Control of Air Pollution From Aircraft and Aircraft Engines;
Emission Standards and Test Procedures
[Federal Register: November 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 221)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69664-69687]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17no05-12]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 87
[OAR-2002-0030; FRL-7997-3]
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), 42 U.S.C. 7571, 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 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 procedures for gaseous exhaust emissions
to correspond to recent amendments to the ICAO test procedures for
these emissions.
On December 19, 2005, 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 December 19, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
this regulation is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of December 19, 2005.
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,
[[Page 69665]]
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.
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. Regulated categories include:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially affected
Category NAICS a codes SIC codes b entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry................................... 336412 3724 Manufacturers of new aircraft
engines.
Industry................................... 336411 3721 Manufacturers of new aircraft.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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.regulations.gov/ 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 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 Current and Projected Level of PM?
C. Other Environmental Effects
1. Acid Deposition
2. Eutrophication and Nitrification
3. Plant Damage from Ozone
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?
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 Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
[[Page 69666]]
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
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.'' 42
U.S.C. 7571(a)(3). 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 models \1\ (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) \2\ and for newly certified gas turbine
engines (those engines designed and certified after the effective date
of the regulations \3\).\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.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In 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'').
\2\ This does not mean that in 1997 we promulgated requirements
for the re-certification or retrofit of existing in-use engines.
\3\ Throughout this rule, the date of manufacture of the first
individual production model means the date of type certification.
\4\ U.S. EPA, ``Control of Air Pollution from Aircraft and
Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards and Test Procedures;'' Final
Rule, 62 FR 25356, May 8, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Interaction With the International Community
Since publication of the initial standards in 1973, EPA, together
with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), has worked with the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) on the development of
international aircraft engine emission standards. ICAO was established
in 1944 by the United Nations (by the Convention on International Civil
Aviation, the ``Chicago Convention'') ``* * * in order that
international civil aviation may be developed in a safe and orderly
manner and that international air transport services may be established
on the basis of equality of opportunity and operated soundly and
economically.'' \5\ ICAO's responsibilities include developing aircraft
technical and operating standards, recommending practices, and
generally fostering the growth of international civil aviation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ICAO, ``Convention on International Civil Aviation,'' Sixth
Edition, Document 7300/6, 1980. Copies of this document can be
obtained from the ICAO Web site located at http://www.icao.int.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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\ At the 35th
Assembly in October 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Foreword
of ``Aircraft Engine Emissions,'' International Standards and
Recommended Practices, Environmental Protection, Annex 16, Volume
II, Second Edition, July 1993. Copies of this document can be
obtained from the ICAO Web site located at http://www.icao.int.
\7\ ICAO, ``Assembly--35th Session, Report of the Executive
Committee on Agenda Item 15,'' Presented by the Chairman of the
Executive Committee, A35-WP/32, October 12, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States is one of 188 participating member States of
ICAO.\8\ 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.\9\ ICAO standards require States to provide written
notification and failure to provide such notification could have
negative consequences as detailed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ As of March 2, 2005 there were 188 Contracting States
according to the ICAO Web site located at http://www.icao.int.
\9\ Text 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\10\ 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
[[Page 69667]]
the loss of its voting power in the Assembly and Council.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Text 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.
\11\ Articles 87 and 88 of Chicago Convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
states may adopt standards that are more stringent than those agreed
upon 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.\12\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Article 33 of Chicago Convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\13\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Article 38 of Chicago Convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ICAO Council's Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection
(CAEP) undertakes ICAO's technical work in the environmental field. The
CAEP is responsible for evaluating, researching, 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).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ICAO, ``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 (http://www.icao.int).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 30, 1981, the ICAO Council adopted its first international
standards and recommended practices covering aircraft engine
emissions.\15\ These standards limit aircraft engine emissions of
NOX, CO, and hydrocarbons (HC), in relation to other engine
performance parameters, and are commonly known as stringency standards.
On March 24, 1993, the ICAO Council approved a proposal adopted at the
second meeting of the CAEP (CAEP/2) to tighten the original
NOX standard by 20 percent and amend the test procedures. At
the next CAEP meeting (CAEP/3) in December 1995, the CAEP recommended a
further tightening of 16 percent and additional test procedure
amendments, but on March 20, 1997 the ICAO Council rejected this
stringency proposal and approved only the test procedure amendments. At
its next meeting (CAEP/4) in April 1998, the CAEP adopted a similar 16
percent NOX reduction proposal, which the ICAO Council
approved on February 26, 1999.\16\ 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).17 18
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ICAO, Foreword of ``Aircraft Engine Emissions,''
International Standards and Recommended Practices, Environmental
Protection, Annex 16, Volume II, Second Edition, July 1993. Copies
of this document can be obtained from ICAO (http://www.icao.int).
