Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
1
Specific
Comments
Specific
comments
and
editorial
suggestions
have
been
written
electronically
in
the
draft,
Final
NPRM
and
may
be
viewed
in
Microsoft
Word
via
the
"
track
changes"
view
option.
In
many
cases,
discussion
that
is
not
intended
as
an
editorial
change,
but
an
explanation,
comment,
or
question
are
provided
in
italics
and
preceeded
with
the
word
"
Note:".
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
2
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
87
[
OAR­
2002­
0030;
FRL­
XXXX­
X]

RIN
2060­
AK01
Control
of
Air
Pollution
From
Aircraft
and
Aircraft
Engines;
Emission
Standards
and
Test
Procedures
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
In
this
action,
we
are
amending
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
establishing
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
adopts
standards
equivalent
to
the
latest
NOx
standards
of
the
United
Nations
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
and
thereby
brings
the
United
States
emission
standards
into
alignment
with
the
internationally
adopted
standards
(
ICAO
standards
for
newly
certified
engines
were
effective
beginning
in
2004).
In
addition,
today's
action
amends
the
test
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
3
procedures
for
gaseous
exhaust
emissions
to
correspond
to
recent
amendments
to
the
ICAO
test
procedures
for
these
emissions.

On
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER],
the
new
NOx
standards
will
apply
to
newly
certified
gas
turbine
engines
 
those
engines
designed
and
certified
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations
(
for
purposes
of
this
action,
the
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
means
the
date
of
type
certification).

Newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
(
i.
e.,
those
individual
engines
that
are
part
of
an
already
certified
engine
model,
but
are
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations
for
such
engines
and
have
never
been
in
service)
will
not
have
to
meet
these
standards.

Today's
amendments
to
the
emission
test
procedures
are
those
recommended
by
ICAO
and
are
widely
used
by
the
aircraft
engine
industry.
Thus,
today's
action
will
help
establish
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
standards,
requirements,
and
test
procedures.
Since
aircraft
and
aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
there
is
commercial
benefit
to
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
emission
standards
and
control
program
requirements.
In
addition,
today's
action
ensures
that
domestic
commercial
aircraft
meet
the
current
international
standards,
and
thus,
the
public
can
be
assured
they
are
receiving
the
air
quality
benefits
of
the
international
standards.

DATES:
This
final
rule
is
effective
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER].
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
4
The
incorporation
by
reference
of
certain
publications
listed
in
this
regulation
is
approved
by
the
Director
of
the
Federal
Register
as
of
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER].

ADDRESSES:
EPA
has
established
a
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2002­

0030.
All
documents
in
the
docket
are
listed
in
the
EDOCKET
index
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Although
listed
in
the
index,
some
information
is
not
publicly
available,
i.
e.,
CBI
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
Certain
other
material,
such
as
copyrighted
material,
is
not
placed
on
the
Internet
and
will
be
publicly
available
only
in
hard
copy
form.
Publicly
available
docket
materials
are
available
either
electronically
in
EDOCKET
or
in
hard
copy
at
the
Air
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center,
EPA/
DC,
EPA
West,

Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
The
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
Public
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Air
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
1742.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Mr.
Bryan
Manning,
Assessment
and
Standards
Division,
Office
of
Transportation
and
Air
Quality,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,

2000
Traverwood
Drive,
Ann
Arbor,
MI
48105;
telephone
number:
(
734)
214­
4832;
fax
number:

(
734)
214­
4816;
e­
mail
address:
manning.
bryan@
epa.
gov,
or
Assessment
and
Standards
Division
Hotline;
telephone
number:
(
734)
214­
4636;
e­
mail
address:
asdinfo@
epa.
gov.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
5
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

Does
This
Action
Apply
to
Me?

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
(
part
87).
If
you
have
any
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
6
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
in
the
preceding
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.

How
Can
I
Get
Copies
of
This
Document
and
Other
Related
Information?

Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
The
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
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
is
(
202)
566­
1742,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Air
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
1742.

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
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.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
7
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
above.

Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number.

Outline
of
This
Preamble
I.
Introduction
A.
Brief
History
of
EPA's
Regulation
of
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions
B.
Interaction
With
the
International
Community
C.
EPA's
Responsibilities
Under
the
Clean
Air
Act
II.
Why
is
EPA
Taking
This
Action?

A.
Inventory
Contribution
B.
Health
and
Welfare
Effects
1.
Ozone
a.
What
Are
the
Health
Effects
of
Ozone
Pollution?

b.
What
Are
the
Current
and
Projected
8­
hour
Ozone
Levels?

2.
Particulate
Matter
a.
What
Is
Particulate
Matter?

b.
What
Are
the
Health
Effects
of
PM2.5?

c.
What
Are
The
Current
and
Projected
Levels?

C.
Other
Environmental
Effects
1.
Acid
Deposition
2.
Eutrophication
and
Nitrification
3.
Plant
Damage
from
Ozone
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
8
4.
Visibility
III.
Aircraft
Engine
Standards
A.
What
Are
The
NOx
Standards
For
Newly
Certified
Engines?

1.
Today's
NOx
Standards
a.
For
Engines
With
a
Pressure
Ratio
of
30
or
less
i.
For
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
89.0
kN
ii.
For
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89.0
kN
b.
For
Engines
With
A
Pressure
Ratio
of
More
Than
30
But
Less
than
62.5
i.
For
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
89.0
kN
ii.
For
engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
of
more
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89.0
kN
c.
For
Engines
With
a
Pressure
Ratio
of
62.5
or
More
2.
NOx
Standards
of
Newly
Certified
Mid­
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
3.
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­
Thrust
Engines
4.
Rationale
for
Today's
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­,
Mid­,
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
5.
Future
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­,
Mid­,
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
B.
Newly
Manufactured
Engines
of
Already
Certified
Models
1.
What
Is
the
Status
of
Engines?

2.
What
Are
The
Issues
With
Applying
Today's
NOx
Standards
to
Newly
Manufactured
Engines
of
Already
Certified
Models?
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
9
IV.
Amendments
to
Criteria
on
Calibration
and
Test
Gases
for
Gaseous
Emissions
Test
and
Measurement
Procedures
V.
Correction
of
Exemptions
for
Very
Low
Production
Models
VI.
Coordination
with
FAA
VII.
Possible
Future
Aviation
Emissions
Reduction
(
EPA/
FAA
Voluntary
Aviation
Emissions
Reduction
Initiative)

VIII.
Regulatory
Impacts
IX.
Public
Participation
X.
Statutory
Provisions
and
Legal
Authority
XI.
Statutory
and
Executive
Orders
Review
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Analysis
D.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
E.
Executive
Order
13132:
Federalism
F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
G.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
&
Safety
Risks
H.
Executive
Order
13211:
Actions
that
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,

or
Use
I.
National
Technology
Transfer
Advancement
Act
J.
Congressional
Review
Act
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
10
I.
Introduction
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
applicable
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)).
In
addition,
section
231(
a)(
3)
provides
that
after
we
propose
standards,
the
Administrator
shall
issue
such
standards
"
with
such
modifications
as
he
deems
appropriate."

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
of
already
certified
models1
(
those
individual
engines
that
are
part
of
an
already
certified
engine
model,
but
are
built
after
the
1In
the
proposal,
we
referred
to
such
engines
as
already
certified,
newly
manufactured
engines
or
already
certified
engines;
however,
this
terminology
may
need
some
clarification
for
the
final
rulemaking
(
thus,
we
use
the
term
"
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models").
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
11
effective
date
of
the
regulations
for
such
engines
and
have
never
been
in
service)
2
and
for
newly
certified
gas
turbine
engines
(
those
engines
designed
and
certified
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations3).
4
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
34
for
the
Department
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
2This
does
not
mean
that
in
1997
we
promulgated
requirements
for
the
re­
certification
or
retrofit
of
existing
in­
use
engines.

3Throughout
this
rule,
the
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
means
the
date
of
type
certification.

4U.
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
1/
13/
05
12
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."
5
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
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..."
6
Insert.
"
At
the
35th
Assembly
in
October
5ICAO,
"
Convention
on
International
Civil
Aviation,"
Sixth
Edition,
Document
7300/
6,

1980.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
the
ICAO
website
located
at
www.
icao.
int.

6International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Foreword
of
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices,
Environmental
Protection,
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
13
2004,
ICAO's
188
Contracting
States
affirmed
that
ICAO
should
continue
to
take
the
leadership
role
in
all
international
civil
aviation
matters
relating
to
the
environment."

The
United
States
is
one
of
188
participating
member
States
of
ICAO.
7
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
its
national
interest.
8
ICAO
standards
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
the
ICAO
website
located
at
www.
icao.
int.

7As
of
June
20,
2002
there
were
188
Contracting
States
according
to
the
ICAO
website
located
at
www.
icao.
int.
(
repeated
in
text,
above)

8Text
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
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
14
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
State,
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.
9
Further,
if
it
fails
to
file
a
written
notification,
it
will
be
in
default
of
its
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.
10
The
Chicago
Convention
does
not
require
all
Contracting
States
to
adopt
identical
airworthiness
standards.
Although
the
Convention
urges
a
high
degree
of
uniformity,
it
is
expected
that
States
will
adopt
their
own
airworthiness
standards,
and
it
is
anticipated
that
some
9Text
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.

10Articles
87
and
88
of
Chicago
Convention.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
15
states
may
adopt
standards
that
are
more
stringent
than
those
agreed
by
ICAO.
However,

because
any
State
can
ban
use
within
its
airspace
of
any
aircraft
that
does
not
meet
ICAO
standards,
States
that
wish
to
use
aircraft
in
international
air
transportation
have
agreed
to
adopt
standards
that
meet
or
exceed
the
stringency
levels
of
ICAO
standards.
11
Because
States
are
required
to
recognize
certificates
of
any
State
whose
standards
meet
or
exceed
ICAO
standards,
a
State
is
assured
its
aircraft
will
be
permitted
to
operate
in
any
other
Contracting
State
if
its
standards
meet
or
exceed
the
minimum
stringency
levels
of
ICAO
standards.

As
long
as
a
participating
nation
of
ICAO
adopts
aircraft
emission
standards
that
are
equal
to
or
more
stringent
than
ICAO's
standards,
the
certificates
of
airworthiness
for
such
nations
are
valid.
Thus,
aircraft
belonging
to
countries
with
more
stringent
standards
are
permitted
to
travel
through
the
airspace
of
other
countries
without
any
restriction.
To
ensure
operation
internationally
without
constraints,
a
participating
nation
which
elects
to
adopt
more
stringent
standards
is
obligated
to
notify
ICAO
of
the
differences
between
its
standards
and
ICAO
standards.
12
However,
if
a
nation
sets
tighter
standards
than
ICAO,
air
carriers
not
based
in
that
nation
(
foreign­
flag
carriers)
would
only
be
required
to
comply
with
the
ICAO
standards.

The
ICAO
Council's
Committee
on
Aviation
Environmental
Protection
(
CAEP)

undertakes
ICAO's
technical
work
in
the
environmental
field.
The
CAEP
is
responsible
for
11Article
33
of
Chicago
Convention.

12Article
38
of
Chicago
Convention.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
16
evaluating,
researching,
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
VI
for
further
discussion
of
FAA's
role).
EPA
has
historically
been
a
principal
participant
in
the
development
of
U.
S.
policy
in
ICAO/
CAEP
and
other
international
venues,

assisting
and
technically
advising
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).
13
On
June
30,
1981,
the
ICAO
Council
adopted
its
first
international
standards
and
recommended
practices
covering
aircraft
engine
emissions.
14
These
standards
limit
aircraft
engine
emissions
of
NOx,
CO,
and
hydrocarbons
(
HC),
in
relation
to
other
engine
performance
13ICAO,
"
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).

14ICAO,
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).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
17
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,
1999.15
The
CAEP/
4
16
percent
NOx
reduction
standard
applies
to
new
engine
designs
certified
after
December
31,
2003
(
i.
e.,
it
applies
only
to
newly
certified
engines,
rather
than
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models).
16,17
15
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993,
Amendment
4
effective
on
July
19,
1999.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int).

16These
NOx
standards
will
be
interchangeably
be
referred
to
as
the
1998
CAEP/
4
standards
and
the
1999
ICAO
standards
throughout
this
Notice.

17Newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
are
those
individual
engines
that
are
part
of
an
already
certified
engine
model,
but
are
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations
for
such
engines
and
have
never
been
in
service.
This
does
not
mean
the
recertification
or
retrofit
of
existing
in­
use
engines
.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
18
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,
in
today's
rulemaking
EPA
is
adopting
standards
for
newly
certified
engines
that
are
equivalent
to
ICAO's
1999
amendment
to
the
NOx
emission
standard
and
the
test
procedure
changes
approved
by
ICAO
in
1997,
and
EPA
is
adopting
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
applicable
to
any
air
pollutant
from
classes
of
aircraft
engines
which
in
its
judgement
may
reasonably
be
anticipated
to
endanger
public
health
or
welfare.

Section
231(
a)(
3)
provides
that
after
we
propose
standards,
the
Administrator
shall
issue
such
standards
"
with
such
modifications
as
he
deems
appropriate."
In
addition,
EPA
is
required
to
ensure,
in
consultation
with
the
Secretary
of
Transportation,
that
such
standards'
effective
dates
permit
the
development
of
necessary
technology,
giving
appropriate
consideration
to
compliance
cost.
Also,
EPA
must
consult
with
the
FAA
before
proposing
or
promulgating
emission
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
19
standards.
(
See
section
VI
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
or
aircraft
engines
only
in
EPA
in
consultation
with
the
Secretary
of
Transportation.
18
States
are
preempted
from
adopting
or
enforcing
any
standard
respecting
aircraft
engine
emissions
unless
such
standard
is
identical
to
EPA's
standards.
In
addition
to
this
express
preemption,
the
comprehensive
scheme
established
by
CAA
sections
231
and
232
for
regulation
of
aircraft
emissions
by
EPA
and
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Transportation
demonstrates
federal
preemption
of
the
entire
field.
See
Washington
V.
General
Motors
Corp.,
406
U.
S.
109,
114
(
1972)
(
stating
that
Congress
has
"
preempted
the
field
so
far
as
emissions
from
airplanes
are
concerned")
19In
addition,
federal
aviation
law
preempts
the
states
from
taking
any
action,

including
action
related
to
aircraft
emissions
that
would
necessarily
have
the
direct
or
indirect
effect
of
restricting
aircraft
operations.

II.
Why
Is
EPA
Taking
This
Action?

18CAA
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
1/
13/
05
20
As
mentioned
above,
section
231(
a)(
2)(
A)
of
the
CAA
authorizes
the
Administrator
to
"
from
time
to
time,
issue
proposed
emission
standards
applicable
to
emission
of
any
air
pollution
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."

