adhere
to
(
nearly
all
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standards).
The
proposed
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards.
These
proposed
standards
would
not
impose
any
additional
burden
on
manufacturers
because
they
are
already
designing
new
engines
to
meet
the
ICAO
standards.
Thus,
the
annual
effect
on
the
economy
of
today's
proposed
standards
would
be
minimal,
and
none
of
the
other
thresholds
identified
in
the
executive
order
would
be
triggered
by
this
action.

B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
107
This
action
does
not
impose
any
information
collection
burden
under
provisions
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act,
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.
Any
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements
associated
with
these
standards
would
be
defined
by
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
in
enforcement
regulations
issued
later
under
the
provisions
of
section
232
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.
Since
most
if
not
all
manufacturers
already
measure
NOx
and
report
the
results
to
the
FAA,
any
additional
reporting
and
record
keeping
requirements
associated
with
FAA
enforcement
of
these
proposed
regulations
would
likely
be
very
small.

C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
The
RFA
generally
requires
an
agency
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
of
any
rule
subject
to
notice
and
comment
rulemaking
requirements
under
the
Administrative
Procedure
Act
or
any
other
statute
unless
the
agency
certifies
that
the
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
Small
entities
include
small
businesses,
small
organizations,
and
small
governmental
jurisdictions.

For
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
today's
rule
on
small
entities,
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(
1)
A
small
business
that
meet
the
definition
for
business
based
on
SBA
size
standards;
(
2)
a
small
governmental
jurisdiction
that
is
a
government
of
a
city,
county,
town,

school
district
or
special
district
with
a
population
of
less
than
50,000;
or
(
3)
a
small
organization
that
is
any
not­
for­
profit
enterprise
which
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.
The
following
table
1
provides
an
overview
of
the
primary
SBA
small
business
categories
potentially
affected
by
this
proposed
regulation.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
108
Table
1
 
Primary
SBA
Small
Business
Categories
Potentially
Affected
by
This
Proposed
Regulation
Industry
NAICSa
Codes
Defined
by
SBA
as
a
small
business
if:
b
Manufacturers
of
new
aircraft
engines
336412
<
1,000
employees
Manufacturers
of
new
aircraft
336411
<
1,500
employees
Scheduled
air
carriers,
passenger
and
freight
481
<
1,500
employees
a
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)

b
According
to
SBA's
regulations
(
13
CFR
121),
businesses
with
no
more
than
the
listed
number
of
employees
or
dollars
in
annual
receipts
are
considered
"
small
entities"
for
purposes
of
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis.

After
considering
the
economic
impacts
of
today's
proposed
rule
on
small
entities,
I
certify
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
This
proposed
rule
will
not
impose
any
requirements
on
small
entities.
Because
of
the
limited
classes
of
aircraft
engines
to
which
today's
proposed
regulations
apply,
no
small
entities
would
be
affected.
Our
review
of
the
list
of
manufacturers
of
commercial
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines
with
rated
thrust
greater
than
26.7
kN
indicates
that
there
are
no
U.
S.

manufacturers
of
these
engines
that
qualify
as
small
businesses.
We
are
unaware
of
any
foreign
manufacturers
with
a
U.
S.­
based
facility
that
would
qualify
as
a
small
business.
In
addition,
the
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
109
proposed
rule
will
not
impose
significant
economic
impacts
on
engine
manufacturers.
As
discussed
earlier,
today's
action
would
codify
emission
standards
that
manufacturers
currently
adhere
to
(
nearly
all
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standards).
The
proposed
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards.
These
proposed
standards
would
not
impose
any
additional
burden
on
manufacturers
because
they
are
already
designing
new
engines
to
meet
the
ICAO
standards.
Also,
the
test
procedure
amendments
(
revisions
to
criteria
on
calibration
and
test
gases)
necessary
to
determine
compliance
are
already
being
adhered
to
by
manufacturers
during
current
engine
certification
tests.
Therefore,
EPA
believes
that
the
proposed
regulations
would
impose
no
additional
burden
on
manufacturers.
The
existence
of
ICAO's
requirements
results
in
minimal
cost
from
today's
proposed
requirements.