\16\ 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 (http://www.icao.int).
\17\ These NOX standards will be interchangeably be
referred to as the 1998 CAEP/4 standards and the 1999 ICAO standards
throughout this Notice.
\18\ Newly 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 re-certification or retrofit of existing in-use engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
the emission of any air pollutant from classes of aircraft engines
which in its 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). Section 231(a)(3) provides that after we propose
standards, the Administrator shall issue such standards ``with such
modifications as he deems appropriate.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(a)(3). In
addition, EPA is required to ensure, in consultation with the Secretary
of Transportation, that such standards' effective dates provide the
necessary time to permit the development and application of the
requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to compliance
cost. 42 U.S.C. 7571(b). Also, EPA must consult with the FAA before
proposing or promulgating emission standards. 42 U.S.C.
7571(a)(2)(B)(i). (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.\19\
States are preempted
[[Page 69668]]
from adopting or enforcing any standard respecting aircraft engine
emissions unless such standard is identical to EPA's standards. 42
U.S.C. 7573.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ CAA 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.'' 42 U.S.C. 7573.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Why Is EPA Taking This Action?
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.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(a)(2)(A).
One of the principal components of aircraft exhaust emissions is
NOX. NOX is a precursor to the formation of
ozone.\20\ 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). This section discusses the contribution of aircraft engines
to the national NOX emissions inventory and the health and
welfare impacts of these emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Ground-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 can also help reduce particulate matter (PM) levels as
NOX emissions can also be part of the secondary formation
of PM. See Section II.B below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Inventory Contribution
EPA's estimate of the contribution of aircraft to the national
NOX emission inventory is set out in Table II.A-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.\21\ Those new standards are expected to reduce NOX
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 after 2001.) Nonetheless, as these new programs go into
effect, the relative size of the contribution of aircraft to national
NOX levels may increase due to the decrease in the
contribution of those other mobile sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ For 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).
Table II.A-1.--Annual NOX Baseline Levels a From EPA's National Air
Quality and Emissions Trends Report, August 2003
[Short tons, 2001]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category NOX
(Thous. Tons)
---------------------------------------------------
Aircraft b c...................................... 81 0.7%
Nonroad........................................... 4,075 32.8%
Highway........................................... 8,249 66.5%
Total Mobile Source............................... 12,405
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: U.S. EPA, ``Average Annual Emissions, All Criteria
Pollutants Years Including 1970-2001,'' Updated August 2003. A copy of
this document can be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030.
\b\ These aircraft emissions are a conservative estimate as they reflect
military operations only at FAA and FAA-contracted 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 (Updated),'' Memorandum to Docket OAR-2002-0030 from Bryan
Manning, May 11, 2005.
\c\ There is a new draft version of the national emissions inventories
(for 2002), and the percentage contribution of the above sources to
the total mobile source NOX inventory remains essentially the same.
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.\22\
Commercial aircraft emissions contribute from 74 to 99 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, air taxis, general aviation, and military
aircraft) are added together.\23\ The lower end of the range is
commercial aircraft's contribution of NOX aircraft emissions
in the U.S. when combining earlier \24\ 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
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 (Updated),''
Memorandum to Docket OAR-2002-0030 from Bryan Manning (Document No.
OAR-2002-0030-0214), May 11, 2005.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Commercial 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 they usually are smaller aircraft than those operated by
air carriers. Air taxis have played an increasing role in the
operations of the U.S. aviation system, and by 2015, such operations
are forecast to represent 54 percent of operations (see Table II.A-2
and the FAA website http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp).
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 modeled separately because they often
operate primarily out of military bases and frequently have
distinctive flight profiles.
\23\ U.S. EPA, ``Average Annual Emissions, All Criteria
Pollutants Years Including 1970-2001,'' Updated August 2003. A copy
of this document can be found in 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.
\24\ The 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 (Updated),'' Memorandum to Docket OAR-2002-0030
from Bryan Manning (Document No. OAR-2002-0030-0214), May 11, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 69669]]
Washington DC.25 26 Nineteen airport facilities with
significant commercial jet aircraft activity were identified within
these selected areas. On average for these ten cities, commercial
aircraft's contribution is expected to increase from about 2 percent of
regional total NOX emissions in 1990 to about 5 percent in 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ U.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. As indicated in the report,
comments received from reviewers of this study indicated that
uncertainty may exist in the national forecasts of growth in
aircraft activity, on future composition of the aircraft fleet, and
on the accuracy of a default mixing height. Such uncertainties carry
over into projections of future emissions, and resolution of
uncertainties may result in higher or lower ground-level emissions
estimates from future aircraft.