One
of
the
principal
components
of
aircraft
exhaust
emissions
is
NOx.
NOx
is
a
precursor
to
the
formation
of
ozone.
19
Many
commercial
airports
are
located
in
urban
areas
and
many
of
these
areas
have
ambient
ozone
levels
above
the
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
(
NAAQS)
for
ozone
(
i.
e.,
they
are
in
nonattainment
for
ozone).
NOx
emissions
from
aircraft
also
contribute
to
adverse
health
effects
associated
with
ambient
concentrations
of
PM.
This
section
discusses
the
contribution
of
aircraft
engines
to
the
national
NOx
and
PM
emissions
inventories
and
the
health
and
welfare
impacts
of
these
emissions.

A.
Inventory
Contribution
20Ground­
level
ozone,
the
main
ingredient
in
smog,
is
formed
by
complex
chemical
reactions
of
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
and
NOx
in
the
presence
of
heat
and
sunlight.

Standards
that
reduce
NOx
emissions
will
help
address
ambient
ozone
levels.
They
will
also
help
reduce
PM
levels
as
NOx
emissions
can
also
be
part
of
the
secondary
formation
of
PM.

However,
these
reductions
may
be
offset
by
potential
tradeoffs
between
NOx
and
PM
reduction
at
the
source.
See
Section
II.
B
below.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
21
EPA's
estimate
of
the
contribution
of
aircraft
to
national
NOx
and
PM
emission
inventories
is
set
out
in
Table
II­
1.
Note
that
this
table
provides
the
inventory
contributions
only
for
2001,
and
therefore
does
not
take
into
account
the
impacts
of
our
recent
mobile
source
emission
control
programs
for
highway
vehicles
and
nonroad
engines
and
equipment
which
will
go
into
effect
in
the
coming
years.
20
.
Those
new
standards
are
expected
to
reduce
NOx
and
PM
emissions
from
highway
and
nonroad
engines
by
90
percent
or
more
on
a
per­
engine
basis.
Nor
does
the
table
account
for
aviation's
reduced
NOx
emissions
due
to
slower
growth
and
changes
in
fleet
composition
Nonetheless,
as
these
new
programs
go
into
effect,
it
is
probable
the
relative
size
of
the
contribution
of
aircraft
to
national
NOx
and
PM
levels
may
increase
due
to
the
decrease
in
the
contribution
of
those
other
mobile
sources.

Table
II­
1
Annual
NOx
and
PM
Baseline
Emission
Levelsa
From
EPA's
National
Air
Quality
and
Emissions
Trends
Report,
August
2003
(
Short
Tons,
2001)

Category
NOx
(
Thous.
Tons)
PM
Aircraftb,
c
81
0.7%
2
0.4%

Nonroad
4,075
32.8%
288
63.7%

Highway
8,249
66.5%
162
35.8%

Total
Mobile
Source
12,405
452
aSource:
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Average
Annual
Emissions,
All
Criteria
Pollutants
Years
Including
1970
­
2001,"
Updated
August
2003.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttnchie1/
trends/
and
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.

20For
additional
information
on
the
inventory
impacts
of
our
new
rules,
see
Tables
IV­
A­

1
and
IV­
A­
2
in
our
Advance
Notice
of
Proposed
Rulemaking
for
an
additional
tier
of
standards
for
locomotives
and
marine
diesel
engines
below
30
liters
per
cylinder
displacement
(
69
FR
39276,
June
29,
2004).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
22
bThese
aircraft
emissions
are
a
conservative
estimate
as
they
reflect
military
operations
only
at
FAA
and
FAAcontracted
facilities
and
not
at
military
bases.
See
the
following
memo
for
further
discussion
of
the
contribution
of
military
aircraft
to
total
aircraft
emissions:
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Earlier
and
Current
Estimates
of
Military
Aircraft
Emissions,"
Memorandum
to
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030
from
Bryan
Manning,
September
30,
2003.
[
MAY
NEED
TO
UPDATE
THIS
MEMO
Note:
We
agree.].
c
Mistakenly,
the
national
aircraft
PM
emissions
in
the
2003
Trends
Report
did
not
include
commercial
aircraft
estimates,
and
thus,
these
aircraft
PM
emissions
are
a
conservative
estimate.
This
error
will
be
corrected
in
the
next
Trends
Report.

Aircraft
emissions
are
emitted
from
a
variety
of
aircraft
types
used
for
public,
private,

and
military
purposes
including
commercial
aircraft,
air
taxis,
general
aviation,
and
military
aircraft.
21
Commercial
aircraft
emissions
contribute
from
70
to
85
percent
of
the
NOx
aircraft
emissions
in
the
U.
S.
The
high
end
of
this
range
represents
commercial
aircraft's
fraction
of
national
aircraft
NOx
emissions
when
current
estimates
for
all
aircraft
types
(
commercial
aircraft,

21Commercial
aircraft
include
those
aircraft
used
for
scheduled
service
transporting
passengers,
freight,
or
both.
Air
taxis
also
fly
scheduled
service
carrying
passengers,
freight
or
both,
and
have
played
an
increasing
role
in
the
operations
of
the
U.
S.
aviation
system.
By
2015,

such
operations
are
forecast
to
represent
54%
of
operations.
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
(
this
needs
clarification,
e.
g.,
data
regarding
military
flights
and
emissions
are
accounted
for
through
separate
dabases
or
models???)
because
they
often
operate
primarily
out
of
military
bases
and
frequently
have
distinctive
flight
profiles.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
23
air
taxis,
general
aviation,
and
military
aircraft)
are
added
together.
22
The
lower
end
of
the
range
is
commercial
aircraft's
contribution
of
NOx
aircraft
emissions
in
the
U.
S.
when
combining
earlier23
military
aircraft
estimates
with
current
emission
estimates
for
the
three
other
aircraft
types
(
the
earlier
and
current
estimates
were
based
on
different
methods
or
models
for
calculating
aircraft
emissions
in
2001).
This
range
was
provided
since
the
current
estimates
of
military
aircraft
emission
have
limitations
 
i.
e.,
military
aircraft
estimates
are
a
conservative
22U.
S.
EPA,
"
Average
Annual
Emissions,
All
Criteria
Pollutants
Years
Including
1970
­

2001,"
Updated
August
2003.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttnchie1/
trends/

and
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.

U.
S.
EPA,
"
Documentation
for
Aircraft,
Commercial
Marine
Vessel,
Locomotive,
and
other
Nonroad
Components
of
the
National
Emissions
Inventory,
Volume
I
­
Methodology,"

Prepared
for
EPA
by
Eastern
Research
Group,
Inc.,
October
7,
2003.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
30.

23The
earlier
military
estimates
are
based
on
emission
inventories
from
the
Final
Rule
for
Control
of
Emissions
from
Land­
based
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines,
69
FR
38958,
June
29,
2004.

Also,
see
the
following
memorandum
for
further
discussion
of
the
contribution
of
military
aircraft
to
total
aircraft
emissions
and
related
references:
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Earlier
and
Current
Estimates
of
Military
Aircraft
Emissions,"
Memorandum
to
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030
from
Bryan
Manning,
September
30,
2003.
[
MAY
NEED
TO
UPDATE
THIS
MEMO
Note:
We
agree.].
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
24
estimate
as
they
reflect
military
operations
only
at
FAA
and
FAA­
contracted
facilities
and
not
at
military
bases.
For
a
discussion
on
obtaining
improved
military
aircraft
emission
estimates,
see
Section
5
of
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
for
this
rulemaking.
(
See
the
following
memorandum
for
a
further
description
of
the
contribution
of
military
aircraft
to
total
aircraft
emissions:
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Earlier
and
Current
Estimates
of
Military
Aircraft
Emissions,"

Memorandum
to
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030
from
Bryan
Manning,
September
30,
2003.
[
MAY
NEED
TO
UPDATE
THIS
MEMO
Note:
We
agree.
].)

While
the
current
contribution
of
aircraft
to
nationwide
NOx
.
is
less
than
one
percent,

their
contribution
on
a
local
level,
especially
in
areas
containing
or
adjacent
to
airports
can
be
much
larger
and
is
also
expected
to
grow.
This
is
illustrated
by
EPA's
1999
study
that
examined
NOx
emissions
from
aircraft
for
ten
cities:
Atlanta,
Boston­
Lawrence­
Worcester,
Charlotte­

Gastonia,
Chicago­
Gary­
Lake
County,
Houston­
Galveston­
Brazoria,
New
York­
New
Jersey­

Long
Island,
Philadelphia,
Phoenix,
Los
Angeles
Air
Basin
and
Washington
D.
C.
24
Nineteen
24U.
S.
EPA,
"
Evaluation
of
Air
Pollutant
Emissions
from
Subsonic
Commercial
Jet
Aircraft,"
April
1999,
EPA420­
R­
99­
013.
A
copy
of
this
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
otaq/
aviation.
htm.
It
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0002.
The
FAA
believes
this
report
has
significant
limits
as
a
reference
in
this
NPRM.
In
generating
its
NOx
forecasts,
tThe
study
failed
to
account
for
infrastructure
limitations,
runway
availability,
and
airport
growth
rates;
used
old
emissions
factors
to
characterize
part
of
the
2010
fleet;
ignored
fleet
turnover
to
cleaner
engines
during
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
25
airport
facilities
with
significant
commercial
jet
aircraft
activity
were
identified
within
these
selected
areas.
.
On
average
for
these
ten
cities,
commercial
aircraft's
contribution
was
expected
to
increase
from
about
2
percent
of
regional
total
NOx
emissions
in
1990
to
about
5
percent
in
2010.25
Note:
The
sentence
doesn't
offer
any
clarity
or
context
and
should
be
footnote
24.
Add,
as
a
footnote
for
the
previous
sentence
along
with
footnote
24:
"
The
FAA
disagreed
with
the
conclusions
of
the
ten
cities
report,
and
therefore,
questioned
its
use
as
a
reference
in
this
NPRM.
Among
the
problems
in
the
report,
beyond
the
fact
that
there
have
been
significant
effects
on
commercial
airline
operations
since
September
11,
2001,
are
a
failure
to
account
for
growth
constraints
such
as
infrastructure
limitations,
funding
limitations,
runway
availability,
and
airport
growth
rates;
use
of
old
emissions
factors
to
characterize
part
of
the
2010
fleet,
fleet
turnover
to
cleaner
engines
that
was
not
accounted
for,
adoption
of
newer
ICAO
emissions
standards;
mixing
height
assumptions;
and
times­
in­
mode
accuracy."

It
should
be
noted
that
the
above
study
of
the
impacts
of
airports
on
regional
air
quality
was
conducted
before
the
tragic
events
of
September
11,
2001,
and
the
economic
downturn
in
the
aircraft
transportation
sector
and
resulting
slowing
of
emissions
growth.
A
report
by
the
Department
of
Transportation
in
2003
indicated
that
the
combination
of
the
September
11,
2001
terrorist
attacks
and
cut­
backs
in
business
travel
have
had
a
significant
effect
on
air
the
time
period;
did
not
account
for
adoption
of
newer
ICAO
emissions
standards;
used
incorrect
(?)
mixing
height
assumptions;
and
times­
in­
mode
accuracy
(?).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
26
transportation
demand.
25
The
FAA
expects
the
demand
for
air
travel
to
recover
and
then
continue
a
long­
term
trend
of
annual
growth,
though
from
a
lower
base
and
at
a
slower
rate
in
the
United
States.
26
Thus,
there
is
both
a
short­
term
decrease
in
aircraft
transportation
activity
as
a
result
of
9/
11,
with
negative
growth
for
the
period
2001
to
2005
and
associated
decreases
in
aircraft
emission
contributions
and
lower
emissions
growth
than
originally
anticipated
over
the
time
period
assessed..
This
is
illustrated
in
Table
II­
2,
which
compares
the
results
of
an
earlier,

pre­
9/
11
FAA
activity
forecast
to
a
recent,
post­
9/
11
forecast.
As
operations
increase,
the
inventory
impact
of
these
aircraft
on
national
and
local
NOx
and
PM
inventories
and
on
ozone
and
ambient
PM
levels
will
also
increase.
.

Table
II­
2
 
FAA
Terminal
Area
Forecast
Summary
Report
of
Nationwide
Air
Carrier
Operationsa,
b
aSource:
U.
S.
FAA,
"
APO
Terminal
Area
Forecast
Summary
Report,"
Aircraft
Operations,
December
14,
2000;
and
"
APO
Terminal
Area
Forecast
Summary
Report
­
Forecast
Issued
January
2004,"
as
of
November
2,
2004.
See
the
following
FAA
website:
http://
www.
apo.
data.
faa.
gov/
faatafall.
HTM.
A
copy
of
these
reports
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.
bOperations
means
the
number
of
arrivals
and
departures
(
www.
apo.
data.
faa.
gov/
gloss.
html).

25U.
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.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0012.

26U.
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.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0005.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
27
cThe
change
in
operations
from
2000
to
2002
was
+
4.7%
for
the
12/
14/
00
forecast,
and
it
was
­
9.2%
for
the
1/
04
forecast.
The
data
in
Table
II­
2
show
that
prior
to
9/
11
growth
in
air
carrier
operations
was
expected
to
increase
by
34
percent
from
2000
to
2015.
The
revised
growth
forecast
for
this
period
estimates
that
aircraft
activity
will
now
increase
only
22%
in
the
period
2010­
2015.
In
fact,
the
originally
anticipated
operation
levels
in
2015
are
now
forecast
not
to
be
reached
until
2020.

Aircraft
emissions
are
a
large
portion
of
total
emissions
associated
with
airports.
Air
pollutants
resulting
from
airport
operations
are
emitted
from
several
types
of
sources
including
aircraft
main
engines
and
auxiliary
power
units
(
APUs);
ground
support
equipment
(
GSE),

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

and
other
miscellaneous
vehicles
used
to
support
aircraft
operations;
and
ground
access
vehicles
(
GAV),
which
include
vehicles
used
by
passengers,
employees,
freight
operators,
and
other
persons
to
enter
and
leave
an
airport.
EPA
estimates
that
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.
29
Note:

29The
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),

estimated
that
for
the
four
airports
studied
(
which
are
large
air
traffic
hubs)
on
average
aircraft
comprise
approximately
35
percent
of
NOx
emissions
from
airport
operations;
GAV
account
for
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
28
The
footnote
indicates
that
aircraft
average
35%,
GAV
35%,
and
APUs
and
GSE
make
up
the
balance.
Is
the
difference
between
these
two
references
a
typographical
error?
Since
EPA
has
established
stringent
emission
standards
for
GAVs
and
other
highway
and
nonroad
vehicles
used
at
airports,
overall
emissions
from
these
vehicles
will
continue
to
decline
for
many
years.
This
means
that
aircraft
will
contribute
an
increasing
portion
of
total
emissions
associated
with
airport
operations.

