Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 1 40 CFR Part 87 [ AMS FRL_____]

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

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( NPRM).

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

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

After December 31, 2003, the proposed NOx standards would apply to newly certified gas turbine engines   those engines designed and certified after the effective date of the proposed Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 2 regulations. Since the proposed NOx standards would apply to only newly certified gas turbine engines, newly manufactured engines ( those engines built after the effective date of the proposed regulations) would not have to meet these standards. Moreover, all engines currently being built would not have to comply with the NOx emission standards that EPA is adopting today.

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

the public can be assured they are receiving the air quality benefits of the international standards.

DATES: Comments: EPA requests comments on the proposed rulemaking by [ insert DATE 30 days after DATE of publication of this proposed rulemaking]. More information about commenting on this action may be found under Public Participation in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section and section I. C. If EPA conducts public hearings on today's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( NPRM), EPA will publish a timely document in the Federal Register that specifies the time and location of such hearings. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 3 ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, by facsimile, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in section I. C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

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

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

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

manning. bryan@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Regulated entities Entities potentially regulated by this action are those that manufacture and sell commercial aircraft engines and aircraft in the United States, and the owners/ operators of such aircraft ( and accompanying engines) in the United States. Regulated categories include:

Category NAICSa Codes SIC Codesb Examples of potentially affected entities Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 4 Industry .......... 336412 3724 Manufacturers of new aircraft engines Industry .......... 336411 3721 Manufacturers of new aircraft Industry .......... 481 4512 Scheduled air carriers, passenger and freight a North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS)

b Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) system code This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your activities are regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 87.20. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. How Can I Get Copies Of This Document and Other Related Information ?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under Docket ID No. OAR 2002 0030. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center, ( EPA/ DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 5 The telephone number for the Reading Room and the Air Docket is ( 202) 566 1742. You may be charged a reasonable fee for photocopying docket materials, as provided in 40 CFR part 2.

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

The EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality also publishes Federal Register notices and related documents on the following secondary web site: http:// www. epa. gov/ otaq/ ( look in What's New or under the specific rulemaking topic).

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

Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets. Information claimed as confidential business information ( CBI) and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 6 electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in section I. B. 1. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket.

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

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

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

For additional information about EPA's electronic public docket visit EPA Dockets online or see 67 FR 38102, May 31, 2002.

C. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments? Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 7 You may submit comments electronically, by mail, by facsimile, or through hand delivery/ courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked " late." EPA is not required to consider these late comments.

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

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

i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. To access EPA's electronic public docket from the EPA Internet Home Page, select " Information Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 8 Sources," " Dockets," and " EPA Dockets." Once in the system, select " search," and then key in Docket ID No. OAR 2002 0030. The system is an " anonymous access" system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.

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

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

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

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

Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20460, Attention Docket ID No. OAR 2002 0030. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 9 3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: EPA Docket Center, U. S.

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

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

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

OAR 2002 0030.

D. How Should I Submit CBI To the Agency?

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

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

In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 10 CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

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

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

1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.

2. Describe any assumptions that you used.

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

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

5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.

6. Offer alternatives.

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

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

II. Introduction A. Brief History of EPA's Regulation of Aircraft Engine Emissions Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 11 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)). Under this authority EPA has conducted several rulemakings since 1973 establishing emission standards and related requirements for several classes ( commercial and general aviation engines) of aircraft and aircraft engines. Most recently, in 1997 EPA promulgated NOx emission standards for newly manufactured gas turbine engines ( those engines built after the effective date of the regulations or already certified engines) and for newly certified gas turbine engines ( those engines designed and certified after the effective date of the regulations). 1 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 Secretary of Transportation's regulations for ensuring compliance with these standards in accordance with section 232 of the Clean Air Act.)

B. Interaction With the International Community 1U. S. EPA, " Control of Air Pollution from Aircraft and Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards and Test Procedures;" Final Rule, 62 FR 25356, May 8, 1997. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 12 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." 2 ICAO's responsibilities include developing aircraft technical and operating standards, recommending practices, and generally fostering the growth of international civil aviation.