\26\ Based on the one-hour ozone standard, nine of the ten
metropolitan areas are currently not in attainment of NAAQS for one-
hour ozone; the tenth city has attained the one-hour ozone standard
and is considered an one-hour ozone ``maintenance'' area. Based on
the 8-hour ozone standard, all ten metropolitan areas are currently
not in attainment of NAAQS for 8-hour ozone. See section II.B.1 of
this rule for further discussion on the ozone NAAQs. Also, for more
detailed information on the 8-hour ozone standard, see the following
EPA Web sites: http://www.epa.gov/airlinks/ozpminfo.html,
http://www.epa.gov/airlinks/airlinks4.html or
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 transportation
demand.\27\ 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 a slower rate in the United States.\28\ Thus, there is both a
short-term decrease in aircraft transportation activity as a result of
9/11, with negative growth for a few years 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.A-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 inventories and on ozone levels will also increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ U.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.
\28\ U.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 http://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.
Table II.A-2.--FAA Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report of Nationwide Air Carrier and Commuter/Air Taxi
Operations a b c d e
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air carrier &
Air carrier & Percent change commuter/air Percent change
commuter/air 12/14/00 taxi 6/30/05 Percent change
Year taxi forecast operations 6/ forecast versus earlier
operations 12/ between years 30/05 between years forecast
14/00 forecast listed forecast listed
(pre-9/11) (post-9/11)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999............................ 28,860,731 .............. 28,947,500 .............. 0.3
2000............................ 29,445,619 2.0 29,714,995 2.7 0.9
2001............................ 30,033,967 2.0 29,366,221 -1.2 -2.2
2002\c\......................... 30,663,508 2.1 27,803,970 -5.3 -9.3
2005............................ 32,619,194 6.4 29,877,529 7.5 -8.4
2010............................ 36,015,595 10 33,118,411 11 -8.0
2015............................ 39,549,526 10 36,280,526 10 -8.3
2020............................ N/A .............. 39,695,796 9 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: U.S. FAA, ``APO Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report,'' Aircraft Operations, December 14, 2000; and
``APO Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report,'' Aircraft Operations, June 30, 2005. See the following FAA Web
site: http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp. A copy of these reports can be found in Docket No.
OAR-2002-0030.
\b\ Operations means the number of arrivals and departures (see Docket No. OAR-2002-0030, Document No. OAR-2002-
0030-0258).
\c\ Air carrier operations refers to flights of commercial aircraft with seating capacity of more than 60 seats.
\d\ Commuter/air taxi operations refers to aircraft with 60 or fewer seats conducting scheduled commercial
flights/non-scheduled or for-hire flights.
\e\ The change in operations from 2000 to 2002 was +4.1% for the 12/14/2000 forecast, and it was -6.4% for the 6/
30/2005 forecast.
The data in Table II.A-2 show that prior to 9/11 growth in air
carrier and commuter/air taxi operations was expected to increase by 34
percent from 2000 to 2015.\29\ The revised growth forecast for this
period estimates that aircraft activity will now increase only 22
percent in the period 2000-2015. In fact, the originally anticipated
operation levels in 2015 are now forecast not to be reached until
2020.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ U.S. FAA, ``APO Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report,''
Aircraft Operations, December 14, 2000. A copy of this document can
be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030.
\30\ U.S. FAA, ``APO Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report,''
Aircraft Operations, June 30, 2005. The flight forecast data is
based on FAA's Terminal Area Forecast System (TAFS). TAFs is the
official forecast of aviation activity at FAA facilities. This
includes FAA-towered airports, federally-contracted towered
airports, nonfederal towered airports, and many non-towered
airports. For detailed information on TAFS and the air carrier
activity forecasts see the following FAA Web site:
http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp. The June 30, 2005
aviation forecasts contained in TAFS for Fiscal Years 2002-2020 included
the impact of the terrorists' attacks of September 11, 2001 and the
recent economic downturn. Currently, the aviation industry is
undergoing significant structural and economic changes. These
changes may necessitate revisions to forecasts for a number of large
hub airports prior to the update of the entire TAF next year. A copy
of the June 30, 2005 forecast summary report can also be found in
Docket No. OAR-2002-0030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
[[Page 69670]]
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.\31 32\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The 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.