B.
Health
and
Welfare
Effects
NOx
emissions
from
commercial
aircraft
and
other
mobile
and
stationary
sources
contribute
to
the
formation
of
ozone.
In
addition,
NOx
emissions
at
low
altitude
also
react
in
the
atmosphere
to
form
secondary
particulate
matter
(
PM2.5),
particularly
ammonium
nitrate,
and
they
contribute
to
regional
haze.
30
The
NOx
standards
adopted
in
this
rule
will
help
reduce
ambient
ozone
and
PM
levels
and
thus
will
help
areas
with
airports
achieve
and/
or
maintain
compliance
with
the
NAAQS
for
ozone
and
PM.
The
NOx
standards
will
also
help
areas
reduce
another
35
percent,
and
APUs
and
GSE
contribute
about
15
percent
each
for
the
remaining
30
percent.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
OAR­

2002­
0030­
0071.

30As
described
later
in
section
II.
B.
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
1/
13/
05
29
regional
haze
and
increase
visibility
in
places
where
people
live,
work,
and
recreate.
31
In
the
following
section
we
discuss
the
health
and
welfare
effects
of
ozone
and
PM
emissions
Note:

Given
the
overall
contribution
of
aircraft
emissions
to
air
quality
problems,
further
dilution
in
the
conversion
rates
of
NOx
into
ozone
and
PM,
reductions
in
regional
haze
and
increased
visibility
may
not
be
a
reasonable
expectation.

1.
Ozone
a.
What
are
the
health
effects
of
ozone
pollution?

NOx
is
a
precursor
in
the
photochemical
reaction
which
forms
tropospheric
ozone.

Ground­
level
ozone,
the
main
ingredient
in
smog,
is
formed
by
complex
chemical
reactions
of
VOCs
and
NOx
in
the
presence
of
heat
and
sunlight.
The
health
effects
of
ozone
pollution
are
described
in
detail
in
EPA's
Air
Quality
Criteria
Document
for
Ozone
and
Other
Photochemical
Oxidants
and
are
also
described
in
the
Final
Regulatory
Analysis
for
our
recent
Clean
Air
Nonroad
Diesel
rule.
32
The
following
is
a
summary
of
those
effects.

31The
NOx
standards
being
set
today
will
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.

32U.
S.
EPA
(
1996).
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Ozone
and
Related
Photochemical
Oxidants,

EPA/
600/
P­
93/
004aF.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­
99­
06.
Document
Nos.
II­
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
30
Ozone
can
irritate
the
respiratory
system,
causing
coughing,
throat
irritation,
and/
or
uncomfortable
sensation
in
the
chest.
In
addition,
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.
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,
people
with
unusual
sensitivity
to
ozone,
and
children.
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.
33,
34
A­
15
to
17.
U.
S.
EPA
(
2004).
Final
Regulatory
Assessment:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines,
EPA420­
R­
04­
007.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­

2002­
0030,
Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0128.

33U.
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
1/
13/
05
31
New
research
suggests
additional
serious
health
effects
beyond
those
that
were
known
when
the
ozone
NAAQS
was
revised
in
1997.
Since
1997,
over
1,700
new
health
and
welfare
studies
relating
to
ozone
have
been
published
in
peer­
reviewed
journals.
35
Many
of
these
studies
investigate
the
impact
of
ozone
exposure
on
such
health
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
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.
In
all,
the
new
studies
that
have
become
available
since
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
was
adopted
in
1997
continue
to
34U.
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.

35New
Ozone
Health
and
Environmental
Effects
References,
Published
Since
Completion
of
the
Previous
Ozone
AQCD,
National
Center
for
Environmental
Assessment,
Office
of
Research
and
Development,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711
(
7/
2002)
Docket
No.
A­
2001­
28,
Document
II­
A­
79.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
32
demonstrate
the
harmful
effects
of
ozone
on
public
health
and
the
need
for
areas
with
high
ozone
levels
to
attain
and
maintain
the
NAAQS.

b.
What
are
current
and
projected
ozone
levels?

There
are
currently
two
ozone
NAAQS,
an
8­
hour
standard
and
a
1­
hour
standard.
The
8­
hour
ozone
standard
is
met
when
the
fourth
highest
daily
maximum
8­
hour
average
ozone
concentration
measured
over
a
3­
year
period
is
less
than
or
equal
to
0.085
parts
per
million
(
ppm).
The
1­
hour
ozone
threshold
value
is
0.12
ppm,
measured
as
a
1­
hour
average
concentration.
An
area
meets
the
1­
hour
ozone
NAAQS
if
there
is
no
more
than
one
day
per
year
when
the
highest
hourly
value
exceeds
the
threshold.
The
1­
hour
ozone
standard
is
being
replaced
by
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
and
the
1­
hour
ozone
standard
will
likely
be
revoked
in
June
2005.36
On
June
15,
2004,
the
8­
hour
ozone
nonattainment
designations
became
effective.
37
Nationwide,
there
are
approximately
159
million
people
living
in
126
areas
that
are
designated
as
36National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
for
Ozone;
Final
Rule.
62
FR
38855
(
July
18,

1997).

37U.
S.
EPA,
"
Air
Quality
Designations
and
Classifications
for
the
8­
hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards;
Early
Action
Compact
Areas
With
Deferred
Effective
Dates,"

Final
Rule,
69
FR
23858
(
April
30,
2004).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
33
not
attaining
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS
based
upon
the
monitored
data
from
2001­
2003
and
other
factors.
The
CAA
defines
a
nonattainment
area
as
an
area
that
is
violating
an
ambient
standard
or
is
contributing
to
a
nearby
area
that
is
violating
the
standard.
All
or
part
of
474
counties
are
designated
as
nonattainment
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS.
These
counties
are
spread
over
wide
geographic
areas,
including
most
of
the
nation's
major
population
centers,

which
include
much
of
the
eastern
half
of
the
U.
S.
and
large
areas
of
California.
38
From
air
quality
modeling
performed
for
the
recent
Clean
Air
Interstate
Rule
(
CAIR),
39
we
anticipate
that
without
emission
reductions
beyond
those
already
required
under
promulgated
regulation
and
approved
State
Implementation
Plans
(
SIPs),
ozone
nonattainment
will
likely
persist
into
the
future.
With
reductions
from
programs
already
in
place,
including
the
CAIR,

[
UPDATE
IF
CAIR
DOESN'T
COME
OUT]
the
number
of
counties
in
the
eastern
U.
S.

violating
the
ozone
8­
hour
standard
is
expected
to
decrease
in
2015
to
26
counties
where
43
million
[
UPDATE
WHEN
CAIR
COMES
OUT]
people
are
projected
to
live.

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,
including
proposed
requirements
that
States
submit
SIPs
that
address
how
areas
will
attain
the
8­
hour
ozone
38A
map
that
shows
the
current
ozone,
PM2.5,
and
federal
Class
I
visibility
areas
and
a
list
of
affected
counties
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.

39[
CITE
NEEDS
TO
BE
UPDATED
WHEN
CAIR
IS
FINALIZED
­
expected
soon]
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
34
standard.
40
The
second
phase
(
Phase
II)
of
this
proposed
implementation
process
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
NAAQS
will
be
finalized
in
the
next
few
months,
and
it
will
describe
the
SIP
submittal
date
requirements.
(
Phase
I
of
the
proposed
implementation
process
was
finalized
on
April
30,

2004
(
69
FR
23951),
but
it
did
not
include
these
SIP
submittal
date
requirements.)
41
The
Act
(
Title
I,
Part
D)
contains
two
sets
of
requirements
for
State
plans
implementing
the
national
ozone
air
quality
standards
in
nonattainment
areas.
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,
a
state
must
demonstrate
that
its
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
8­
hour
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
40U.
S.
EPA,
"
Proposed
Rule
to
Implement
the
8­
hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard,"
Proposed
Rule,
68
FR
32802
(
June
2,
2003).

41
U.
S.
EPA,
"
Final
Rule
to
Implement
the
8­
Hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
­
Phase
1,"
Final
Rule,
69
FR
23951
(
April
30,
2004).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
35
designation,
depending
on
an
area's
classification.
Thus,
we
anticipate
that
areas
covered
by
subpart
2
will
attain
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
in
the
2007
to
2024
time
period.

Since
the
emission
reductions
expected
from
the
standards
we
are
adopting
in
this
rule
will
occur
during
the
time
period
when
areas
will
need
to
attain
the
standard
under
either
option,

projected
reductions
in
aircraft
engine
emissions
will
assist
States
in
their
efforts
to
attain
and
maintain
the
8­
hour
NAAQS.

2.
Particulate
Matter
a.
What
is
Particulate
Matter?

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
those
particles
with
an
aerodynamic
diameter
less
than
or
equal
to
a
nominal
2.5
micrometers
(
also
known
as
PM2.5).
The
emission
sources,
formation
processes,
chemical
composition,

atmospheric
residence
times,
transport
distances
and
other
parameters
of
fine
and
coarse
particles
are
distinct.
This
discussion
focuses
on
fine
PM
since
the
NOx
emitted
by
aircraft
engines
reacts
in
the
atmosphere
to
form
fine
PM
as
discussed
below.

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,
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
36
and
metals.
Aircraft
engines
emit
NOx
which
reacts
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.
Fine
particles
can
remain
in
the
atmosphere
for
days
to
weeks
and
travel
through
the
atmosphere
hundreds
to
thousands
of
kilometers.
Thus
emissions
from
aircraft,
as
well
as
those
from
other
sources,
could
affect
nonattainment
areas
far
from
their
source.
However,
because
of
uncertainties
surrounding
aircraft
PM
formation
and
subsequent
growth
in
the
atmosphere,
the
relative
impact
is
uncertain
and
further
research
is
needed
to
characterize
impact
and
suggest
mitigation.

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
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.
42
However,

the
majority
of
NOx
involved
in
this
process
does
not
come
from
aircraft.
See
detailed
42See
the
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
"
Final
Regulatory
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines,"
EPA420­
R­
04­
007,
May
2004.
This
document
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
nonroad/
and
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
OAR­
2002­

0030­
0128.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
37
comments
on
pages
29
and
35.
The
relationship
between
this
discussion
and
aircraft
NOx
is
tenuous
at
best.

b.
What
Are
the
Health
Effects
of
PM?

Scientific
studies
show
ambient
PM
is
associated
with
a
series
of
adverse
health
effects.

These
health
effects
are
discussed
in
detail
in
the
recently
released
EPA
Criteria
Document
for
PM.
43
They
are
also
described
in
the
Final
Regulatory
Analysis
for
our
recent
Clean
Air
Nonroad
Diesel
rule.
44
The
following
is
a
summary
of
those
effects.

The
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
43U.
S.
EPA,
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Particulate
Matter
(
OCT
2004),
Volume
I
Document
No.
EPA600/
P­
99/
002aF
and
Volume
II
Document
No.
EPA600/
P­
99/
002bF.
This
document
is
available
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0129
and
OAR­
2002­

0030­
0130.

44U.
S.
EPA
(
2004).
Final
Regulatory
Assessment:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines,
EPA420­
R­
04­
007.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­

0030,
Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0128.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
38
in
ambient
PM
have
also
been
associated
with
increased
cough,
lower
respiratory
symptoms,
and
decrements
in
lung
function.
Additional
studies
have
associated
changes
in
heart
rate
and/
or
heart
rhythm
in
addition
to
changes
in
blood
characteristics
with
exposure
to
ambient
PM.

Short­
term
variations
in
ambient
PM
have
also
been
associated
with
increases
in
total
and
cardiorespiratory
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.
45,
46
Additionally,
one
long­
term
study
provides
evidence
for
premature
mortality
specifically
associated
with
PM
generated
by
mobile
sources47.
Two
studies
further
analyzing
the
Harvard
Six
Cities
Study's
air
quality
data
have
also
established
a
specific
influence
of
45Dockery,
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.

46Pope,
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.

47Hoek,
G;
Brunekreef,
B;
Goldbohm,
S;
et
al.
(
2002)
Association
between
mortality
and
indicators
of
traffic­
related
air
pollution
in
the
Netherlands:
a
cohort
study.
Lancet
360:
1203­

1209.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
39
mobile
source­
related
PM2.5
on
daily
mortality48
and
a
concentration­
response
function
for
mobile
source­
associated
PM2.5
and
daily
mortality.
49
c.
What
are
current
and
projected
levels
of
PM?

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.
The
long­
term
standard
specifies
an
expected
annual
arithmetic
mean
not
to
exceed
15
ug/
m3
averaged
over
three
years.

Approximately
XXX
million
people
live
in
XXXX
counties
and
XXX
areas
which
EPA
has
recommended
be
designated
nonattainment
for
the
PM2.5
NAAQS.
50
[
Update
soon
after
PM
designations
are
made].
In
addition,
tens
of
millions
of
people
live
in
areas
where
there
is
a
significant
future
risk
of
failing
to
maintain
or
achieve
the
PM2.5
NAAQS.

48Laden
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.

49Schwartz
J;
Laden
F;
Zanobetti
A.
(
2002)
The
concentration­
response
relation
between
PM(
2.5)
and
daily
deaths.
Environ
Health
Perspect
110(
10):
1025­
1029.

50A
map
that
shows
the
current
ozone,
PM2.5,
and
federal
Class
I
visibility
areas
and
a
list
of
affected
counties
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
40
This
is
illustrated
by
the
air
quality
modeling
performed
recently
in
connection
with
our
CAIR
rule,
which
suggests
that
elevated
PM2.5
levels
are
likely
to
continue
to
exist
in
the
future
in
many
areas
in
the
absence
of
additional
emission
controls.
51
For
example
in
the
eastern
U.
S.

in
2015,
based
on
emission
controls
currently
adopted,
we
project
that
66
[
UPDATE
WHEN
CAIR
COMES
OUT]
million
people
will
live
in
13
counties
with
average
PM2.5
levels
above
15
ug/
m3.
[
UPDATE
IF
CAIR
DOESN'T
COME
OUT]

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
than
10
years
from
the
date
of
designation
as
nonattainment."
Therefore,
based
on
this
information,
we
expect
that
most
or
all
are
as
will
need
to
attain
the
PM2.5
NAAQS
in
the
2009
to
2014
time
frame,
and
then
be
required
to
maintain
the
NAAQS
thereafter.

51[
CITE
NEEDS
TO
BE
UPDATED
CAIR
IS
FINALIZED
­
expected
soon]
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
41
Since
the
emission
reductions
expected
from
today's
final
rule
will
occur
during
the
time
period
when
areas
will
need
to
attain
the
standard
under
either
option,
these
standards
will
assist
States
in
their
effort
to
meet
the
new
PM2.5
NAAQS.
Note:
There
is
no
basis
for
this
statement.