In 1972 at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, ICAO's position on the human environment was developed to be the following: "[ i] n fulfilling this role ICAO is conscious of the adverse environmental impact that may be related to aircraft activity and its responsibility and that of its member States to achieve maximum compatibility between the safe and orderly development of civil aviation and the quality of the human environment." Also, in 1972 ICAO established the position to continue "* * * with the assistance and cooperation of other bodies of the Organization and other international organizations * * * the work related to 2ICAO, " Convention on International Civil Aviation," Sixth Edition, Document 7300/ 6,

1980. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 13 the development of Standards, Recommended Practices and Procedures and/ or guidance material dealing with the quality of the human environment * * *." 3 The United States is one of 188 participating member States of ICAO. 4 Under the basic ICAO treaty established in 1944 ( the Chicago Convention), a participating nation which elects not to adopt the ICAO standards must provide a written explanation to ICAO describing why a given standard is impractical to comply with or not in their national interest. 5 ICAO has no 3International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO), Foreword of " Aircraft Engine Emissions," International Standards and Recommended Practices, Environmental Protection,

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

4As of June 20, 2002 there were 188 Contracting States according to the ICAO website located at http:// www. icao. int.

5Text 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 Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 14 punitive powers for states that elect not to adopt ICAO standards. ICAO standards require States to provide written notification and failure to provide such notification could have negative consequences as detailed below.

If a Contracting State files a written notification indicating that it does not meet ICAO standards, other Contracting States are absolved of their obligations to " recognize as valid" the certificate of airworthiness issued by that Contracting States, since that certificate will not have been issued under standards " equal to or above" ICAO standards. In other words, other Contracting States do not have to allow aircraft belonging to that Contracting State to travel through their airspace. 6 Further, if it fails to file a written notification, it will be in default of its obligations, and risks mandatory exclusion of its aircraft from the airspace of other Contracting States and the loss of its voting power in the Assembly and Council. 7 of the difference which exists between one or more features of an international standard and the corresponding national practice of that State.

6Text 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.

7Articles 87 and 88 of Chicago Convention. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 15 The ICAO Council's Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection ( CAEP)

undertakes ICAO's technical work in the environmental field. The CAEP is responsible for discussing and recommending measures to the ICAO Council that address the environmental impact of international civil aviation. At CAEP meetings, the United States is represented by the FAA, which plays an active role at these meetings ( see section V for further discussion of FAA's role). 8 If the ICAO Council adopts a CAEP proposal to adopt a new environmental standard, it then becomes part of the ICAO standards and recommended practices ( Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention). 9 On June 30, 1981, the ICAO Council adopted its first international standards and recommended practices covering aircraft engine emissions. 10 These standards limit aircraft 8EPA is a principal participant in the development of U. S. policy in ICAO/ CAEP and other international venues. EPA assists and technically advises FAA on aviation emissions matters.

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

0030, Document _____.

10ICAO, Foreword of " Aircraft Engine Emissions," International Standards and Recommended Practices, Environmental Protection, Annex 16, Volume II, Second Edition, July 1993. Copies of this document can be obtained from ICAO ( www. icao. int) or found in Docket Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 16 engine emissions of NOx, CO, and hydrocarbons ( HC), in relation to other engine performance parameters, and are commonly known as stringency standards. On March 24, 1993, the ICAO Council approved a proposal adopted at the second meeting of the CAEP ( CAEP/ 2) to tighten the original NOx standard by 20 percent and amend the test procedures. At the next CAEP meeting ( CAEP/ 3) in December 1995, the CAEP recommended a further tightening of 16 percent and additional test procedure amendments, but on March 20, 1997 the ICAO Council rejected this stringency proposal and approved only the test procedure amendments. At its next meeting ( CAEP/ 4) in April 1998, the CAEP adopted a similar 16 percent NOx reduction proposal, which the ICAO Council approved on February 26, 1999.11 The CAEP/ 4 16 percent NOx reduction standard applies to new engine designs certified after December 31, 2003 ( applies only to newly certified engines). 12 As discussed earlier, in 1997 EPA amended its regulations to adopt the 1981 ICAO NOx and CO emission standards, as well as the NOx emission standards and test procedures revised by ICAO in 1993. As discussed above, the U. S. has an obligation under the Convention on International Civil Aviation to notify ICAO regarding differences between U. S. standards and OAR 2002 0030, Document _____.

11 International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO), Aircraft Engine Emissions, Annex 16, Volume II, Second Edition, July 1993, Amendment 4 effective on July 19, 1999.