\32\ For comparison, 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 another 35
percent, and APUs and GSE contribute about 15 percent each for the
remaining 30 percent. For NOX and VOC together, aircraft
contribute about 35 percent; GAV account for another 40 percent, and
APUs and GSE combined make up the remaining 25 percent. This
document can be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030, Document No. OAR-
2002-0030-0071.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 contribute to regional haze.\33\ The
NOX standards adopted in this rule will help reduce ambient
ozone and potentially secondary PM levels and thus will help areas with
airports achieve and/or maintain compliance with the NAAQS for ozone
and potentially PM.\34\ In the following section we discuss the adverse
health and welfare effects associated with NOX emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ As 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).
\34\ The 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\35\ The following is a summary of those effects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ U.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. OAR-2002-0030. Document Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0165
through OAR-2002-0030-0194. (U.S. EPA (2005), Air Quality Criteria
for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (First External Review
Draft), EPA/600/R-05/004aA-cA. This document can be found in Docket
No. OAR-2002-0030, Document Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0202, -0210, and -
0211.) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\36 37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ U.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.
\37\ U.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. OAR-2002-0030, Document Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0165
through OAR-2002-0030-0194. (U.S. EPA (2005). Air Quality Criteria
for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (First External Review
Draft), EPA/600/R-05/004aA-cA. This document can be accessed
electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/
s_o3_cr_cd.html. This document can also be found in Docket No. OAR-
2002-0030, Doc. Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0202, -0210, and -0211.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New research suggests additional serious health effects beyond
those that were known when the ozone NAAQS was revised in 1997. Between
1997 and a 2002 literature review, over 1,700 new health and welfare
studies relating to ozone have been published in peer-reviewed
journals.\38\ 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).\39\ 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 demonstrate the harmful effects of ozone on public health and the
need for areas with high ozone levels to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ New 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). This document can be found in Docket No.
OAR-2002-0030, Document No. OAR-2002-0030-0131.
\39\ U.S. EPA (2005), Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (First External Review Draft), Volume I
Document No. EPA/600/R-05/004aA, Volume II Document No. EPA/600/R-
05/004bA, Volume III Document No. EPA/600/R-05/004cA. This document
can be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030, Document Nos. OAR-2002-
0030-0202, -0210, and -0211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. What are the current and projected 8-hour ozone levels?
There is currently one ozone NAAQS, an 8-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 0.084 parts per million (ppm). The former 1-hour ozone
standard was revoked in June 2005.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ U.S. EPA, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone;
Final Rule. 62 FR 38855 (July 18, 1997). 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 69671]]
On June 15, 2004, the 8-hour ozone nonattainment designations
became effective.\41\ Nationwide, there are approximately 159 million
people living in 126 areas that are designated as 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.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ U.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).
\42\ A map that shows the current 8-hour ozone and
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, federal Class I areas, and a
list of affected counties can be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030,
Document No. OAR-2002-0030-0209.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From air quality modeling performed for the recent Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR),\43\ 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, the number of counties in the
eastern U.S. violating the ozone 8-hour standard is expected to
decrease in 2015 to 16 counties where 12 million people are projected
to live.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ U.S. EPA, ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions
to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call,''
Final Rule, 70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
standard.\44\ 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.) \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ U.S. EPA, ``Proposed Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Proposed Rule, 68 FR 32802
(June 2, 2003).
\45\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 ozone 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 can react 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, 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.
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.\46\
(However, the majority of NOX involved in this process does
not come from aircraft.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. What are the health effects of PM2.5?
Scientific studies show ambient PM is associated with a series of
adverse health effects. These health effects are discussed in detail in
the recently released EPA Criteria Document for PM.\47\ They are also
described in the Final Regulatory Analysis for our recent
[[Page 69672]]
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel rule.\48\ The following is a summary of those
effects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ U.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.
\48\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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.49 50 Additionally, one long-term study
provides evidence for premature mortality specifically associated with
PM generated by mobile sources.\51\ Two studies further analyzing the
Harvard Six Cities Study's air quality data have also established a
specific influence of mobile source-related PM2.5 on daily
mortality \52\ and a concentration-response function for mobile source-
associated PM2.5 and daily mortality.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Dockery, 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.
\50\ Pope, 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.
\51\ Hoek, 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.
\52\ Laden 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.
\53\ Schwartz J; Laden F; Zanobetti A. (2002) The concentration-
response relation between PM(2.5) and daily deaths.
Environ Health Perspect 110(10): 1025-1029.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. What are current and projected levels of PM?