Although
there
is
scientific
basis
for
the
tie
between
NOx
and
PM
­
this
discussion
appears
to
try
to
equate
NOx
mitigation
with
PM
mitigation.
Measures
taken
to
mitigate
NOx
in
aircraft
engines
may,
in
fact,
increase
fuel
burn,
other
gaseous
emissions,
and
PM
at
the
source
(
engine
exit
plane).
The
tradeoffs
and
uncertainties
must
be
recognized
and
acknowledged.
Although
the
ne
NOx
standards
may
help
mitigate
PM
­
there
are
tradeoffs
with
the
mitigation
of
PM
inception
that
must
be
understood.
C.
Other
Environmental
Effects
This
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,
and
visibility
impairment.
These
environmental
effects
are
described
in
detail
in
the
Final
Regulatory
Analysis
for
our
recent
Clean
Air
Nonroad
Diesel
rule.
52
1.
Acid
Deposition
52U.
S.
EPA
(
1996).
Air
Quality
Criteria
for
Ozone
and
Related
Photochemical
Oxidants,

EPA/
600/
P­
93/
004aF.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
A­
99­
06.
Document
Nos.

IIA
15
to
17.
U.
S.
EPA
(
2004).
Final
Regulatory
Assessment:
Control
of
Pollution
from
Nonroad
Diesel
Engines,
EPA420­
R­
04­
007.
This
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­

0030,
Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0128.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
42
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.
53
Acid
rain
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
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
for
a
total
of
$
80­
85
million
per
year
when
applied
to
all
new
cars
and
trucks
sold
in
the
U.
S.
each
year.

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

thereby
helping
to
reduce
acidity
levels
in
lakes
and
streams
throughout
the
country
and
helping
to
accelerate
the
recovery
of
acidified
lakes
and
streams
and
the
revival
of
ecosystems
adversely
affected
by
acid
deposition.
Reduced
acid
deposition
levels
will
also
help
reduce
stress
on
forests,
thereby
accelerating
reforestation
efforts
and
improving
timber
production.

53Much
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.
A
copy
of
this
document
is
available
in
Docket
No.
OAR
2002­
0030,

Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0028.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
43
Deterioration
of
our
historic
buildings
and
monuments,
and
of
buildings,
vehicles,
and
other
structures
exposed
to
acid
rain
and
dry
acid
deposition
will
be
reduced,
and
the
costs
borne
to
prevent
acid­
related
damage
may
also
decline.

2.
Eutrophication
and
Nitrification
In
recent
decades,
human
activities
have
greatly
accelerated
nutrient
impacts,
such
as
nitrogen
and
phosphorus,
causing
excessive
growth
of
algae
and
leading
to
degraded
water
quality
and
associated
impairment
of
fresh
water
and
estuarine
resources
for
human
uses.
54
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.

Deposition
of
nitrogen
from
aircraft
engines
contributes
to
elevated
nitrogen
levels
in
waterbodies.
The
NOx
reductions
from
today's
promulgated
standards
will
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.

54Deposition
of
Air
Pollutants
to
the
Great
Waters,
Third
Report
to
Congress,
June
2000.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
44
3.
Plant
Damage
from
Ozone
Ground­
level
ozone
can
also
cause
adverse
welfare
or
environmental
effects.
55
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.

As
discussed
earlier,
aircraft
engine
emissions
of
NOx
contribute
to
ozone.
The
final
standards
will
aid
in
the
reduction
of
ozone
and,
therefore,
help
reduce
crop
damage
and
stress
from
ozone
on
vegetation.

4.
Visibility
55U.
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
45
Visibility
can
be
defined
as
the
degree
to
which
the
atmosphere
is
transparent
to
visible
light.
56
Fine
particles
with
significant
light­
extinction
efficiencies
include
organic
matter,

sulfates,
nitrates,
elemental
carbon
(
soot),
and
soil.

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.

As
discussed
previously,
aircraft
engine
emissions
of
NOx
are
precursors
to
PM2.5.
In
1997,
EPA
established
the
secondary
(
welfare­
based)
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
56National
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
book
can
be
viewed
on
the
National
Academy
Press
Website
at
http://
www.
nap.
edu/
books/
0309048443/
html/.
See
also
U.
S.

EPA
Air
Quality
Criteria
Document
for
Particulate
Matter
(
2004).
This
document
is
available
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030,
Document
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0129
and
OAR­
2002­
0030­
0130.

See
also
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
1/
13/
05
46
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.
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).

Taken
together
with
other
programs,
reductions
from
this
final
rule
will
help
to
improve
visibility
across
the
nation,
including
mandatory
Federal
Class
I
areas.

III.
Aircraft
Engine
Standards
Under
the
authority
of
section
231
of
the
CAA,
EPA
today
adopts
standards
equivalent
to
ICAO's
February
1999
NOx
emission
standards
(
these
NOx
standards
were
adopted
at
CAEP/
4
in
57A
map
that
shows
the
current
ozone,
PM2.5,
and
federal
Class
I
visibility
areas
and
a
list
of
affected
counties
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
47
1998
and
approved
by
the
ICAO
Council
in
1999)
and
March
1997
test
procedure
amendments.

Today's
emission
standards
and
test
procedure
amendments
apply
to
commercial
aircraft
engines,
and
these
standards
do
not
apply
to
aircraft
engines
used
only
for
general
aviation
or
military
applications.
58
(
General
aviation
and
military
aircraft
can
use
commercial
aircraft
engines
subject
to
these
standards
 
e.
g.,
small
regional
jet
engines
are
also
utilized
in
executive
general
aviation
aircraft
and
larger
commercial
aircraft
engines
may
also
be
used
in
military
transport
aircraft).
The
commercial
aircraft
engines
subject
to
today's
NOx
standards
are
those
gas
turbine
engines
that
are
newly
certified
(
and
newly
designed)
after
the
effective
dates
of
the
regulations.
(
Newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
 
i.
e.,
those
individual
engines
that
are
part
of
an
already
certified
engine
model,
but
are
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations
for
such
engines
and
have
never
been
in
service
 
will
not
have
to
meet
these
standards).
59
The
NOx
emission
standards
and
their
effective
dates
are
described
below
in
this
section,
and
the
test
procedure
amendments
are
discussed
later
in
section
IV.

58In
the
proposal,
we
stated
that
no
general
aviation
or
military
engines
are
covered
by
the
proposal;
however,
this
statement
may
need
some
clarification
in
today's
final
rulemaking.
See
the
Section
5.2
of
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
of
this
rulemaking
for
further
discussion
of
general
aviation
and
military
aircraft
.

59This
provision
does
not
mean
the
re­
certification
or
retrofit
of
existing
in­
use
engines.

Instead
the
provision
does
not
require
the
ongoing
production
of
engines
that
have
already
been
certified
to
meet
the
new
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
48
A.
What
Are
The
NOx
Standards
For
Newly
Certified
Engines?

As
discussed
earlier
in
sections
I
and
II
of
today's
notice,
section
231(
a)(
2)(
A)
of
the
CAA
authorizes
EPA
to
establish
emission
standards
for
aircraft
engine
emissions
"...
which
in
his
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
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
adopts
near­
term
standards
that
will
go
into
effect
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER]
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
1998.60
This
final
rule
to
promulgate
aircraft
engine
NOx
standards
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
standards
is
consistent
with
U.
S.
obligations
under
ICAO.
By
issuing
standards
that
meet
or
exceed
ICAO
CAEP/
4
standards,
we
satisfy
these
obligations.
As
indicated
earlier
in
section
I
of
today's
rule,
the
implementation
date,
December
31,
2003,
has
already
occurred
for
the
CAEP/
4
60ICAO,
CAEP,
Fourth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
April
6­
8,
1998,
Report,
Document
9720,
CAEP/
4.
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
the
ICAO
website
located
at
www.
icao.
int.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
49
standards,
and
we
need
to
promulgate
the
standards
in
accordance
with
U.
S.
obligations
under
ICAO.
At
the
same
time,
EPA
anticipates
establishing
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
the
future.
In
February
2004,
CAEP/
6
(
sixth
meeting
of
CAEP)
agreed
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
approach
is
the
most
appropriate
means
to
address
emissions
from
aircraft
engines
in
this
rulemaking.
It
codifies
current
practice,
with
no
significant
lead
time,
as
a
near­
term
approach.
61
EPA
has
authority
to
revise
emission
standards
from
"
time
to
time."
EPA
intends
to
address
more
stringent
emission
standards
requiring
more
lead
time
in
a
future
rulemaking
(
see
section
III.
A.
5
for
further
discussion
of
future
standards),
as
the
ICAO
and
CAEP
process
develops
progressively
more
stringent
standards.

1.
Today's
NOx
Standards
61As
described
later,
more
information
and
greater
lead
time
would
be
necessary
to
require
more
stringent
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
50
EPA
is
adopting
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:
62
For
engines
of
a
type
or
model
of
which
that
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
was
after
December
31,
2003
(
see
below
for
further
discussion
on
the
effective
date
of
these
standards):

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

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

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

ii)
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:

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

NOx
=
(
7
+
2.0(
rated
pressure
ratio))
g/
kN(
rated
output)

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

62This
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
1/
13/
05
51
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,
2003.63
However,
since
this
date
has
past,
the
NOx
emission
standards
prescribed
above
for
newly
certified
engines
shall
take
effect
as
prescribed
beginning
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER].

2.
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Mid­
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
EPA
is
adopting
NOx
standards
for
newly
certified
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
(
those
engines
designed
and
certified
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations,
which
have
a
rated
63)
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
1/
13/
05
52
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
III.
A.
1(
a)(
i)
and
III.
A.
1(
b)(
i)

above
for
the
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines.)
More
specifically,
at
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
30
the
NOx
standards
represent
a
16
percent
reduction
from
the
existing
standard.
At
rated
pressure
ratios
of
10
and
20
,
the
standards
correspond
to
27
and
20
percent
reductions,

respectively.
In
addition,
at
rated
pressure
ratios
of
40
and
50,
the
NOx
standards
signify
9
and
4
percent
reductions,
respectively.
Also,
today's
and
existing
standards
are
equivalent
at
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
62.5.
See
Figure
III.
B­
1
in
section
III.
B
for
a
comparison
of
today's
NOx
standards
(
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
standards)
to
the
existing
standards
(
equivalent
to
CAEP/
2
standards)
.

3.
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
adopting
near­
term
NOx
standards
that
are
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
standards
for
such
engines,
and
these
standards
are
different
than
today's
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
(
engines
with
thrust
greater
than
89.0
kN).

In
64Today's
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
today's
(
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
standard
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
53
addition
to
rated
pressure
ratio,
the
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines
will
also
be
dependent
on
an
engine's
thrust
or
rated
output.
65
(
See
section
III.
A.
1(
a)(
ii)
and
III.
A.
1(
b)(
ii)
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
standards
are
an
8
percent
reduction
(
or
increase
in
stringency)
from
the
existing
standard
compared
to
a
16
percent
reduction
for
the
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines.
66
and
the
high
range
of
today's
standard
based
upon
the
rated
output
to
determine
the
NOx
limits
for
such
engines.
Thus,
thrust
dependent
standards
are
being
adopted
for
engines
with
rated
output
or
thrust
between
26.7
kN
and
89
kN.

65The
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
dependent
only
on
an
engine's
rated
pressure
ratio.

66Additional
examples
of
the
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines
in
comparison
to
the
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
provided
below.
At
rated
pressure
ratios
of
10
and
20
with
a
thrust
of
58
kN,
today's
low­
thrust
engine
standards
are
a
14
and
10
percent
reduction
from
the
existing
standard,
respectively.
Whereas,
at
these
same
rated
pressure
ratios,

today's
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,
today's
standards
for
mid­
and
high­
thrust
engines
are
9
and
4
percent
reductions.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
54
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
adopted
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).
67
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.
68
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
will
be
available
to
obtain
acceptable
67ICAO/
CAEP,
Report
of
Third
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
December
5­
15,
1995,

Document
9675,
CAEP/
3.

68"
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
1/
13/
05
55
turbine
inlet
temperature
distribution
and
for
emissions
control.
69
Since
the
difficulties
increase
progressively
as
engine
thrust
size
is
reduced,
EPA
believes
it
is
appropriate
to
make
a
graded
change
in
stringency
of
today's
NOx
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines.

4.
Rationale
for
Today's
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­,
Mid­,
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
Today's
standards
for
low­,
mid­,
and
high­
thrust
engines,
which
are
equivalent
to
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
ensure
that
new
engine
designs
will
incorporate
the
existing
combustor
technology
and
will
not
perform
worse
than
today's
current
engines.
This
final
rule
to
promulgate
aircraft
engine
NOx
standards
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
standards
is
consistent
with
U.
S.

obligations
under
ICAO.
By
issuing
standards
that
meet
or
exceed
the
minimum
stringency
levels
of
ICAO
CAEP/
4
standards,
we
satisfy
these
obligations.
(
See
section
I.
B
for
a
discussion
of
the
obligation
of
ICAO's
participating
nations).
As
indicated
earlier,
the
implementation
date,

December
31,
2003,
has
already
occurred
for
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
and
we
need
to
promulgate
the
standards
to
meet
our
obligations
for
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
Moreover,
since
we
have
already
gone
past
the
implementation
date
of
the
ICAO/
CAEP/
4
standards,
there
is
not
sufficient
lead
time
to
require
more
stringent
emission
standards
in
the
very
near
term.
As
discussed
later
69ICAO/
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
56
in
section
III.
A.
5
for
future
standards,
we
plan
to
address
whether
to
take
action
on
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
the
future
because
pursuant
to
section
231(
b)
of
the
CAA
we
need
more
time
to
better
understand
the
cost
of
compliance
with
such
standards
(
see
section
III.
A.
5
for
further
discussion
regarding
lead
time).
Also,
see
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
for
this
rulemaking
for
further
discussion
of
this
near­
term
approach.

EPA
believes
that
today's
standards
will
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
VIII
of
today's
action
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
standards
are
aimed
at
assuring
that
this
progress
is
not
reversed
in
the
future.

We
received
a
number
of
comments
from
state
and
local
governments
and
environmental
groups
stating
that
the
NOx
standards
should
be
technology­
forcing
standards
(
a
performance
level
that
is
beyond
what
sources
are
currently
achieving).
They
stated
that
the
standards
are
not
technology
forcing
since
94
percent
of
all
engine
models
currently
in
production
already
meet
the
standards
(
85
percent
did
in
1999
when
the
ICAO
adopted
the
standards).
Also,
state
and
local
governments
and
environmental
groups
stated
that
since
the
standards
are
not
technologyforcing
and
most
engines
already
meet
the
standards,
aircraft
engine
NOx
will
increase.
They
expressed
concern
the
many
states
are
facing
air
quality
challenges
with
implementation
of
the
new
8­
hour
ozone
standard
and
fine
particulate
matter
(
PM2.5)
Note:
Again,
although
there
is
scientific
basis
for
the
tie
in
between
NOx
and
PM
­
this
discussion
appears
to
try
to
equate
NOx
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
57
mitigation
with
PM
mitigation.
Measures
taken
to
mitigate
NOx
in
aircraft
engines
may,
in
fact,

increase
fuel
burn,
other
gaseous
emissions,
and
PM
at
the
source.
There
are
no
certification
requirements
to
measure
PM
from
aircraft
engines
­
hence
there
is
a
very
limited
database
to
help
assess
tradeoffs
and
base
mitigation
actions.
Furthermore,
we
do
not
even
yet
have
reliable
techniques
to
measure
aircraft
PM.
These
tradeoffs
and
uncertainties
must
be
recognized
and
acknowledged.
This
discussion
must
acknowledge
that
though
new
NOx
standards
may
help
mitigate
PM
­
efforts
to
mitigate
NOx
may
also
increase
PM
and
we
must
carefully
examine
the
impact
and
cost/
benefits
to
optimize
environmental
benefits.
national
ambient
air
quality
standards
(
NAAQS).
Decreases
in
ozone
and
PM2.5
precursors,
including
NOx,
requires
controls
of
emissions
from
all
sectors,
in
addition
to
controls
already
implemented
for
1­
hour
ozone
NAAQS.
For
nonattainment
areas,
aircraft
emissions
are
problematic,
and
the
standards
will
not
reduce
aircraft
emissions
or
address
aircraft
NOx
pollution.