D.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA),
P.
L.
104­
4,
establishes
requirements
for
Federal
agencies
to
assess
the
effects
of
their
regulatory
actions
on
State,
local,

and
tribal
governments
and
the
private
sector.
Under
section
202
of
the
UMRA,
EPA
generally
must
prepare
a
written
statement,
including
a
cost­
benefit
analysis,
for
proposed
and
final
rules
with
"
Federal
mandates"
that
may
result
in
expenditures
to
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,

in
the
aggregate,
or
to
the
private
sector,
of
$
100
million
or
more
in
any
one
year.
Before
promulgating
an
EPA
rule
for
which
a
written
statement
is
needed,
section
205
of
the
UMRA
generally
requires
EPA
to
identify
and
consider
a
reasonable
number
of
regulatory
alternatives
and
adopt
the
least
costly,
most
cost­
effective
or
least
burdensome
alternative
that
achieves
the
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
110
objectives
of
the
rule.
The
provisions
of
section
205
do
not
apply
when
they
are
inconsistent
with
applicable
law.
Moreover,
section
205
allows
EPA
to
adopt
an
alternative
other
than
the
least
costly,
most
cost­
effective
or
least
burdensome
alternative
if
the
Administrator
publishes
with
the
final
rule
an
explanation
why
that
alternative
was
not
adopted.
Before
EPA
establishes
any
regulatory
requirements
that
may
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments,

including
tribal
governments,
it
must
have
developed
under
section
203
of
the
UMRA
a
small
government
agency
plan.
The
plan
must
provide
for
notifying
potentially
affected
small
governments,
enabling
officials
of
affected
small
governments
to
have
meaningful
and
timely
input
in
the
development
of
EPA
regulatory
proposals
with
significant
Federal
intergovernmental
mandates,
and
informing,
educating,
and
advising
small
governments
on
compliance
with
the
regulatory
requirements.

EPA
has
determined
that
this
rule
does
not
contain
a
Federal
mandate
that
may
result
in
expenditure
of
$
100
million
or
more
for
State,
local,
or
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate
or
the
private
sector
in
any
one
year.
This
rule
contains
no
regulatory
requirements
that
might
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments.
Today's
action
would
codify
emission
standards
that
manufacturers
currently
adhere
to
(
nearly
all
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standards).
The
proposed
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards.
These
proposed
standards
would
not
impose
any
additional
burden
on
manufacturers
because
they
are
already
designing
new
engines
to
meet
the
ICAO
standards.
Thus,
the
annual
effect
on
the
economy
of
today's
proposed
standards
will
be
minimal.
Thus,
today's
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
sections
202
and
205
of
the
UMRA.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
111
E.
Executive
Order
13132:
Federalism
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
"
Federalism"
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
"
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications."

"
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications"
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
"
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government."

This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
federalism
implications.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,

or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132.
As
discussed
earlier,
section
233
of
the
CAA
preempts
states
from
adopting
or
enforcing
aircraft
engine
emission
standards.
This
proposed
rule
merely
modifies
existing
EPA
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
and
test
procedures
and
therefore
will
merely
continue
an
existing
preemption
of
State
and
local
law.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13132
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

In
the
spirit
of
Executive
Order
13132,
and
consistent
with
EPA
policy
to
promote
communications
between
EPA
and
State
and
local
governments,
EPA
specifically
solicits
comment
on
this
proposed
rule
from
State
and
local
officials.

F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
112
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
"
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments"
(
65
FR
67249,
November
6,
2000),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
"
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
tribal
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
tribal
implications."

This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
The
proposed
emission
standards
and
other
related
requirements
for
private
industry
in
this
rule
have
national
applicability
and
therefore
do
not
uniquely
affect
the
communities
of
Indian
Tribal
Governments.
As
discussed
earlier,
section
233
of
the
CAA
preempts
states
from
adopting
or
enforcing
aircraft
engine
emission
standards.
This
proposed
rule
merely
modifies
existing
EPA
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
and
test
procedures
and
therefore
will
merely
continue
an
existing
preemption
of
State
and
local
law.
In
addition,
this
rule
will
be
implemented
at
the
Federal
level
and
impose
compliance
obligations
only
on
engine
manufacturers.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.
EPA
specifically
solicits
additional
comment
on
this
proposed
rule
from
tribal
officials.