The NAAQS for PM2.5 were established by EPA in 1997 (62
FR 38651, July 18, 1997). The short-term (24-hour) standard is set at a
level of 65 [mu]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 88 million people live in 208 full and partial
counties and 39 areas which EPA has designated nonattainment for the
PM2.5 NAAQS.\54\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ A map that shows the current 8-hour ozone and
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, federal Class I areas, and a
list of affected counties can be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030,
Document No. OAR-2002-0030-0209. The final PM2.5
designations were effective on April 5, 2005. (U.S. EPA, ``Air
Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' Final
Rule, January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944); ``Air Quality Designations for
the Fine Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards,'' Supplemental Notice, April 5, 2005, located at
http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\55\ For
example in the eastern U.S. in 2015, based on emission controls
currently adopted, we project that 16 million people will live in 18
counties with average PM2.5 levels above 15 [mu]/m3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ U.S. EPA, ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions
to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call,''
Final Rule, 70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 designated PM2.5 nonattainment
areas on April 5, 2005. 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.
Potentially, today's aircraft NOX standards may
contribute to attainment and maintenance of the existing PM NAAQS since
NOX contributes to the secondary formation of PM2.5.
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 Assessment for
our recent Clean Air Nonroad Diesel rule.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Acid Deposition
Acid deposition, or acid rain as it is commonly known, occurs when
NOX and SO2 react in the atmosphere with water,
oxygen, and oxidants to form various acidic compounds that later fall
to earth in the form of precipitation or dry deposition of acidic
particles.\57\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Much 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NOX reductions from today's action will help reduce
acid rain and acid deposition, thereby helping to reduce acidity levels
in lakes and
[[Page 69673]]
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. 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.\58\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ Deposition of Air Pollutants to the Great Waters, Third
Report to Congress, June 2000, EPA-453/R-00-005. This document can
be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030, Document No. OAR-2002-0030-
0025. It is also available at
http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/gr8water/3rdrpt/obtain.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
3. Plant Damage From Ozone
Ground-level ozone can also cause adverse welfare or environmental
effects.\59\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ U.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. OAR-2002-0030. Document Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0165
through OAR-2002-0030-0194. (U.S. EPA (2005), Air Quality Criteria
for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (First External Review
Draft), EPA/600/R-05/004aA--cA. This document can be found in Docket
No. OAR-2002-0030, Document Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0202, -0210, and -0211.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Visibility can be defined as the degree to which the atmosphere is
transparent to visible light.\60\ Fine particles with significant
light-extinction efficiencies include organic matter, sulfates,
nitrates, elemental carbon (soot), and soil.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ National 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 Web site 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, 2nd Draft. This document can be found in
Docket No. OAR-2002-0030, Document Nos. OAR-2002-0030-0198 through--
0201. It is also available electronically at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/pm_staff_paper_2nddraft.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ A map that shows the current 8-hour ozone and
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, federal Class I areas, and a
list of affected counties can be found in Docket No. OAR-2002-0030,
Document No. OAR-2002-0030-0209.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, potential reductions from this
final rule may 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
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.\62\ (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
[[Page 69674]]
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).\63\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ In 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.
\63\ Applying standards to newly manufactured engines of already
certified models does not mean the re-certification or retrofit of
existing in-use engines. Instead such a provision would require the
ongoing production of engines that have already been certified to
meet the new standards. However, we are not adopting this provision
in today's rulemaking
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(a)(2).
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.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(b).
Today's rule adopts near-term standards that will go into effect
December 19, 2005 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.\64\ 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 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 will be a central consideration in a future EPA
regulation of aircraft engine emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ ICAO, CAEP, Fourth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, April 6-8,
1998, Report, Document 9720, CAEP/4. Copies of this document can be
obtained from the ICAO Web site located at http://www.icao.int.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\65\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ As described later, more information and greater lead time
would be necessary to require more stringent standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Today's NOX Standards
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:\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ This 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
NOX = (42.71 + 1.4286(rated pressure ratio)--0.4013(rated
output) + 0.00642(rated pressure ratio x 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.\67\ However, since this date
has passed, the NOX emission standards prescribed above for
newly certified engines shall take effect as prescribed beginning
December 19, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ 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.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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
[[Page 69675]]
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).\68\ In addition to rated pressure ratio, the standards for low-
thrust engines will also be dependent on an engine's thrust or rated
output.\69\ (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.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ Today'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 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.
\69\ The standards for mid- and high-thrust engines are
dependent only on an engine's rated pressure ratio.