Engine
and
airframe
manufacturers
and
airlines
supported
the
standards
and
opposed
the
concept
of
technology­
forcing
standards.
Airlines
indicated
that
the
rulemaking
would
codify
aircraft
emission
standards
determined
to
be
technologically
feasible.
In
addition,
airlines
expressed
that
technology­
forcing
standards
would
be
contrary
to
the
CAA.
Aircraft
engine
emission
standards
adopted
according
section
231
of
the
CAA
must
be
based
on
what
is
technologically
feasible,
and
the
standards
cannot
be
amended
if
the
change
would
significantly
increase
noise
or
adversely
affect
safety.
They
suggested
that
a
technology­
forcing
NOx
standard
could
adversely
affect
noise
and
safety.
In
addition,
they
indicated
that
section
231
of
the
Act
is
different
from
other
sections
of
the
CAA
that
call
for
technology­
forcing
standards.
Air
carriers
expressed
that
section
231
requires
that
standards
already
be
technologically
feasible
and
not
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
58
compromise
noise
and
safety.
In
addition,
airlines
expressed
that
whether
a
"
standard
is
technologically
feasible
depends
not
just
on
whether
it
can
be
achieved
in
a
laboratory
setting,

but
whether
it
can
be
achieved
on
a
range
of
actual
aircraft
engine
and
airframe
combinations
that
are
certified
as
airworthy,
safe,
and
fully
operable
under
flight
conditions.
Moreover,
such
demonstrated
technology
must
be
available
for
application
over
a
sufficient
range
of
newly
certificated
aircraft,
not
just
on
a
few
airframe/
engine
combinations."
(
See
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
of
this
rulemaking
for
further
discussion
of
comments.)

In
response
to
these
comments,
we
refer
to
Section
231(
b)
of
the
CAA,
which
requires
that
any
emission
standards
"
take
effect
after
such
period
as
the
Administrator
finds
necessary
(
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
within
such
period."
This
statutory
language
is
forward
looking
and
on
its
face
assumes
that
the
requisite
technology
to
meet
emission
standards
might
not
currently
be
in
widespread
production.
Section
231(
b)
thus
allows
EPA
to
establish
aircraft
emission
standards
at
a
level
that
is
currently
not
achieved
in
practice
by
all
aircraft
engines
(
i.
e.,
the
standards
would
force
some
technological
improvements),
provided
there
is
sufficient
lead
time
before
such
standards
become
effective,
the
agency
gives
appropriate
consideration
to
the
cost
of
compliance
within
the
provided
lead
time,
consults
with
the
Secretary
of
Transportation,
and
takes
into
account
considerations
of
safety
and
noise.
EPA
also
needs
to
have
a
technical
basis
for
expecting
the
standards
will
be
achievable
in
a
specific
period
of
time.
While
the
statutory
language
of
section
231
is
not
identical
to
other
provisions
in
title
II
of
the
CAA
that
direct
EPA
to
establish
technology­
based
standards
for
various
types
of
engines,
EPA
interprets
its
authority
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
59
under
section
231
to
be
somewhat
similar
to
those
provisions
that
require
us
to
identify
a
reasonable
balance
of
specified
emissions
reduction,
cost,
safety,
noise,
and
other
factors.
See,

e.
g.,
Husqvarna
AB
v.
EPA,
254
F.
3d
195
(
D.
C.
Cir.
2001)
(
upholding
EPA's
promulgation
of
technology­
based
standards
for
small
non­
road
engines
under
section
213(
a)(
3)
of
the
CAA).

However,
we
are
not
compelled
under
section
231
to
obtain
the
"
greatest
degree
of
emission
reduction
achievable"
as
per
sections
213
and
202
of
the
CAA,
and
so
EPA
does
not
interpret
the
Act
as
requiring
the
agency
to
give
subordinate
status
to
factors
such
as
cost,
safety,
and
noise
in
determining
what
standards
are
reasonable
for
aircraft
engines.
Rather,
EPA
has
greater
flexibility
under
section
231
in
determining
what
standard
is
most
reasonable
for
aircraft
engines,

and
is
not
required
to
achieve
a
"
technology­
forcing"
result.
The
fact
the
most
engines
already
meet
standards
would
not
in
itself
mean
that
the
standard
is
inappropriate,
provided
the
agency
has
a
reasonable
basis
after
considering
all
the
relevant
factors
for
setting
the
standard
(
with
an
appropriate
period
of
lead
time
for
that
standard)
at
a
level
that
results
in
no
actual
emissions
reduction
from
the
baseline.

By
the
same
token,
EPA
does
not
agree
that
a
technology­
forcing
standard
would
be
precluded
by
section
231,
in
light
of
section
231(
b)'
s
forward­
looking
language.
Nor
would
EPA
have
to
demonstrate
that
a
technology
is
currently
available
universally
or
over
a
broad
range
of
aircraft
in
order
to
base
a
standard
on
the
emissions
performance
of
such
technology
 
the
agency
is
not
limited
in
identifying
what
is
"
technologically
feasible"
as
what
is
already
technologically
achieved.
However,
EPA
would,
after
consultation
with
DOT,
need
to
provide
manufacturers
sufficient
lead
time
to
develop
and
implement
requisite
technology
that
can
be
certified
by
the
FAA
as
airworthy
for
any
class
of
engine
it
would
be
applicable
to.
As
section
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
60
231
conveys,
there
is
an
added
emphasis
on
the
consideration
of
safety
(
see,
e.
g.,
sections
231(
a)(
2)(
B)(
ii)
("
The
Administrator
shall
not
change
the
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
if
such
change
would
[.
.
.]
adversely
affect
safety")
and
231(
c)
("
Any
regulations
in
effect
under
this
section
[.
.
.]
shall
not
apply
if
disapproved
by
the
President,
after
notice
and
opportunity
for
public
hearing,
on
the
basis
of
a
finding
by
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
that
any
such
regulation
would
create
a
hazard
to
aircraft
safety").
Therefore,
it
is
reasonable
for
EPA
to
give
greater
weight
to
considerations
of
safety
in
this
context
than
it
might
in
balancing
emissions
reduction,
cost,
and
energy
factors
under
other
title
II
provisions.

EPA
is
aware
that
many
states
face
air
quality
challenges
in
light
of
the
new
ozone
and
PM2.5
NAAQS,
and
since
section
233
of
the
CAA
vests
authority
only
in
EPA
to
set
aircraft
emission
standards,
we
understand
their
perspective
regarding
the
importance
of
setting
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
the
future.
For
these
future
standards,
we
expect
to
adopt
standards
developed
through
the
CAEP
process
in
ICAO.
Further,
we
plan,
working
with
FAA
and
NASA
and
other
relevant
agencies
through
the
environmental
Integrated
Product
Team
for
the
Next
Generation
Air
Transportation
System
(
NGATS),
to
conduct
a
review
of
technology
for
aircraft
engines
and
the
resulting
trend
in
aircraft
emissions
as
well
as
interrelationships
with
noise
(
e.
g,

standards
effect
on
projected
aircraft
emissions
growth
and
expected
effects
on
noise).
See
section
III.
A.
5
below
for
further
discussion
of
future
NOx
standards.
(
See
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
of
this
rulemaking
for
further
discussion
of
our
responses
to
comments.)

5.
Future
NOx
Standards
for
Newly
Certified
Low­,
Mid­,
and
High­
Thrust
Engines
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
61
More
stringent
standards
for
low­,
mid­,
and
high­
thrust
engines
will
likely
be
necessary
and
appropriate
in
the
future.
As
discussed
earlier
in
section
II,
the
growth
in
aircraft
emissions
is
projected
to
occur
at
a
time
when
other
mobile
source
categories
are
reducing
emissions.
70
70The
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
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.
Note:
The
units
or
basis
for
"
fuel
efficiency"
needs
to
be
specified
for
this
statement
to
be
unambiguous
e.
g.,
per
passenger
mile.
EPA
needs
to
also
consider
that
engines
that
power
regional
jet
aircraft
produce
much
less
NOx..
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
62
The
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
percent
in
2010.71
(
As
indicated
earlier,
the
above
projections
were
made
prior
to
the
tragic
events
of
September
11,
2001,
and
the
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.
While
the
FAA
expects
the
demand
for
air
travel
to
recover,
and
then
continue
a
long­
term
trend
of
annual
growth
in
the
United
States,
it
will
grow
at
a
lower
rate
and
from
a
lower
base
than
originally
forecast..
More
recently,
as
discussed
earlier,
FAA
reports
that
flights
(
or
activity)
of
commercial
air
carriers
will
increase
by
22
percent
from
2000
to
2015,
about
1/
3
less
than
what
was
forecast
before
September
11th.
While
flight
activity,
and
thus
NOx
emissions,
will
be
lower
than
originally
anticipated,
the
relative
size
of
the
contribution
of
aircraft
to
national
NOx
levels
may
increase
due
to
the
potential
decreased
contribution
from
other
mobile
sources;
hence,
further
action
may
be
necessary
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
NOx
emissions.
The
importance
of
controlling
aircraft
emissions
has
grown
in
many
71U.
S.
EPA,
"
Evaluation
of
Air
Pollutant
Emissions
from
Subsonic
Commercial
Jet
Aircraft,"
April
1999,
EPA420­
R­
99­
013.
This
study
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
otaq/
aviation.
htm.
It
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
63
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.
73)
As
activity
increases,
aircraft
would
emit
increasing
amounts
of
NOx
in
many
nonattainment
areas,
and
thus,
aircraft
NOx
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
may
assist
in
alleviating
these
problems
in
nonattainment
areas,
and
they
may
aid
in
preventing
future
concerns
in
areas
currently
designated
as
attainment
(
or
maintenance)
areas.
In
addition,

attainment
or
maintenance
of
the
NAAQS
may
depend
upon
aircraft
engines
being
subject
to
a
program
of
control
compatible
with
their
significance
as
pollution
sources.
(
See
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
for
this
rulemaking
for
further
discussion
of
future
standards
and
the
environmental
need
for
control.)

EPA,
therefore,
is
considering
the
exploration
of
more
stringent
future
standards,
beyond
today's
standards.
The
ICAO
Council
last
year
adopted
more
stringent
international
consensus
73For
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
1/
13/
05
64
NOx
emission
standards
for
newly
certified
aircraft
engines
(
implementation
date
of
after
December
31,
2007).
The
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards
generally
represent
about
a
12
percent
increase
in
stringency
from
the
standards
promulgated
in
this
final
rule
(
or
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards).
74
(
These
standards
were
accompanied
by
more
stringent
standards
for
low­
thrust
engines).
Moreover,
CAEP
agreed
to
review
the
stringency
of
the
NOx
standards
again
durint
the
work
program
for
the
eighth
meeting
of
CAEP,
which
will
commence
in
early
2007
and
is
expected
to
culminate
in
early
2010.
Such
standards
will
be
a
central
consideration
in
a
future
EPA
regulation
of
aircraft
engine
emissions.
Thus
it
will
be
important
that
the
EPA
and
FAA
continue
to
actively
participate
in
the
technical
emissions
work
activity
that
will
endeavor
to
establish
the
technological
basis
for
any
increase
in
stringency
that
CAEP
will
contemplate.
We
believe
this
ongoing
phased
approach
is
the
most
appropriate
means
to
address
emissions
from
aircraft
engines.

As
we
discussed
in
the
proposal,
activity
is
also
underway
in
CAEP
to
identify
and
assess
the
potential
for
long­
term
technology
goals
to
be
established
for
further
emission
reductions,

74ICAO,
CAEP,
Sixth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
February
2­
12,
2004,
Report,
Letter
of
Transmittal
to
the
President
of
Council
From
the
Chairman
of
the
Sixth
Meeting
of
CAEP,

CAEP/
6­
WP/
57
(
Report
o
Agenda
Item
1).
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int).
It
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
65
including
implementing
a
CAEP­
approved
process
to
set
and
review
these
goals.
75,76
The
aim
of
the
goal
setting
activity
is
to
complement
the
ICAO
CAEP
standard
setting
process
with
75ICAO,
CAEP,
Sixth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
February
2­
12,
2004,
Report,
Letter
of
Transmittal
to
the
President
of
Council
From
the
Chairman
of
the
Sixth
Meeting
of
CAEP,

CAEP/
6­
WP/
57
(
Report
on
Agenda
Item
4).
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int).
It
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.

76For
the
purposes
of
setting
long­
term
technology
goals
for
aircraft
emission
reductions,

the
CAEP/
6
(
occurred
in
February
2004)
future
work
program
included
the
following
items:

(
a)
implement
a
CAEP­
approved
process
to
set,
periodically
review
and
update
technology
goals
and
identify
environmental
benefits,
taking
into
account
progress
in
ongoing
research
and
development
efforts
toward
reducing
aircraft
emissions,
environmental
interdependencies
and
trade­
offs,
and
scientific
understanding
of
the
effects
of
aircraft
engine
emissions;

(
b)
support
and
monitor
development
and
methods
for
understanding
the
inter­
relationship
of
technology
goals
targeting
individual
emissions
performance
improvements;
and
(
c)
develop
the
inputs
appropriate
for
use
of
air
quality
and
climate
impact
models
to
be
used
by
CAEP
to
quantify
the
value
of
emissions
reduction
and
to
estimate
the
benefit
from
long­
term
goals.