12These NOx standards will be interchangeably be referred to as the 1998 CAEP/ 4 standards and the 1999 ICAO standards throughout this Notice. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 17 ICAO standards, and to provide notification on the date by which the program requirements will be consistent. In response to the recent actions by ICAO and for the reasons discussed below,

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

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

Also, EPA must consult with the FAA concerning aircraft safety before proposing or promulgating emission standards. ( See section V of today's proposal for further discussion of EPA's coordination with FAA and FAA's responsibilities under the CAA.)

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

13CAA section 233 entitled " State Standards and Controls'' states that " No State or political subdivision thereof may adopt or attempt to enforce any standard respecting emissions of any air pollutant from any aircraft or engine thereof unless such standard is identical to a standard applicable to such aircraft under this part.'' Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 18 while many states are implementing control programs to reduce mobile source emissions, EPA has the authority to establish an emission control program for aircraft engines.

III. Environmental Need for Control As mentioned above, section 231( a)( 2)( A) of the CAA authorizes the EPA Administrator to, from time to time, revisit emission standards for aircraft engine emissions "* * * which in his judgment causes, or contributes to air pollution which may * * * endanger public health or welfare." In judging the need for the NOx standard promulgated in today's action, the Administrator has determined ( 1) that the public health and welfare is endangered in several air quality regions by violation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) for ozone ( NOx contributes to the formation of ozone); and ( 2) that airports and aircraft are now or are projected to be, significant sources of emissions of NOx in some of the air quality control regions in which the NAAQS are being violated.

Currently, aircraft account for over 1 percent of the total U. S. mobile source NOx ground level emissions inventory. 14 Commercial aircraft emissions contribute about 70 percent of the 14" National Air Quality and Emission Trends Report," 1999, EPA, 2001, at Table A 4.

This document is available at http:// www. epa. gov/ oar/ aqtrnd99/. A copy of this table can also be found in Docket No. OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 19 NOx aircraft emissions inventories. 15 Commercial aircraft emissions are a fast growing segment of the transportation sector's emission inventory. This growth in commercial aircraft emissions is occurring at a time when other significant mobile and stationary sources are drastically reducing emissions, thereby accentuating the growth in aircraft emissions. Nationally, aircraft NOx emissions experienced a 130 percent growth from 1970 to 1995, and they are expected to increase by 25 percent from 1995 to 2010.16 From a local/ regional perspective, the 1999 EPA study, Evaluation of Air Pollutant Emissions from Subsonic Commercial Jet Aircraft, reported that from 1990 to 2010 increases in commercial aircraft NOx emissions for the ten cities studied ( 19 airport facilities with significant commercial jet aircraft activity were identified within these selected cities) are expected to range from 50 to 110 percent. 17 In addition, the study showed 15E. H. Pechan and Associates, Inc.,    National Annual Aircraft Emissions by Subcategory from Trends 1995 Report'' ( National Air Pollutant Emission Trends 1995 EPA), Facsimile from Maureen Mullen to Bryan Manning of the U. S. EPA, August 16, 1996.

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

17This document ( EPA420 R 99 013, April 1999) is available at http:// www. epa. gov/ otaq/ aviation. htm. It can also be found in Docket No. OAR 2002 0030,

Document No. _____. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 20 that in 2010 commercial aircraft are projected to contribute as much as 10 percent of total regional mobile source NOx emissions in at least two of the cities studied. 18 Air pollutants resulting from airport operations are emitted from several types of sources:

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

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

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

and other persons utilizing an airport. EPA's previous estimates show aircraft engines comprise approximately 45 percent of total air pollutant emissions from airport operations; GAV account for another 45 percent, and APUs and GSE combined make up the remaining 10 percent. 19 Since 18Based on the one hour ozone standard, nine of the ten metropolitan areas are currently not in attainment of NAAQS for ozone ; the tenth city has attained the ozone standard and is considered an ozone " maintenance" area. For detailed information on the 8 hour ozone standard,

see the following EPA website: http:// www. epa. gov/ airlinks/ ozpminfo. html. EPA has not yet designated areas for the 8 hour standard.

19The California FIP, signed by the Administrator 2/ 14/ 95, is located in EPA Air Docket A 94 09, item number V A 1. The FIP was vacated by an act of Congress before it became effective.