\70\ Additional 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).\71\ 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.\72\ 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 turbine inlet
temperature distribution and for emissions control.\73\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ ICAO/CAEP, Report of Third Meeting, Montreal, Quebec,
December 5-15, 1995, Document 9675, CAEP/3.
\72\ ``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.)
\73\ ICAO/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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 technology-forcing 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 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
Decreases in ozone and its 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
[[Page 69676]]
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. Airlines expressed that section 231
requires that standards already be technologically feasible and not
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 sections 231(a)(2)(B)
and (b) of the CAA. Section 231(b) 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 during such
period.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(b). Section 231(a)(2)(B) provides that the
Administrator shall consult with the Administrator of the FAA on
standards, and ``shall not change the aircraft engine emission
standards if such change would significantly increase noise and
adversely affect safety.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(a)(2)(B). Future aircraft
emission standards will involve appropriate consultations between EPA
and the FAA in applying these provisions of the CAA.
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
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 (DC 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 that 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
the Secretary of Transportation, need to provide manufacturers
sufficient lead time to develop and implement requisite technology. As
section 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''), 42 U.S.C. 7571(a)(2)(B)(ii), 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''), 42 U.S.C. 7571(c). 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 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, federal agencies plan on working 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
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.\74\ 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.\75\ As
[[Page 69677]]
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 and commuters/air
taxis will increase by 22 percent from 2000 to 2015, about 12 percent
less than what was forecast before September 11th.\76\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ The 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. (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.)
\75\ U.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.
\76\ U.S. FAA, ``APO Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report,''
Aircraft Operations, June 30, 2005. The flight forecast data is
based on FAA's Terminal Area Forecast System (TAFS). TAFs is the
official forecast of aviation activity at FAA facilities. This
includes FAA-towered airports, federally-contracted towered
airports, nonfederal towered airports, and many non-towered
airports. For detailed information on TAFS and the air carrier
activity forecasts see the following FAA website:
http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp. The June 30, 2005
aviation forecasts contained in TAFS for Fiscal Years 2002-2020 included
the impact of the terrorists' attacks of September 11, 2001 and the
recent economic downturn. Currently, the aviation industry is
undergoing significant structural and economic changes. These
changes may necessitate revisions to forecasts for a number of large
hub airports prior to the update of the entire TAF next year. A copy
of the June 30, 2005 forecast summary report can also be found in
Docket No. OAR-2002-0030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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.\77\) 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.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ For information on the geographic location of airports, see
the following U.S. Department of Transportation (Bureau of
Transportation Statistics) website: http://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: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA, therefore, is considering the exploration of more stringent
future standards, beyond today's standards. Earlier this year, the ICAO
Council adopted more stringent international consensus NOX
emission standards for newly certified aircraft engines (implementation
date of after December 31, 2007).\78\ 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).\79\ (These standards were accompanied by
more stringent standards for low-thrust engines). Moreover, CAEP agreed
to review the stringency of the NOX standards again during
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 U.S. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ ICAO News Release, ``ICAO Council Adopts New Standards for
Aircraft Emissions,'' PIO 03/05, March 2, 2005. Copies of this
document can be obtained at the ICAO website located at
http://www.icao.int.
\79\ ICAO, CAEP, Sixth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, February 2-12,
2004, Report, Letter of Transmittal to the President of the Council
From the Chairman of the Sixth Meeting of CAEP, CAEP/6-WP/57 (Report
on Agenda Item 1). Copies of this document can be obtained from ICAO
(http://www.icao.int). It can also be found in Docket No.
OAR-2002-0030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, including implementing
a CAEP-approved process to set and review these goals.80 81
The aim of the goal setting activity is to complement the ICAO CAEP
standard setting process with information to aid the engine and
airframe manufacturer's design process. The goals are expected to take
into account the results of recently completed emissions reduction
technology programs such as those conducted by National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) and the European Commission and the
timeline necessary to carry those technologies from the research phase
through commercialization.\82\ We support this CAEP work item for
establishing 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 or
for encouraging the development of better performing technology. For
example, the Next Generation Air Transportation System
[[Page 69678]]
(NGATS) plan was released in December 2004--a Congressionally chartered
and Administration endorsed 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 performance-based
standards have been successfully used to stimulate technological
development resulting in cleaner, cost-effective, and safe engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ ICAO, CAEP, Sixth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, February 2-12,
2004, Report, Letter of Transmittal to the President of the 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
(http://www.icao.int). It can also be found in Docket No.
OAR-2002-0030.