(
ICAO,
CAEP,
Sixth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
February
2­
12,
2004,
Report,
Letter
of
Transmittal
to
the
President
of
Council
From
the
Chairman
of
the
Sixth
Meeting
of
CAEP,

CAEP/
6­
WP/
57
(
Appendix
A
to
the
Report
on
Agenda
Item
4
­
Revised
Work
Program
for
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
66
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
through
commercialization.
77
We
support
this
CAEP
work
item
for
establishing
long­
term
goals.
However,
this
should
not
be
interpreted
as
agreement
on
our
part
that
the
CAEP
process
is
the
exclusive
appropriate
process
for
setting
aircraft
emissions
reduction
goals
for
encouraging
the
development
of
better
performing
technology.
For
example,
the
Next
Generation
Air
Transportation
System
(
NGATS)
plan
released
in
December
2004­
a
Congressionally
chartered
and
Administration
endorse
activity
to
develop
research
and
plans
to
transform
the
air
transportation
system.
Efforts
there
will
include
assessment
of
various
technological
and
operational
procedures
to
reduce
aircraft
emissions,
including
NOx,
as
well
as
a
thorough
assessment
of
interrelationships
between
noise
and
emissions
and
amongst
emissions
to
enable
maximizing
environmental
benefit
derived
from
mitigating
actions.
Further,
in
EPA's
long
history
of
mobile
source
regulation,
we
have
found
that
technology
standards
have
been
successfully
used
to
stimulate
technological
development
resulting
in
cleaner,
cost­
effective,
and
CAEP,
page
4A­
7).
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int).
It
can
also
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
0030.

77ICAO,
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).
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
67
safe
engines.
Note:
Does
this
statement
just
apply
to
surface
transportation,
or
all
forms
of
transportation?

Manufacturers
should
be
able
to
achieve
additional
reductions
with
more
lead
time
than
is
provided
by
today's
action.
As
we
discussed
in
the
proposal,
in
the
future
we
intend
to
assess,

in
cooperation
with
the
NGATS
Environmental
Integrated
Product
Team
(
IPT)
whether
or
not
the
new
international
consensus
and
longer­
term
standards,
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards,
would
be
stringent
enough
to
protect
the
U.
S.
public
health
and
welfare.
If
so,
we
would
plan
to
propose
to
adopt
the
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards.
EPA
in
consultation
with
DOT
retains
the
discretion
to
adopt
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
the
future
if
the
international
consensus
standards
ultimately
prove
insufficient
to
protect
U.
S.
air
quality.
As
discussed
earlier,
the
implementation
date,
December
31,
2003,
has
already
occurred
for
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
and
we
need
to
promulgate
today's
standards
to
meet
our
obligations
for
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
This
final
rule
to
promulgate
aircraft
engine
NOx
standards
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
standards
is
consistent
with
U.
S.
obligations
under
ICAO.
We
would
not
be
able
to
quickly
adopt
a
more
stringent
standard.
However,
we
intend
to
consider
further
stringency
in
a
future
rulemaking.
In
addition,
we
have
not
yet
assessed
the
costs
(
and
emission
benefits)
of
more
stringent
standards,

but
we
anticipate
doing
so
in
the
future
for
such
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
68
Consideration
of
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
the
future
will
allow
us
to
obtain
important
additional
information
on
the
costs
of
such
standards.
78
As
described
earlier,
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
did
not
propose
more
stringent
NOx
standards
primarily
because
we
needed
more
time
to
better
understand
the
cost
of
compliance
of
such
standards.
Cost
data
is
now
available
from
CAEP/
6
(
meeting
occurred
in
February
2004),
but
we
need
to
first
adopt
the
standards
equivalent
to
CAEP/
4
today
since
we
have
already
gone
past
the
CAEP/
4
implementation
date.
Although,
as
we
described
earlier,
the
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards
will
be
a
central
consideration
in
a
future
aircraft
engine
emission
standards,
other
levels
of
further
stringency
would
also
be
under
consideration,
and
additional
cost
information
for
such
standards
would
need
to
be
evaluated.

As
we
discussed
in
the
proposal,
producing
(
and/
or
developing)
new
engines
or
engine
technologies
require
significant
financial
investments
from
engine
manufacturers,
which
takes
time
to
recoup
(
the
amount
of
time
depends
upon
sales
of
engines,
replacement
parts,
etc.).
After
evaluating
additional
cost
information
for
future
standards
as
well
as
other
emissions
reduction
approaches,
we
would
then
be
better
situated
to
make
decisions
on
an
appropriate
level
of
stringency
and
implementation
timing
that
maximizes
NOx
reductions
from
aircraft
engines,

78For
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
1/
13/
05
69
taking
into
consideration
cost,
safety,
and
the
impact
on
fuel
burn,
other
emissions
and
noise..

B.
Newly
Manufactured
Engines
of
Already
Certified
Models
We
requested
comment
on
whether
the
NOx
standards
would
apply
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
(
i.
e.,
those
individual
engines
that
are
part
of
an
already
certified
engine
model,
but
are
built
after
the
effective
date
of
the
regulations
for
such
engines
and
have
never
been
in
service),
79
but
after
careful
consideration
and
reviewing
comments
from
stakeholders,
we
have
decided
not
to
include
such
engines
in
today's
final
rulemaking.
It
is
important
to
mention
that
CAEP/
6
did
not
adopt
provisions
to
apply
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
(
a
production
cut­
off).
CAEP/
6
noted
the
industry
view
that
market
forces
are
the
primary
drivers
of
the
development
and
incorporation
of
new
technology
(
asserting
voluntary
compliance
would
suffice),
and
an
understanding
at
CAEP/
4
that
a
production
cut­
off
would
not
be
introduced
in
the
future.
CAEP/
6,
after
reviewing
that
commitment,
decided
that
" 
this
should
not
be
79This
provision
does
not
mean
the
re­
certification
or
retrofit
of
existing
in­
use
engines.

Instead
the
provision
would
require
the
ongoing
production
of
engines
that
have
already
been
certified
to
meet
the
new
standards,
rather
than
following
CAEP/
4
and
merely
applying
today's
standards
to
future
engine
designs
and
allowing
currently
produced
engine
models
to
meet
the
previous
standards.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
70
interpreted
as
meaning
that
production
cut­
offs
would
not
be
introduced
in
the
future
if
the
situation
so
warranted."
80,81
(
As
we
discussed
in
the
proposal,
CAEP's
Forecasting
and
Economic
Analysis
Support
Group
(
FESG)
further
analyzed
applying
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
for
CAEP/
6,
and
assessed
effective
dates
of
2,
4,
and
6
years
after
December
31,
2003,
which
is
the
implementation
date
for
newly
certified
engines.
82
FESG
estimated
that
the
cost
per
ton
of
NOx
reduced
would
range
from
80ICAO,
CAEP,
Sixth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
February
2­
12,
2004,
Report,
Letter
of
Transmittal
to
the
President
of
Council
From
the
Chairman
of
the
Sixth
Meeting
of
CAEP,

CAEP/
6­
WP/
57
(
Report
o
Agenda
Item
1).

81CAEP/
6
noted
that
industry
"
pointed
out
that
introduction
of
a
production
cut­
off
now
would
cause
the
manufacturer
to
modify
engines
to
meet
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
whereas
if
no
cut­
off
were
imposed
it
was
likely
that
they
could
be
modified
to
meet
the
new
standards
agreed
at
this
meeting."
(
ICAO,
CAEP,
Sixth
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
February
2­
12,
2004,
Report,

Letter
of
Transmittal
to
the
President
of
Council
From
the
Chairman
of
the
Sixth
Meeting
of
CAEP,
CAEP/
6­
WP/
57,
Report
o
Agenda
Item
1,
page
1­
13.)

82ICAO,
CAEP/
6,
Information
Paper
28
­
Appendix
B,
"
FESG
Economic
Assessment
of
Applying
a
Production
Cut­
off
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
Standard"
Presented
by
the
FESG
Rapporteur,
January
29,
2004
(
Same
as
CAEP­
SG20031­
IP/
9,
which
was
presented
at
June
10,

2003
CAEP
Steering
Group
Meeting).
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.

OAR­
2002­
30.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
71
$
3,800
to
$
11,200
for
the
three
effective
dates.
83
The
emission
benefits
and
costs
of
this
provision
are
discussed
further
below.)

1.
What
is
the
Status
of
Engines?

According
to
the
ICAO
Aircraft
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank84,
nearly
all
already
certified
engine
models
(
95
percent
of
already
certified
and
in­
production
engine
models
in
the
Data
Bank)
currently
meet
or
perform
better
than
the
standards
we
are
adopting
today.

83ICAO,
CAEP/
6,
Information
Paper
28
­
Appendix
B,
"
FESG
Economic
Assessment
of
Applying
a
Production
Cut­
off
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
Standard"
Presented
by
the
FESG
Rapporteur,
January
29,
2004
(
Same
as
CAEP­
SG20031­
IP/
9,
which
was
presented
at
June
10,

2003
CAEP
Steering
Group
Meeting).
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.

OAR­
2002­
30.

84
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Aircraft
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank,
July
26,
2004.
This
data
bank
is
available
at
http://
www.
caa.
co.
uk/
srg/
environmental/
emissions/
default.
asp.
In
addition,
a
copy
of
a
table
including
data
of
engine
NOx
emissions
from
the
ICAO
data
bank
and
their
margin
to
today's
NOx
standards
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030.

85Based
on
the
ICAO
Data
Bank,
151
out
of
159
(
95
percent)
engine
models
that
are
currently
in
production
perform
better
than
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards.
The
8
engine
models
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
72
(
See
Figure
III.
B­
1
below
for
a
comparison
of
the
NOx
emission
levels
of
current
in­
production
engines
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards.

)
At
the
time
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
were
adopted
in
(
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
III.
B­
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.)

86
For
Figure
III.
B­
1,
the
Allison,
Pratt
and
Whitney
(
does
not
include
JT8D­
217C
E­
kit
and
JT8D­
219
E­
kit),
Rolls­
Royce,
and
Textron
Lycoming
engines
with
rated
pressure
ratios
less
than
or
equal
to
20
and
NOx
levels
above
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
actually
perform
better
than
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
73
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.

Today,
nearly
all
of
the
engines
that
did
not
meet
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standard
in
1998
now
comply,
except
for
the
JT8D­
200
engine
family.
88
The
other
engine
models
have
either,
through
additional
testing
or
modifications,
been
improved
to
meet
the
standards
or
the
engines
are
no
longer
in­
production.
Although,
as
described
earlier,
the
the
standards,
since
there
are
different
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
for
these
low­
thrust
engines
(
see
section
III.
A.
3
for
further
discussion
of
NOx
standards
for
low
thrust
engines).
(
47
of
the
159
engines,
30
percent
of
engine
models
in
production,
in
Figure
IV.
B­
1
and
the
ICAO
Aircraft
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank
are
low
 
thrust
engines
 
engines
with
thrust
greater
than
26.7
kN
but
not
more
than
89
kN.)

87
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.
A
copy
of
this
paper
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030.

88ICAO,
CAEP/
6,
Working
Paper
34,
"
NOx
Production
Cut­
off
Consideration,"

Presented
by
the
International
Coordinating
Council
of
Aerospace
Industries
Associations
(
ICCAIA),
January
6,
2004.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­

30.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
74
ICAO
Data
Bank
shows
that
eight
engine
models
or
three
different
Pratt
and
Whitney
engine
types
or
families
do
not
meet
the
NOx
standards,
we
now
know
that
except
for
the
JT8D­
217
and
JT8D­
219,
six
of
the
engine
models
or
two
of
the
engine
types
are
compliant.

The
PW4090
family
of
engines
(
PW4077D,
PW4084D,
and
PW4090)
now
has
the
means
to
eventually
meet
the
standards
utilizing
technology
that
would
meet
the
lower
ranges
of
stringency
options
for
the
NOx
standards
considered
at
CAEP/
6,
although
the
manufacturer
has
projected
it
would
be
some
years
before
it
expects
to
meet
CAEP/
6
levels
(
the
manufacturer
has
not
provided
us
with
a
projected
necessary
lead­
time
to
meet
CAEP/
4).
The
engine
family
that
includes
the
PW4164,
PW4168
and
PW4168A
engines
is
now
certified
with
the
PW
4168
Technologically
Affordable
Low
NOx
(
Talon)
II
engine
combustor
technology,
which
performs
significantly
better
than
the
CAEP/
4
standards.
Also,
the
JT8D­
200
engine
powers
the
MD­
80
aircraft,
which
is
no
longer
in
production.
Yet,
the
JT8D­
200
engine
(
JT8D­
217C
and
JT8D­
219
in­
production
engines)
could
potentially
apply
to
future
supersonic
business
jets.
As
stated
in
the
proposal,
the
resulting
NOx
emission
benefits
of
applying
the
standards
to
the
JT8D­
200
(
for
these
possible
supersonic
business
jets)
would
be
expected
to
be
very
small,
and
the
costs
would
also
likely
be
relatively
small
on
an
industry
wide
basis,
although
as
discussed
further
below
we
do
not
feel
we
have
a
sufficient
record
at
this
point
 
nor
have
we
presented
it
for
public
comment
 
to
state
our
definitive
views
on
these
issues.
However,
the
direct
(
development)

costs
would
most
likely
be
borne
by
one
engine
manufacturer.
89
As
discussed
in
the
proposal,

89ICAO,
CAEP/
6,
Information
Paper
28
­
Appendix
B,
"
FESG
Economic
Assessment
of
Applying
a
Production
Cut­
off
to
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
Standard"
Presented
by
the
FESG
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
75
there
is
only
one
remaining
newly
designed
engine
model
 
out
of
the
five
identified
in
1998
 
that
would
be
certified
after
2003,
and
it
also
has
been
made
compliant
with
today's
or
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards.
90
In
addition,
as
we
indicated
in
the
proposal,
if
an
already
certified
engine
design
meets
the
standards
that
we
are
adopting
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.
However,
we
may
have
been
imprecise
by
stating
in
the
proposal
that
when
design
modifications
are
made
to
an
existing
engine
type,
then
this
engine
type
would
likely
need
to
be
recertified.
Derivative
versions
of
engines
are
not
typically
required
to
meet
new
standards
for
newly
certified
(
and
newly
designed)
engines,
but
they
usually
need
to
Rapporteur,
January
29,
2004
(
Same
as
CAEP­
SG20031­
IP/
9,
which
was
presented
at
June
10,

2003
CAEP
Steering
Group
Meeting).
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.

OAR­
2002­
30.

90
The
PW
Canada
growth
engines
are
the
one
remaining
type
of
newly
designed
engines.

The
ICAO
Aircraft
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank
currently
does
not
have
emissions
certification
data
for
such
an
engine,
but
Working
Paper
34
presented
at
CAEP/
6
indicated
it
would
be
compliant.
(
ICAO,
CAEP/
6,
Working
Paper
34,
"
NOx
Production
Cut­
off
Consideration,"
Presented
by
the
International
Coordinating
Council
of
Aerospace
Industries
Associations
(
ICCAIA),
January
6,
2004.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.

OAR­
2002­
30.)
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
76
comply
with
the
same
standards
as
were
applied
to
the
original
engine
model.
91,92
Thus,

derivative
versions
of
engines
typically
do
not
need
to
be
recertified.
However,
an
engine
type
that
does
need
to
recertified
will
be
required
to
comply
with
the
CAEP/
4
and
today's
NOx
standards.