In addition, the 1997 EPA Draft Final Report entitled, " Analysis of Techniques to Reduce Air Emission at Airports" ( prepared by Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc), it was Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 21 EPA has established stringent emission standards for GAVs and other motor vehicles that will be manufactured and introduced into commerce in future years, overall emissions from these vehicles will continue to decline for many years.

Adopting standards equivalent to the latest ICAO NOx emission standards and the related ICAO test procedures would help in achieving and/ or maintaining compliance with the NAAQS for ozone ( O3), NOx, and particulate matter ( PM). Some of the adverse effects on public health and welfare associated with these pollutants are discussed briefly below.

A. Oxides of Nitrogen ( NOx)

NOx is directly harmful to human health and the environment. Exposure to NO2 ( nitrogen dioxide) can reduce pulmonary function and increase airway irritation in healthy subjects as well as people with pre existing pulmonary conditions. In children, exposure to NO2 at or near the level of the ambient standard appears to increase the risk of respiratory illness.

NOx and one of its key transformation products ( nitric acid) also contribute to a number of adverse environmental impacts such as overgrowth of algae and oxygen depletion estimated that for the four airports studied ( which are large air traffic hubs) on average aircraft compromise approximately 35 percent of NOx emissions from airport operations; GAV account for another 35 percent, and APUs and GSE contribute about 15 percent each for the remaining 30 percent. This document can be found in Docket No. OAR 2002 0030, Document No. ___

__. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 22 ( eutrophication). ( NOx and its products have a role in excess nitrogen loads to sensitive water bodies. For instance, 27 percent of excess nitrogen to the Chesapeake Bay comes from the air.) 20 NOx and its products contribute to acid rain, which affects both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems ( already under stress from sulfur related acidification), including acidification of surface waters, reduction in fish populations, damage to forests and associated wildlife, soil degradation, damage to materials, monuments, buildings, etc., and reduced visibility. In addition, NOx at cruise altitudes from subsonic aircraft is considered to be a precursor of tropospheric ozone and a contributor to greenhouse gas. 21 20Atmospheric nitrogen deposition onto surface waters and deposition to watershed and subsequent transport into the tidal waters has been documented to contribute from 12 to 44 percent of the total nitrogen loadings to the United States coastal waterbodies. Nitrogen is the nutrient limiting growth of algae in most coastal waters and estuaries. Thus, addition of nitrogen results in accelerated algae and aquatic plant growth causing adverse ecological effects.

High levels of nitrate in drinking water is a health hazard, especially for infants.

Atmospheric nitrogen deposition in sensitive watersheds can increase stream water nitrate concentrations; the added nitrate can remain in the water and be transported long distances downstream. ( U. S. EPA, " Nitrogen Oxides: Impacts on Public Health and the Environment,"

EPA 452/ R 97 002, August 1997.)

21Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( World Meteorological Organization/ United Nations Environment Program), " Aviation and the Global Atmosphere,'' Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 23 B. NOx and Ozone NOx and volatile organic compounds ( VOC) are precursors in the photochemical reaction which forms tropospheric ozone. Ground level ozone, the main ingredient in smog, is formed by complex chemical reactions of NOx and VOCs in the presence of heat and sunlight.

Based on a large number of studies, we have identified several key health effects caused when people are exposed to levels of ozone found today in many areas of the country. A large body of evidence shows that ozone can cause harmful respiratory effects including chest pain,

coughing, and shortness of breath, which affect people with compromised respiratory systems most severely. When inhaled, ozone can cause acute respiratory problems; aggravate asthma;

cause significant temporary decreases in lung function of 15 to over 20 percent in some healthy adults; cause inflammation of lung tissue; produce changes in lung tissue and structure; may increase hospital admissions and emergency room visits; and impair the body's immune system defenses, making people more susceptible to respiratory illnesses. Children and outdoor workers are likely to be exposed to elevated ambient levels of ozone during exercise and, therefore, are at a greater risk of experiencing adverse health effects. 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.