\81\ For 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 the 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
CAEP, page 4A-7). Copies of this document can be obtained from ICAO
(http://www.icao.int). It can also be found in Docket No.
OAR-2002-0030.
\82\ ICAO, 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 (http://www.icao.int).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 coordination 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 the Secretary
of Transportation 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.
Consideration of more stringent NOX standards in the
future will allow us to obtain important additional information on the
costs of such standards.\83\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ For 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we discussed in the proposal, producing (and/or developing) new
engines or engine technologies requires significant financial
investments from engine manufacturers, which takes time to recoup (the
amount of time depends upon sales of engines, replacement parts, etc.).
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, taking into consideration cost, safety, 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),\84\ 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
interpreted as meaning that production cut-offs would not be introduced
in the future if the situation so warranted.''85 86 (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.\87\ FESG estimated that the cost per ton of NOX
reduced would range from $3,800 to $11,200 for the three effective
dates.\88\ The emission benefits and costs of this provision are
discussed further below.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ This 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.
\85\ ICAO, CAEP, Sixth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, February 2-12,
2004, Report, Letter of Transmittal to the President of the Council
From the Chairman of the Sixth Meeting of CAEP, CAEP/6-WP/57 (Report
on Agenda Item 1). A copy of this document can be found in Docket
No. OAR-2002-30.
\86\ CAEP/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 the Council From the Chairman of the Sixth
Meeting of CAEP, CAEP/6-WP/57, Report on Agenda Item 1, pages 1-13.)
\87\ ICAO, 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.
\88\ ICAO, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. What Is the Status of Engines?
According to the ICAO Aircraft Engine Exhaust Emissions Data
Bank,\89\ nearly all already certified engine models (95 percent of
already certified
[[Page 69679]]
and in-production engine models in the Data Bank) currently meet or
perform better than the standards we are adopting today.\90\ (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.\91\) At the time the CAEP/4 NOX standards were
adopted in 1998, all but 11 in-production engines and 5 newly designed
engine models (these 5 engines were in the design and development
process in 1998) had NOX emission levels that would perform
better than the CAEP/4 standards.\92\ 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.\93\ 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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ 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/default.aspx?categoryid=702&pagetype=90.
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.
\90\ Based 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 (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.
\91\ 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 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.)
\92\ 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.
\93\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(The above reference for the fleet fraction is BACK Aviation
Solutions, http://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.)
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.\94\ As
discussed in the proposal, 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.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ ICAO, 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.
\95\ 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.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 comply
with the same standards as were applied to the original engine
model.96 97 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ ICAO, 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.
\97\ Chapter 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 69680]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR17NO05.001
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 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. Airlines 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
airlines 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
airlines) operates this engine in our commercial aircraft fleet.
Therefore, the implication of these 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
[[Page 69681]]
manufacturers. EPA and ICAO (as we mentioned in the proposal and as one
commenter noted in its comments) have historically adopted production
cut-offs 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, 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 notice-and-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 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 in-production 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
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 engines \98\) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ Such engines include newly manufactured engines of already
certified models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For CAEP/3 in 1995, the Russian Federation presented a working
paper entitled, ``Corrections to Annex 16, Volume II,'' that stated the
following: \99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ Russian 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.
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 an 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.
In addition, at CAEP/3 the United Kingdom then presented a working
paper on this same issue.\100\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ United 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\101\ Today, EPA will incorporate by reference the
amendments to the criteria on calibration and test gases for the test
procedures of gaseous emissions, because the changes improve the test
procedures by correcting inconsistencies and distinguishing between
calibration and test gases. The amendments 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''
[[Page 69682]]
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ ICAO/CAEP, Report of Third Meeting, Montreal, Quebec,
December 5-15, 1995, Document 9675, CAEP/3. Copies of this document
can be obtained from ICAO (http://www.icao.int).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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.\102\ For Sec. 87.7(b), today, EPA
will correct this editorial error by eliminating paragraph (b)(1) and
(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ This action was taken in 1984 to provide greater
flexibility to manufacturers for scheduling engine production rates
during the final years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
The requirements contained in this action are being promulgated
after consultation with the Federal Aviation Administration (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'' 42
U.S.C. 7571(a)(2)(B)(i), 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 * * *.'' 42 U.S.C.
7571(a)(2)(B)(ii). 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.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(b). 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.'' 42 U.S.C. 7571(c). 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.\103\ As in past rulemakings and pursuant to the above referenced
sections of the CAA, EPA has coordinated with the FAA of the DOT with
respect to today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ The functions of the Secretary of Transportation under
part B of title II of the Clean Air Act (Sec. Sec. 231-234, 42
U.S.C. 7571-7574) have been delegated to the Administrator of the
FAA. 49 CFR 1.47(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\104\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ The 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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.\105\
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
[[Page 69683]]
contribute to local and regional air pollution in the United States.