91ICAO,
CAEP/
4,
Information
Paper
3,
"
Clarification
of
the
Definition
of
Derivative
Version,"
Agenda
Item
4
­
Future
Work,
Presented
by
United
States,
April
3,
1998.
A
copy
of
this
document
can
be
found
in
Docket
No.
OAR­
2002­
30.

92Chapter
1
of
Part
I
of
the
ICAO
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,

defines
derivative
version
as
follows:
"
an
aircraft
gas
turbine
engine
of
the
same
generic
family
as
an
originally
type­
certificated
engine
and
having
features
which
retain
the
basic
core
engine
and
combustor
design
of
the
original
model
and
for
which
other
factors,
as
judged
by
the
certificating
authority,
have
not
changed."

ICAO,
"
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,"
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices,
Environmental
Protection,
Annex
16,
Volume
II,
Second
Edition,
July
1993
(
Chapter
1,
Part
I,
Definitions
and
Symbols).
Copies
of
this
document
can
be
obtained
from
ICAO
(
www.
icao.
int).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
77
a
119
out
of
159
(
75
percent)
of
the
in­
production
engines
have
greater
than
10
percent
margin
to
the
proposed
(
or
CAEP/
4)
NOx
standards.
78
(
49
percent)
of
the
engines
have
more
than
20
percent
margin.
24
(
15
percent)
of
the
engines
have
greater
than
30
percent
margin.
(
120
of
159
(
75
percent)
of
the
in­
production
engines
have
margin
to
the
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards,
which
generally
represent
about
a
12
percent
increase
in
stringency
from
today's
standards.)

b
Source:
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
(
ICAO),
Aircraft
Engine
Exhaust
Emissions
Data
Bank,
July
26
2004.
This
data
bank
is
available
at
http://
www.
caa.
co.
uk/
srg/
environmental/
emissions/
default.
asp.
In
addition,
a
copy
of
tables
including
data
of
engine
NOx
emissions
from
the
ICAO
data
bank
and
their
margin
to
today's
NOx
standards
and
the
CAEP/
6
NOx
standards
can
be
found
in
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0030.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
78
2.
What
Are
The
Issues
With
Applying
Today's
NOx
Standards
to
Newly
Manufactured
Engines
of
Already
Certified
Models?

One
commenter
expressed
that
EPA
conceded
in
the
proposed
rule
that
it
has
historically
applied
aircraft
emission
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models,

and
doing
so
this
time
would
prohibit
the
indefinite
continued
production
of
aircraft
engines
that
would
meet
only
the
previous
standards.
"
EPA
does
not
explain
why
it
is
proposing
a
sudden
departure
from
the
past
practice
of
regulating
already
certified,
newly
manufactured
engines
­

i.
e.,
what
is
different
about
this
particular
rulemaking
that
justifies
the
exemption
of
such
engines."
With
the
long
life
of
aircraft
engines
and
the
availability
of
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
in
the
future,
there
is
a
need
to
apply
the
proposed
NOx
standards
to
this
category
of
aircraft
engines.

State
and
local
governments
recommended
that
the
standards
for
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
should
be
implemented
one
year
after
the
effective
date
of
the
final
rulemaking.
At
a
minimum,
EPA
should
have
an
implementation
date
that
prohibits
engine
manufacturers
from
selling
already
certified
engines
unless
the
engines
were
recertified
or
redesigned
to
meet
the
proposed
standards.
Such
a
provision
would
be
consistent
with
a
stated
objective
of
the
rulemaking,
which
is
to
assure
that
progress
in
reducing
aircraft
engine
emissions
is
not
reversed
in
the
future.
Without
such
standards
high­
emitting
engines
can
continue
to
be
produced
and
brought
into
service,
further
adding
to
the
long­
term
growth
in
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
79
aircraft
emissions
that
is
anticipated
without
a
more
aggressive
approach
to
regulating
this
source.

Airlines
commented
that
as
the
proposal
acknowledges,
market
incentives
lead
manufacturers
to
bring
their
engines
to
the
levels
of
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards
as
soon
as
possible
once
the
standards
take
effect.
Air
carriers
investing
in
costly,
long­
lasting
assets
prefer
to
buy
engines
that
meet
the
latest
standards,
and
demand
engines
that
perform
better
than
the
standard
without
regulatory
intervention
of
a
production
cut­
off
(
applying
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models).
Such
market
forces
together
with
EPA's
four­
year
delay
in
proposing
to
adopt
the
CAEP/
4
NOx
standards,
account
for
the
fact
that
94
percent
of
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standard.

In
addition,
airlines
expressed
that
for
the
same
reasons
that
the
Agency
should
generally
align
with
ICAO
standards,
it
should
be
consistent
with
ICAO
on
whether
to
apply
CAEP/
4
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models.
If
EPA
differed
from
ICAO
on
this
provision,
there
would
be
the
very
inconsistency
between
domestic
and
international
practice
that
aligning
with
ICAO
requirements
avoids.
Furthermore,
if
EPA
adopts
such
a
provision
prior
to
ICAO,
such
action
would
potentially
place
U.
S.
manufacturers
and
air
carriers
at
a
competitive
disadvantage
for
what
EPA
acknowledges
to
be
minimal
environmental
benefit.

In
addition,
one
airline
expressed
that
it
presently
has
the
JT8D­
219
engine
on
some
of
its
commercial
jets.
The
proposal
indicated
that
the
JT8D­
219
would
be
used
in
supersonic
business
jets,
which
the
airline
does
not
operate;
however,
it
(
and
maybe
other
domestic
air
carriers)
operates
this
engine
in
our
commercial
aircraft
fleet.
Therefore,
the
implication
of
these
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
80
provisions
has
not
been
fully
investigated
by
EPA
as
mandated
by
the
CAA.
(
See
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
for
this
rulemaking
for
further
discussion
of
comments.)

In
response,
as
indicated
earlier,
the
implementation
date
applicable
to
newly
designed
and
certified
engines
under
CAEP/
4,
December
31,
2003,
has
already
occurred
for
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
and
at
this
late
date
to
promulgate
a
provision
to
apply
today's
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
(
a
production
cut­
off)
could
be
disruptive
to
the
production
planning
of
engine
manufacturers.
EPA
and
ICAO
(
as
we
mentioned
in
the
proposal
and
as
one
commenter
noted
in
its
comments)
have
historically
adopted
production
cutoffs
for
previous
standards,
but
in
today's
unique
case
the
lateness
of
the
rule
may
not
provide
manufacturers
enough
lead
time
for
such
planning.
However,
as
we
discussed
earlier
in
section
1,
we
intend
to
consider
more
stringent
NOx
standards
in
a
future
rulemaking,
and
similar
to
CAEP/
6'
s
future
plans
described
above,
we
also
intend
to
consider
applying
more
stringent
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models
for
such
a
future
rulemaking.
This
provision
is
an
important
issue
that
we
expect
to
fully
consider
for
future
standards.

While
we
solicited
comment
on
extending
the
CAEP/
4
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models,
we
did
not
develop
a
record
that
fully
analyzes
the
emissions
benefits
(
if
any)
and
the
implementation
costs
of
going
beyond
CAEP
in
this
manner.
Therefore,

the
public
has
not
been
provided
an
opportunity
to
analyze
and
comment
upon
these
important
factors.
We
believe
that
our
analysis
of
these
factors
would
need
to
be
weighed
through
a
noticeand
comment
process
in
determining
whether
a
production
cut­
off,
with
a
specific
lead­
time
period,
would
be
appropriate
under
CAA
section
231
in
this
case.
Particularly
regarding
the
cost
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
81
of
compliance
within
necessary
lead­
time
issue,
we
are
concerned
that
there
is
insufficient
data
that
specifically
addresses
the
appropriate
lead
time
for
subjecting
the
few
remaining
inproduction
engine
models
to
the
CAEP/
4
standards,
and
that
our
selection
of
a
production
cut­
off
date
could
therefore
be
viewed
as
arbitrarily
chosen.

Since
we
have
not
yet
provided
that
opportunity
for
public
comment
on
our
analysis
of
this
issue,
and
since
attempting
to
do
so
now
would
in
our
view
unacceptably
slow
down
this
rulemaking,
in
the
interests
of
expediency
and
of
bringing
U.
S.
domestic
law
into
conformity
with
our
obligations
under
the
Chicago
Convention
(
albeit
tardily),
we
have
decided
that
the
most
appropriate
course
for
now,
under
CAA
section
231
(
a),
is
to
simply
update
our
regulations
to
track
CAEP/
4
in
terms
of
both
stringency
levels
and
scope
of
applicability.
Similarly,
without
having
developed
the
necessary
record
and
analysis,
at
this
time
we
are
unable
to
respond
to
the
substantive
comments
offered
by
commenters
regarding
the
production­
cutoff
issue,
and
our
decision
today
should
in
no
way
be
viewed
as
either
endorsing
or
rejecting
the
concept
of
a
production
cut­
off.
Given
the
need
to
quickly
promulgate
standards
that
are
at
least
as
stringent
as
CAEP/
4,
we
must
decline
to
resolve
the
numerous
issues
raised
either
in
favor
of
or
in
opposition
to
applying
the
CAEP/
4
standards
to
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models.

IV.
Amendments
to
Criteria
on
Calibration
and
Test
Gases
for
Gaseous
Emissions
Test
and
Measurement
Procedures
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
82
In
today's
rulemaking,
EPA
will
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
engines93)
and
supersonic
gas
turbine
engines.
The
technical
changes
will
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
will
be
effective
30
days
after
the
publication
of
the
final
rule.

For
CAEP/
3
in
1995,
the
Russian
Federation
presented
a
working
paper
entitled,

"
Corrections
to
Annex
16,
Volume
II,"
that
stated
the
following:
94
93Such
engines
include
newly
manufactured
engines
of
already
certified
models.

94Russian
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
83
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
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
84
In
addition,
at
CAEP/
3
the
United
Kingdom
then
presented
a
working
paper
on
this
same
issue.
95
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.

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.
96
Today,
EPA
will
incorporate
by
reference
the
amendments
to
the
criteria
on
calibration
and
test
gases
for
the
test
95United
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.

96ICAO/
CAEP,
Report
of
Third
Meeting,
Montreal,
Quebec,
December
5­
15,
1995,

Document
9675,
CAEP/
3.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
85
procedures
of
gaseous
emissions,
because
the
changes
improve
the
test
procedures
by
correcting
inconsistencies
and
distinguishing
between
calibration
and
test
gases.
The
amendments
will
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
will
require
no
new
action
by
manufacturers.

In
addition,
the
existence
of
ICAO's
requirements
will
ensure
that
the
costs
of
compliance
(
as
well
as
the
air
quality
impact)
with
these
test
procedures
will
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
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
86
CFR
87.64)
in
order
to
eliminate
confusion
over
minor
differences
in
procedures
for
demonstrating
compliance
with
the
U.
S.
and
ICAO
standards.)

V.
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
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,

1984.97
For
§
87.7(
b),
Today,
EPA
will
correct
this
editorial
error
by
eliminating
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
and
(
b)(
2).

As
discussed
further
in
the
1984
final
rulemaking,
this
action
will
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
will
be
very
small.

VI.
Coordination
with
FAA
97This
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
1/
13/
05
87
The
requirements
contained
in
this
action
are
being
promulgated
after
consultation
with
the
FAA.
Note:
in
49
CFR
1.47(
g),
the
Secretary's
functions
under
part
B
of
title
II
of
the
CAA
(
§
§
231­
234)
were
delegated
to
the
Administrator
of
the
FAA
Section
231(
a)(
2)(
B)(
i)
of
the
CAA
requires
EPA
to
"
consult
with
the
Administrator
of
the
[
FAA]
on
aircraft
engine
emission
standards"
and
section
231(
a)(
2)(
B)(
ii)
indicates
that
EPA
"
shall
not
change
the
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
if
such
change
would
significantly
increase
noise...."
Section
231(
b)
of
the
CAA
states
that
"[
a]
ny
regulation
prescribed
under
this
section
(
and
any
revision
thereof)
shall
take
effect
after
such
period
as
the
Administrator
finds
necessary
(
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
within
such
period."

Section
231(
c)
provides
that
any
regulation
under
section
231
"
shall
not
apply
if
disapproved
by
the
President 
on
the
basis
of
a
finding
by
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
that
any
such
regulation
would
create
a
hazard
to
aircraft
safety."
Under
section
232
of
the
CAA,
the
Department
of
Transportation
(
DOT)
has
the
responsibility
to
enforce
the
aircraft
emission
standards
established
by
EPA
under
section
231.99
.
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
action.

99
The
functions
of
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
under
part
B
of
title
II
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
§
§
231­
234,
49
U.
S.
C.
§
§
7571­
7574)
have
been
delegated
to
the
Administrator
of
the
FAA.
49
C.
F.
R.
§
1.47(
g).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
88
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
CAEP/
4)
after
advisement
from
EPA.
100
FAA
and
EPA
were
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
CAEP/
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
CAEP/
4
meetings,
respectively,
prior
to
their
adoption
by
ICAO
in
1997
and
1999.

In
addition,
as
discussed
above,
FAA
will
have
the
responsibility
to
enforce
today's
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,
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
rulemaking
will
not
affect
their
duties.

100The
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
1/
13/
05
89
VII.
Possible
Future
Aviation
Emission
Reductions
(
EPA/
FAA
Voluntary
Aviation
Emissions
Reduction
Initiative)

As
discussed
in
the
proposal,
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
approaches
may
provide
effective
avenues
to
achieve
additional
aviation
emission
reductions,
beyond
EPA
establishing
aircraft
engine
emission
standards.

Concerns
by
state
and
local
air
agencies
and
environmental
and
public
health
organizations
about
aviation
emissions,
led
to
EPA
and
FAA
signing
a
memorandum
of
understanding
(
MOU)
in
March
1998
agreeing
to
work
to
identify
efforts
that
could
reduce
aviation
emissions.
101
FAA
and
EPA
participated
in
a
national
stakeholder
initiative
led
by
states
and
industry
whose
goal
was
to
develop
a
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
that
participated
in
this
initiative
included
representatives
of
the
101FAA
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
90
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
might
be
applied
to
certain
existing
aircraft
engines.
102
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,
103
in
addition
to
strategies
to
reduce
aircraft
emissions.
104
FAA
developed
a
program,
with
Congressional
approval,
to
fund
conversion
of
airport
infrastructure
and
ground
support
vehicles
to
alternative
fuels
technologies.
Unfortunately,
the
state
and
industry
stakeholders
did
not
reach
consensus
on
a
national
aviation
emissions
reduction
program.
The
Agencies
are
currently
contemplating
102Two
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.

103The
stakeholders
considered
the
impact,
operation
and
design
of
GSE
at
airports,
and
whether
to
undertake
projects
at
several
airports
to
reduce
overall
emissions.

104Operational
strategies,
such
as
reducing
the
time
in
which
aircraft
are
in
idle
and
taxi
modes
and
the
impact
of
auxiliary
power
units
(
APUs)
were
also
considered.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
91
next
steps
following
from
the
national
stakeholder
initiative
and
discussions
of
potential
voluntary
programs.