1999. A copy of this document can be found at the Cambridge University Press' web site at www. cup. org or Docket No. OAR 2002 0030, Document No, __ ___. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 24 There is strong and convincing evidence that exposure to ozone is associated with exacerbation of asthma related symptoms. Increases in ozone concentrations in the air have been associated with increases in hospitalization for respiratory causes for individuals with asthma,

worsening of symptoms, decrements in lung function, and increased medication use, and chronic exposure may cause permanent lung damage. The risk of suffering these effects is particularly high for children and for people with compromised respiratory systems.

In addition to the health effects described above, there exists a large body of scientific literature that shows that harmful effects can occur from sustained levels of ozone exposure at low levels. 22 Studies of prolonged exposures, those lasting about 7 hours, show health effects from prolonged and repeated exposures at moderate levels of exertion to ozone concentrations as low as 0.08 ppm. The health effects at these levels of exposure include transient pulmonary function responses, transient respiratory symptoms, effects on exercise performance, increased airway responsiveness, increased susceptibility to respiratory infection, increased hospital and emergency room visits, and transient pulmonary respiratory inflammation.

The current primary and secondary ozone NAAQS is 0.12 ppm daily maximum 1 hour concentration, not to be exceeded more than once per year on average. EPA is replacing the 22Additional information about these studies can be found in Chapter 2 of " Regulatory Impact Analysis: Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements," December 2000, EPA420 R 00 026. Docket No. OAR 2002 0030,

Document XX A XX. This document is also available at http:// www. epa. gov/ otaq/ diesel. htm# documents. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 25 previous 1 hour ozone standard with a new 8 hour standard. The new standard is set at a concentration of 0.08 parts per million ( ppm), and the measurement period is 8 hours. Areas are allowed to disregard their three worst measurements every year and average performance over three years to determine if they meet the standard. That is, the standard is set by the 4th highest maximum 8 hour concentration.

Ground level ozone today remains a pervasive pollution problem in the United States.

About 51 million people live in areas with design values above the level of the 1 hour ozone standard based on three years of data ( 1999 2001). In addition, about 111 million people live in areas with design values above the 8 hour ozone standard based on those three years of data.

Approximately 61 million of these people live in areas with design values above the 8 hour standard but are below the design standard for the 1 hour ozone standard ( i. e., they are attaining the 1 hour standard). The remainder of these people live in areas with design values above the 8

hour ozone standards but are above the design value for the 1 hour ozone standard ( i. e., they are not attaining the 1 hour standard). 23 This represents 291 counties with design values above the level of the 8 hour standard.

Over the last decade, declines in ozone levels were found mostly in urban areas, where emissions are heavily influenced by controls on mobile sources and their fuels. Twenty three 23Memorandum to Docket A 2001 11 from Fred Dimmick, Group Leader, Air Trends Group, " Summary of Currently Available Air Quality Data and Ambient Concentrations for Ozone and Particulate Matter," December 3, 2002, Air Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No.

XX B XX. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 26 metropolitan areas have realized a decline in ozone levels since 1989, but at the same time ozone levels in 11 metropolitan areas with 7 million people have increased. 24 Regionally, California and the Northeast have recorded significant reductions in peak ozone levels, while four other regions ( the Mid Atlantic, the Southeast, the Central and Pacific Northwest) have seen ozone levels increase. The highest ambient concentrations are currently found in suburban areas,

consistent with downwind transport of emissions from urban centers. Concentrations in rural areas have risen to the levels previously found only in cities.

C. NOx and Secondary Particulate Matter NOx emitted at low altitude is also a precursor in the formation of some nitrate particulate matter ( PM) in the atmosphere ( mostly ammonium nitrate). 25 In general, nitrate PM is a significant contributor to overall ambient PM concentrations in many parts of the western U. S.,

24National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1998, March, 2000, at 28. This document is available at http:// www. epa. gov/ oar/ aqtrnd98/. Relevant pages of this report can be found in ________. This _________ is available in Air Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No.

_____.

25Secondary PM is formed when NOx reacts with ammonia in the atmosphere to yield ammonium nitrate particulate. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 27 and thus, contributes to the overall health and welfare concerns related to PM. 26 Essentially all nitrate PM is of such a diameter that it is respirable in humans.

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

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

26As a national average, each 100 tons of NOx reduction will result in about 4 tons of secondary PM reduction. This conversion rate varies from region to region, and is greatest in the West. ( U. S. EPA, Final Rule, " Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Nonroad Diesel Engines, 63 FR 56967, October 23, 1998.) Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 28 A. What Emission Standards Are Under Consideration?