The major stakeholders that participated in this initiative included
representatives of the aviation industry (passenger and cargo airlines
and engine manufacturers), airports, state and local air pollution
control officials, environmental organizations, and NASA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ FAA 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\106\ 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,\107\ in addition to strategies to reduce aircraft
emissions.\108\ (At the same time, FAA developed a program, with
Congressional approval, to fund conversion of airport infrastructure
and ground support vehicles to alternative fuels technologies.\109\)
Unfortunately, the state and industry stakeholders did not reach
consensus on a national aviation emissions reduction program. The
Agencies are currently contemplating next steps following from the
national stakeholder initiative and discussions of potential voluntary
programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ Two 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.
\107\ The stakeholders considered the impact, operation and
design of GSE at airports, and whether to undertake projects at
several airports to reduce overall emissions.
\108\ Operational 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.
\109\ The Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act,
signed into law on December 12, 2003 (Pub. L. 108-176), directs the
FAA to establish a national program to reduce airport ground
emissions at commercial service airports located in air quality
nonattainment and maintenance areas. The new Voluntary Airport Low
Emissions (VALE) program will allow airport sponsors to use the
Airport Improvement Program (AIP) and Passenger Facility Charges
(PFCs) to finance low-emission vehicles, refueling and recharging
stations, gate electrification, and other airport air quality
improvements. See the FAA website located at
http://www.faa.gov/arp/environmental/vale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, 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 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.\110\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ CAEP'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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. Public Participation
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 (http://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
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;
[[Page 69684]]
(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
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
EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by 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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS a Defined by SBA as a
Industry codes small business if: b
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturers of new aircraft 336412 < 1,000 employees.
engines.
Manufacturers of new aircraft....... 336411 < 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.
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. Our
review of the list of manufacturers of commercial aircraft gas turbine
engines with rated thrust greater than 26.7 kN and manufacturers of
aircraft with such engines indicates that there are no U.S.
manufacturers 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.
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.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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
[[Page 69685]]
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditure of $100 million or more for
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate or the private
sector in any one year. This rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Today's
action 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 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'' (59 FR 22951, 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, 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
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.
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
[[Page 69686]]
rulemaking.\111\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ ICAO 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 (http://www.icao.int).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Congressional Review Act
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 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 December 19, 2005.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 87
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Aircraft,
Incorporation by reference.
Dated: November 9, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
? For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is 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)).
Subpart A--[Amended]
? 2. Section 87.7 is amended by removing paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2).
? 3. A new Sec. 87.8 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 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 at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
(a) ICAO material. Table 1 of Sec. 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:
Table 1 of Sec. 87.8.--ICAO Materials
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document number and name Part 87 reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Civil Aviation Organization 87.8, 87.64, 87.71, 87.82,
Annex 16, Environmental Protection, Volume 87.89.
II, Aircraft Engine Emissions, Second
Edition, July 1993, Including Amendment 3
of March 20, 1997 (as indicated in
footnoted pages.).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) [Reserved]
Subpart C--[Amended]
? 4. Section 87.21 is amended by adding paragraphs (d)(1)(vi) and
(d)(1)(vii) to read as follows:
Sec. 87.21 Standards for exhaust emissions.
* * * * *
(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.
(B) 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:
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)) grams/kilonewtons rO.
(C) Engines with a rated pressure ratio of 62.5 or more:
Oxides of Nitrogen: (32 + 1.6(rPR)) grams/kilonewtons rO.
(vii) The emission standards prescribed in paragraph (d)(1)(vi) of
this section shall apply as prescribed beginning December 19, 2005.
* * * * *
Subpart G--[Amended]
? 5. Section 87.64 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 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 Sec. 87.8).
? 6. Section 87.71 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 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 Sec.
87.64 with the applicable emission standard under this part. An
acceptable alternative to testing every
[[Page 69687]]
engine is described in Appendix 6 to ICAO Annex 16 (incorporated by
reference in Sec. 87.8). Other methods of demonstrating compliance may
be approved by the Secretary with the concurrence of the Administrator.
Subpart H--[Amended]
? 7. Section 87.82 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 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 Sec. 87.8).
? 8. Section 87.89 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 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 Sec. 87.8).
[FR Doc. 05-22704 Filed 11-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U