G.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
&
Safety
Risks
Executive
Order
13045,
"
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks"
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997)
applies
to
any
rule
that
(
1)
is
determined
to
be
"
economically
significant"
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866,
and
(
2)
concerns
an
environmental
health
or
safety
risk
that
EPA
has
reason
to
believe
may
have
a
disproportionate
effect
on
children.
If
the
regulatory
action
meets
both
criteria,
Section
5­
501
of
the
Order
directs
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
113
the
Agency
to
evaluate
the
environmental
health
or
safety
effects
of
the
planned
rule
on
children,

and
explain
why
the
planned
regulation
is
preferable
to
other
potentially
effective
and
reasonably
feasible
alternatives
considered
by
the
Agency.

This
proposal
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13045
because
it
is
not
economically
significant
under
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
12866,
and
because
the
Agency
does
not
have
reason
to
believe
the
environmental
health
or
safety
risks
addressed
by
this
action
present
a
disproportionate
risk
to
children.

The
effects
of
ozone
and
PM
on
children's
health
were
addressed
in
detail
in
EPA's
rulemaking
to
establish
NAAQS
for
these
pollutants,
and
EPA
is
not
revisiting
those
issues
here.

EPA
believes,
however,
that
the
emission
reductions
(
NOx
and
secondary
PM)
from
this
rulemaking
will
further
reduce
ozone
and
PM
and
the
related
adverse
impacts
on
children's
health.

The
public
is
invited
to
submit
or
identify
peer­
reviewed
studies
and
data,
of
which
the
agency
may
not
be
aware,
that
assessed
results
of
early
life
exposure
to
ozone
and
PM.

H.
Executive
Order
13211:
Actions
that
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
This
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13211,
"
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use"
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001)
because
it
is
not
a
significant
regulatory
action
under
Executive
Order
12866.

I.
National
Technology
Transfer
Advancement
Act
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
114
Section
12(
d)
of
the
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
("
NTTAA"),
Public
Law
104­
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note)
directs
EPA
to
use
voluntary
consensus
standards
in
its
regulatory
activities
unless
to
do
so
would
be
inconsistent
with
applicable
law
or
otherwise
impractical.
Voluntary
consensus
standards
are
technical
standards
(
e.
g.,
materials
specifications,
test
methods,
sampling
procedures,
and
business
practices)
that
are
developed
or
adopted
by
voluntary
consensus
standards
bodies.
NTTAA
directs
EPA
to
provide
Congress,
through
OMB,
explanations
when
the
Agency
decides
not
to
use
available
and
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards.

This
proposed
rulemaking
involves
technical
standards
for
testing
emissions
for
commercial
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines.
EPA
proposes
to
use
test
procedures
contained
in
ICAO
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices
Environmental
Protection,
with
the
proposed
modifications
contained
in
this
rulemaking.
139
These
procedures
are
currently
used
by
all
manufacturers
of
commercial
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines
(
with
thrust
greater
than
26.7
kN)
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
ICAO
emissions
standards.

EPA
welcomes
comments
on
this
aspect
of
the
proposed
rulemaking
and,
specifically,

invites
the
public
to
identify
potentially­
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards
and
to
explain
why
such
standards
should
be
used
in
this
regulation.

139ICAO
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices
Environmental
Protection,

Annex
16,
Volume
II,
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
Second
Edition,
July
1993
­­
Amendment
3,

March
20,
1997.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int)
or
found
in
Docket
OAR
2002­
0030,
Document
__­_­__.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
cite,
quote,
or
distribute
6/
12/
03
115
List
of
Subjects
in
40
CFR
Part
87
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,

Incorporation
by
reference,
Aircraft
engines.

Dated:
______,
200_

Christine
Todd
Whitman,

Administrator.