As discussed earlier in sections II and III of today's notice, section 231( a)( 2)( A) of the CAA authorizes EPA to establish emission standards for aircraft engine emissions "... which in [ her] judgment causes, or contributes to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." The Administrator may revise such standards from " time to time." CAA section 231( b) requires that any emission standards provide sufficient lead time " to permit the development and application of the requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to the cost of compliance within such period."

Today's rule proposes near term standards that will go into effect in 2004 to ensure future engines do not jeopardize recent or past technology gains. These standards are equivalent to the CAEP/ 4 NOx international consensus emissions standards for aircraft engines adopted by ICAO's CAEP in 1998.27 EPA intends to promulgate these standards by January 2004 in order to be consistent with U. S. obligations under ICAO. At the same time, EPA anticipates establishing more stringent NOx standards in the future. EPA will participate at CAEP/ 6 ( sixth meeting of CAEP), which is scheduled in early 2004, to establish more stringent international consensus emission standards for aircraft engines. Such standards will likely be a central consideration in a future EPA regulation of aircraft engine emissions.

27ICAO, CAEP, Fourth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, April 6 8, 1998, Report, Document 9720, CAEP/ 4. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 29 We believe this two step approach is the most appropriate means to address emissions from aircraft engines in this rulemaking. It would codify current practice, with no significant lead time, as a near term approach. 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 IV. A. 2 and IV. A. 3. for further discussion of future standards).

1. Today's Proposed NOx Standards EPA proposes to adopt standards equivalent to ICAO's 1999 NOx emission standards for newly certified aircraft gas turbine engines ( turbofan and turbojet engines) of rated thrust or output greater than 26.7 kilonewtons ( kN) with compliance dates as follows: 28 For engines of a type or model of which that date of manufacture of the first individual production model was after December 31, 2003:

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

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

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

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

28This proposal includes standards for low, mid, and high thrust engines ( see below for further discussion of the different standards based on the thrust of the engines) . Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 30 NOx = ( 37.572 + 1.6( rated pressure ratio)  0.2087( rated output)) g/ kN( rated output)

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

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

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

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

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

0.00642( rated pressure ratio

rated output)) g/ kN( rated output)

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

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

The NOx emission standards presented above are equivalent to the ICAO NOx standards that will become effective after December 31, 2003.

i. Rationale of Proposed NOx Standards for Newly Certified Mid and High Thrust Engines EPA is proposing to adopt NOx standards for newly certified mid and high thrust engines ( those engines designed and certified after the effective date of the proposed regulations,

which have a rated output or thrust greater than 89 kN) that represent about a 16 percent Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 31 reduction ( or increase in stringency) from the existing standard. 29 ( See section IV. A. 1( a)( 1) and IV. A. 1( b)( 1) above for the standards for mid and high thrust engines.) The proposed standards ensure that new engine designs would incorporate the existing combustor technology and would not perform worse than today's current engines. EPA intends to promulgate these standards by January 2004 in order to be consistent with U. S. obligations under ICAO. ( See section II. B for a discussion of the obligation of ICAO's participating nations). At this time, there is not sufficient lead time to require more stringent emission standards than the CAEP/ 4 NOx emission standards by January 2004. As discussed later in section IV. A. 2 for future standards, we are deferring action on more stringent NOx standards because pursuant to section 231( b) of the CAA we need more time to better understand the cost of compliance with such standards, and additional cost data is expected to be available from CAEP/ 6 in early 2004 ( see section IV. A. 2 for further discussion regarding lead time).

29 The proposed NOx standards, which are equivalent to the CAEP/ 4 standards, represent a 16 percent reduction from the existing standards at a rated pressure ratio of 30. At rated pressure ratios of 10 and 20 , the proposed standards correspond to 27 and 20 percent reductions,

respectively. In addition, at rated pressure ratios of 40 and 50, the proposed NOx standards signify 9 and 4 percent reductions, respectively. Also, the proposed and existing standards are equivalent at a rated pressure ratio of 62.5. See Figure 1 in section IV. B. for a comparison of the proposed ( or CAEP/ 4) NOx standards to the existing ( or CAEP/ 2) standards. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 32 EPA believes that the proposed standards would not impose any additional burden on manufacturers, because manufacturers' are already designing new engines to meet the ICAO international consensus standards by 2004 ( see section VII of today's notice for further discussion of regulatory impact). Even though the U. S. did not immediately adopt the ICAO NOx standards after 1999, engine manufacturers have continued to make progress in reducing these emissions. Today's proposed standards are aimed at assuring that this progress is not reversed in the future.