In
addition,
in
the
proposal
EPA
invited
comment
on
the
national
stakeholder
initiative
and
any
other
approaches
for
aviation
emission
reductions,
and
we
received
many
suggestions
from
commenters.
We
may
consider
these
suggested
approaches
during
our
current
reflection
on
the
stakeholder
initiative
and
for
future
voluntary
programs.

Finally,
the
FAA
has
two
other
initiatives
that
will
assist
in
addressing
concerns
with
respect
to
emissions
from
aircraft.
First,
in
September
2003
it
created
a
Center
of
Excellence
 
Partnership
for
Reduction
of
Air
Transportation
Noise
and
Emissions
Reduction
(
PARTNER)­
a
consortium
of
8
universities,
29
industry
representatives
as
well
as
NASA
and
Transport
Canada­

to
develop
new
approaches
and
solutions
to
reduce
aviation's
environmental
impacts.
Second,

with
the
assistance
of
the
National
Academy
of
Sciences,
FAA
is
developing
the
next
generation
of
aviation
noise
and
emissions
models
and
analytical
tools
improve
measurement,

understanding,
and
targeted
solutions.
See
the
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
for
further
discussion
of
approaches
to
additional
aviation
emission
reductions.

VIII.
Regulatory
Impacts
Aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
and
thus,
they
are
designed
to
meet
international
standards.
Today's
action
will
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
will
also
be
applicable
to
all
ICAO
requirements.
Engine
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
92
manufacturers
are
already
developing
improved
technology
in
response
to
the
ICAO
standards
that
match
standards
promulgated
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
regulations.
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
today's
regulations
will
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
requirements.
105
Since
aircraft
and
aircraft
engines
are
international
commodities,
there
is
commercial
benefit
to
consistency
between
U.
S.
and
international
emission
standards
and
control
program
requirements.
Also,
the
adoption
of
the
ICAO
standards
and
related
test
procedures
is
consistent
with
our
treaty
obligations.

IX.
Public
Participation
105CAEP'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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
93
A
number
of
interested
parties
participated
in
the
rulemaking
process
that
culminates
with
this
final
rule.
This
process
provided
opportunity
for
submitting
written
public
comments
following
the
proposal
that
we
published
on
September
30,
2003
(
68
FR
56226).
We
considered
these
comments
in
developing
the
final
rule.
In
addition,
we
held
a
public
hearing
on
the
proposed
rulemaking
on
November
13,
2003,
and
we
have
considered
comments
presented
at
the
hearing.

We
have
prepared
a
detailed
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
document,
which
describes
comments
we
received
on
the
proposal
and
our
response
to
each
of
these
comments.

The
Summary
and
Analysis
of
Comments
is
available
in
the
e­
docket
for
this
rule,
as
well
as
on
the
Office
of
Transportation
and
Air
Quality
homepage
(
www.
epa.
gov/
otaq/
aviation.
htm).
In
addition,
comments
and
responses
for
key
issues
are
included
throughout
this
preamble.

X.
Statutory
Provisions
and
Legal
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(
a).
See
section
II
of
today's
rule
for
discussion
of
how
EPA
meets
the
CAA's
statutory
requirements.

XI.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
A.
Executive
Order
12866:
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
94
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:

(
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.

Pursuant
to
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
12866,
OMB
has
notified
EPA
that
it
considers
this
a
"
significant
regulatory
action"
within
the
meaning
of
the
Executive
Order.
EPA
has
submitted
this
action
to
OMB
for
review.
Changes
made
in
response
to
OMB
suggestions
or
recommendations
will
be
documented
in
the
public
record.

B.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
95
This
action
does
not
impose
an
information
collection
burden
under
the
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
today's
regulations
would
likely
be
very
small.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.

An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
in
40
CFR
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9.

C.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Analysis
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
96
EPA
has
determined
that
it
is
not
necessary
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
in
connection
with
this
final
rule.
The
EPA
has
also
determined
that
the
final
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.

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
XI­
C­
1
provides
an
overview
of
the
primary
SBA
small
business
categories
potentially
affected
by
this
regulation.

Table
XI.
C­
1
 
Primary
SBA
Small
Business
Categories
Potentially
Affected
by
This
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
part
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
97
After
considering
the
economic
impacts
of
today's
rule
on
small
entities,
EPA
has
concluded
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
This
rule
will
not
impose
any
requirements
on
small
entities.
Because
of
the
limited
classes
of
aircraft
engines
to
which
today's
regulations
apply,
no
small
entities
will
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
will
qualify
as
a
small
business.
In
addition,
the
rule
will
not
impose
significant
economic
impacts
on
engine
manufacturers.
As
discussed
earlier,
today's
action
will
codify
emission
standards
that
manufacturers
currently
adhere
to
(
nearly
all
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standards).
These
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards.
Today's
emission
standards
will
not
impose
any
additional
burden
on
manufacturers
because
they
are
already
designing
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
today's
regulations
will
impose
no
additional
burden
on
manufacturers.
The
existence
of
ICAO's
requirements
results
in
minimal
cost
from
these
requirements.

D.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
98
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA),
Public
Law
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
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
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
99
the
private
sector
in
any
one
year.
This
rule
contains
no
regulatory
requirements
that
might
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments.
Today's
action
will
codify
emission
standards
that
manufacturers
currently
adhere
to
(
nearly
all
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standards).
These
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards.

Today's
emission
standards
will
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
standards
will
be
minimal.
Today's
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
sections
202
and
205
of
the
UMRA.

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."

Today's
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
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
100
states
from
adopting
or
enforcing
aircraft
engine
emission
standards
that
are
not
identical
to
our
standards.
This
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
solicited
comment
on
the
proposed
rule
from
State
and
local
officials.

F.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
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
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
The
promulgated
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
that
are
not
identical
to
our
standards.
This
final
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,
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
101
today's
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.

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
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
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13045
because
the
Agency
does
not
have
reason
to
believe
the
environmental
health
risks
or
safety
risks
addressed
by
this
action
present
a
disproportionate
risk
to
children.
EPA
believes
that
the
NOx
emission
reductions
(
NOx
is
a
precursor
to
the
formation
of
ozone
and
PM)
from
this
rulemaking
will
further
improve
air
quality
and
will
further
improve
children's
health.

H.
Executive
Order
13211:
Actions
that
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
102
This
rule
is
not
a
"
significant
energy
action"
as
defined
in
Executive
Order
13211,

"
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use"

(
66
FR
28355
(
May
22,
2001))
because
it
is
not
likely
to
have
a
significant
adverse
effect
on
the
supply,
distribution,
or
use
of
energy.
As
discussed
earlier,
today's
action
will
codify
emission
standards
that
manufacturers
currently
adhere
to
(
nearly
all
in­
production
engines
already
meet
the
standards).
These
standards
are
equivalent
to
the
ICAO
international
consensus
standards.

The
final
standards
will
have
no
likely
adverse
energy
effects
because
manufacturers
are
already
designing
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.
Thus,
we
have
concluded
that
this
rule
is
not
likely
to
have
any
adverse
energy
effects.

I.
National
Technology
Transfer
Advancement
Act
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.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
103
This
final
rulemaking
involves
technical
standards
for
testing
emissions
for
commercial
aircraft
gas
turbine
engines.
EPA
will
use
test
procedures
contained
in
ICAO
International
Standards
and
Recommended
Practices
Environmental
Protection,
with
the
modifications
contained
in
this
rulemaking.
106
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.

J.
Congressional
Review
Act
106ICAO
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).
The
Congressional
Review
Act,
5
U.
S.
C.
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
generally
provides
that
before
a
rule
may
take
effect,
the
agency
promulgating
the
rule
must
submit
a
rule
report,
which
includes
a
copy
of
the
rule,
to
each
House
of
the
Congress
and
to
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States.
EPA
will
submit
a
report
containing
this
rule
and
other
required
information
to
the
U.
S.
Senate,
the
U.
S.
House
of
Representatives,
and
the
Comptroller
General
of
the
United
States
prior
to
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
104
publication
of
the
rule
in
the
Federal
Register.
A
major
rule
cannot
take
effect
until
60
days
after
it
is
published
in
the
Federal
Register.
This
action
is
not
a
"
major
rule"
as
defined
by
5
U.
S.
C.

804(
2).
This
rule
will
be
effective
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER].

List
of
Subjects
in
40
CFR
Part
87
Environmental
protection,
Air
pollution
control,
Aircraft,
Incorporation
by
reference.

Dated:
_______
XX,
200X
Michael
O.
Leavitt,

Administrator.

For
the
reasons
set
out
in
the
preamble,
title
40,
chapter
I
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
is
proposed
to
be
amended
as
follows:

PART
87
­­
CONTROL
OF
AIR
POLLUTION
FROM
AIRCRAFT
AND
AIRCRAFT
ENGINES
1.
The
authority
citation
for
part
87
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
Secs.
231,
301(
a),
Clean
Air
Act,
as
amended
(
42
U.
S.
C
7571,
7601(
a)).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
105
Subpart
A
 
[
Amended]

2.
Section
87.7
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
b)(
2).

3.
A
new
section
87.8
is
added
to
read
as
follows:

§
87.8
Incorporation
by
reference.

We
have
incorporated
by
reference
the
documents
listed
in
this
section.
The
Director
of
the
Federal
Register
approved
the
incorporation
by
reference
as
prescribed
in
5
U.
S.
C.
552(
a)

and
1
CFR
part
51.
Anyone
may
inspect
copies
at
the
U.
S.
EPA,
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW.,
Room
B102,
EPA
West
Building,

Washington,
DC
20460
or
the
Office
of
the
Federal
Register,
800
N.
Capitol
St.,
NW.,
7th
Floor,

Suite
700,
Washington,
DC.

(
a)
ICAO
material.
Table
1
of
§
87.8
lists
material
from
the
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
that
we
have
incorporated
by
reference.
The
first
column
lists
the
number
and
name
of
the
material.
The
second
column
lists
the
sections
of
this
part
where
we
reference
it.
Anyone
may
purchase
copies
of
these
materials
from
the
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization,
Document
Sales
Unit,
999
University
Street,
Montreal,
Quebec,
Canada
H3C
5H7.

Table
1
follows:
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
106
Table
1
of
§
87.8
 
ICAO
Materials
Document
number
and
name
Part
1039
reference
International
Civil
Aviation
Organization
Annex
16,
Environmental
Protection,
Volume
II,
Aircraft
Engine
Emissions,
Second
Edition,
July
1993,
Including
Amendment
3
of
March
20,
1997.
87.8,
87.64,
87.71,
87.82,

87.89
(
b)
[
Reserved]

Subpart
C
 
[
Amended]

4.
Section
87.21
is
amended
by
adding
paragraph
(
d)(
1)(
vi)
and
(
d)(
1)(
vii)
to
read
as
follows:

§
87.21
Standards
for
exhaust
emissions.
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
107
*
*
*
*
*

(
d)
*
*
*

(
1)
*
*
*

(
vi)
Engines
of
a
type
or
model
of
which
the
date
of
manufacture
of
the
first
individual
production
model
was
after
December
31,
2003:

(
A)
Engines
with
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
30
or
less:

(
1)
Engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
greater
than
89
kilonewtons:

Oxides
of
Nitrogen:
(
19
+
1.6(
rPR))
grams/
kilonewtons
rO.

(
2)
Engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
greater
than
26.7
kilonewtons
but
not
greater
than
89
kilonewtons:

Oxides
of
Nitrogen:
(
37.572
+
1.6(
rPR)
­
0.2087(
rO))
grams/
kilonewtons
rO.

(
A)
Engines
with
a
rated
pressure
ratio
greater
than
30
but
less
than
62.5:

(
1)
Engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
greater
than
89
kilonewtons:
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
108
Oxides
of
Nitrogen:
(
7
+
2(
rPR))
grams/
kilonewtons
rO.

(
2)
Engines
with
a
maximum
rated
output
greater
than
26.7
kilonewtons
but
not
greater
than
89
kilonewtons:

Oxides
of
Nitrogen:
(
42.71
+
1.4286(
rPR)
­
0.4013(
rO)
+
0.00642(
rPR

X
rO))
(
Note:
check
all
of
these
throughout)
grams/
kilonewtons
rO.

(
A)
Engines
with
a
rated
pressure
ratio
of
62.5
or
more:

Oxides
of
Nitrogen:
(
32
+
1.6(
rPR))
grams/
kilonewtons
rO.

(
i)
The
emission
standards
prescribed
in
paragraph
(
d)(
1)(
vi)
of
this
section
shall
apply
as
prescribed
beginning
[
Insert
date
30
days
after
date
of
publication
in
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER].

*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
G
 
[
Amended]

5.
Section
87.64
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
109
§
87.64
Sampling
and
analytical
procedures
for
measuring
gaseous
exhaust
emissions.

The
system
and
procedures
for
sampling
and
measurement
of
gaseous
emissions
shall
be
as
specified
by
Appendices
3
and
5
to
ICAO
Annex
16
(
incorporated
by
reference
in
§
87.8).

6.
Section
87.71
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:

§
87.71
Compliance
with
gaseous
emission
standards.

Compliance
with
each
gaseous
emission
standard
by
an
aircraft
engine
shall
be
determined
by
comparing
the
pollutant
level
in
grams/
kilonewton/
thrust/
cycle
or
grams/
kilowatt/
cycle
as
calculated
in
§
87.64
with
the
applicable
emission
standard
under
this
part.
An
acceptable
alternative
to
testing
every
engine
is
described
in
Appendix
6
to
ICAO
Annex
16
(
incorporated
by
reference
in
§
87.8).
Other
methods
of
demonstrating
compliance
may
be
approved
by
the
Secretary
with
the
concurrence
of
the
Administrator.

7.
Section
87.82
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:

§
87.82
Sampling
and
analytical
procedures
for
measuring
smoke
exhaust
emissions.

The
system
and
procedures
for
sampling
and
measurement
of
smoke
emissions
shall
be
as
specified
by
Appendix
2
to
ICAO
Annex
16
(
incorporated
by
reference
in
§
87.8).
Preliminary
Draft
 
Do
not
Cite,
Quote,
or
Distribute
1/
13/
05
110
8.
Section
87.89
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:

§
87.89
Compliance
with
smoke
emission
standards.

Compliance
with
each
smoke
emission
standard
shall
be
determined
by
comparing
the
plot
of
SN
as
a
function
of
power
setting
with
the
applicable
emission
standard
under
this
part.

The
SN
at
every
power
setting
must
be
such
that
there
is
a
high
degree
of
confidence
that
the
standard
will
not
be
exceeded
by
any
engine
of
the
model
being
tested.
An
acceptable
alternative
to
testing
every
engine
is
described
in
Appendix
6
to
ICAO
Annex
16
(
incorporated
by
reference
in
§
87.8).