ii. Rationale of Proposed NOx Standards for Newly Certified Low Thrust Engines For newly certified low thrust engines ( engines with a thrust or rated output of more than 26.7 kN but not more than 89.0 kN), EPA is today proposing to adopt near term NOx standards that are different than the standards proposed for mid and high thrust engines ( engines with thrust greater than 89.0 kN). 30 In addition to rated pressure ratio, the proposed standards for low

30 Today's proposed NOx standards for low thrust or small engines specify that engines with a rated output or thrust at 26.7 kN meet the existing standard, and engines with a rated output at 89 kN meet the proposed ( or CAEP/ 4) standards. For engines with rated outputs or thrust levels between 26.7 and 89 kN, a linear interpolation was made between the low range of the existing standard and the high range of the proposed standard based upon the rated output to determine the proposed NOx limits for such engines. Thus, thrust dependent standards are being proposed for engines with rated output or thrust between 26.7 kN and 89 kN. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 33 thrust engines would also be dependent on an engine's thrust or rated output. 31 ( See section IV. A. 1( a)( 2) and IV. A. 1( b)( 2) for a description of these different standards.) For example, at a rated pressure ratio of 30 and a thrust of 58 kN ( thrust level in the middle of 26.7 kN and 89 kN),

these proposed standards are an 8 percent reduction ( or increase in stringency) from the existing standard compared to a 16 percent reduction for the proposed standards for mid and high thrust engines. 32 The existing standards were not set at stringency level that created a need for low thrust engines to have different requirements, but at the level of NOx stringency proposed today different standards are considered necessary for such engines. Due to their physical size, it is 31The proposed standards for mid and high thrust engines are dependent only on an engine's rated pressure ratio.

32Additional examples of the proposed standards for low thrust engines in comparison to the proposed standards for mid and high thrust engines are provided below. At rated pressure ratios of 10 and 20 with a thrust of 58 kN, the proposed low thrust engine standards are a 14 and 10 percent reduction from the existing standard, respectively. Whereas, at these same rated pressure ratios, the proposed standards for mid and high thrust engines are 27 and 20 percent reductions.

In addition, at rated pressure ratios of 40 and 50 with a thrust of 58 kN, these low thrust engine standards signify a 5 and 2 percent reduction from the existing standard, respectively. In comparison, at these same rated pressure ratios, the proposed standards for mid and high thrust engines are 9 and 4 percent reductions. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 34 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). 33 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. 34 Also, fuel staged combustors need more fuel injectors, and this need is not compatible with the relatively lower total fuel flows of lower thrust engines. ( Reductions in fuel flow per nozzle are difficult to attain without having clogging problems due to the small sizes of the fuel metering ports.) In addition,

lower thrust engine combustors have an inherently greater liner surface to combustion volume ratio, and this requires increased wall cooling air flow. Thus, less air would be available to obtain acceptable turbine inlet temperature distribution and for emissions control. 35 Since the 33ICAO/ CAEP, Report of Third Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, December 5 15, 1995, Document 9675, CAEP/ 3. A copy of this report can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No.

_____).

34" 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.)

35ICAO/ CAEP Working Group 3 ( Emissions), " Combined Report of the Certification and Technology Subgroups," section <IP_ADDRESS>, Presented by the Chairman of the Technology Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 35 difficulties increase progressively as engine thrust size is reduced, EPA believes it would be appropriate to make a graded change in stringency of the proposed NOx standards for low thrust engines.

EPA intends to promulgate these standards for low thrust engines by January 2004 in order to be consistent with its obligations under ICAO. Currently, there is not sufficient lead time to require more stringent emission standards than the CAEP/ 4 NOx emission standards by January 2004. As discussed later in section IV. A. 2 and IV. A. 3. for future standards, we are deferring action on more stringent NOx standards because pursuant to section 231( b) of the CAA we need more time to better understand the cost of compliance with such standards, and additional cost data is expected to be available from CAEP/ 6 in early 2004 ( see section IV. A. 2 and IV. A. 3. for further discussion regarding lead time).

2. Future NOx Standards for Newly Certified Mid and High Thrust Engines More stringent standards will be necessary in the future. As discussed earlier in section III, the substantial growth in aircraft emissions is occurring at a time when other mobile source categories are reducing emissions. FAA reports that flights of commercial air carriers will increase by 21 percent by 2010 and 35 percent by 2015.36 In addition, the 1999 EPA study of Subgroup, Third Meeting, Bonn, Germany, June 1995. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____)

36The flight forecast data is based on FAA's Terminal Area Forecast System ( TAFS). TAFs is Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 36 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 these 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 2010.37 Thus, based on these trends more stringent NOx standards than the proposed standards are needed in the future to reduce aircraft NOx emissions in nonattainment areas.

Further stringency of the NOx standards would reduce the expected growth in commercial aircraft emissions. The importance of controlling aircraft emissions has grown in many areas ( especially areas not meeting the 1 hour and 8 hour ozone NAAQS) as controls on other sources become more stringent and attainment of the NAAQS's has still not been achieved. ( Many the official forecast of aviation activity at FAA facilities. This includes FAA towered airports,

federally contracted towered airports, nonfederal towered airports, and many non towered airports. For detailed information on TAFS and the air carrier activity forecasts see the following FAA website: http:// www. apo. data. faa. gov/ faatafall. HTM. As of December 9, 2002,

the aviation forecasts contained in TAFS for Fiscal Years 2001 2015 do not incorporate any impact of the September 11 terrorist attacks. The forecasts do, however, provide government and aviation planners with a valuable benchmark to measure the impact of the September 11 events.

37U. S. EPA, " Evaluation of Air Pollutant Emissions from Subsonic Commercial Jet Aircraft,"

April 1999, EPA420 R 99 013. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 37 airports in the U. S. are located in nonattainment areas. 38) As activity increases, aircraft are emitting increasing amounts of NOx in many nonattainment areas, and thus, aircraft emissions further aggravate the problems in these areas ( either by emitting pollutants directly within a nonattainment area or by contributing to regional transport emissions in an area upwind of a nonattainment area). More stringent aircraft engine NOx standards would assist in alleviating these problems in nonattainment areas, and they would aid in preventing future concerns in areas currently designated as attainment ( or maintenance) areas. In addition, attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS requires that aircraft engines be subject to a program of control compatible with their significance as pollution sources.

EPA, therefore, is considering more stringent future standards, beyond today's proposed standards. Leading up to CAEP/ 6 in early 2004, one of the objectives of CAEP ( and/ or the international aviation community) is to consider more stringent aircraft engine standards than CAEP/ 4 standards for all gaseous emissions, especially NOx. 39 In September 2002, the CAEP 38For information on the geographic location of airports, see the following U. S. Department of Transportation ( Bureau of Transportation Statistics) website: www. bts. gov. oai. The report or database provided on the website entitled, " Airport Activity Statistics of Certificated Air Carriers: Summary Tables 2000," lists airports by community. In addition, see the following EPA website for information on nonattainment areas for criteria pollutants:

www. epa. gov/ oar/ oaqps/ greenbk.

39ICAO, CAEP, Fifth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, January 1 17, 2001, " Report on Agenda Item Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 38 Steering Group directed CAEP's Working Group 3 ( Emissions Technical Issues Working Group) and Forecasting and Economic Analysis Support Group ( FESG) to analyze the following six options for further NOx stringency, with an implementation date of 2012: 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 percent for newly certified engines. 40 Based on the results of this analysis, a proposal for more stringent NOx standards is expected to be made at CAEP/ 6.41 ( No changes to the standards of other pollutants, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, are anticipated.) EPA is currently working with FAA and Working Group 3 ( as described in section V) in the evaluation of NOx stringency options for CAEP/ 6.

4," CAEP/ 5 WP/ 86, January 17, 2001. A copy of this report can be found in Docket OAR 2002

0030, Document No. _____).

40ICAO, CAEP, Steering Group Meeting, Paris, France, September 10 13, 2002, " Summary of Discussions and Decisions of the Second Meeting of the Steering Group," September 11, 2002,

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

Document No. _____). FESG is analyzing the costs and emission reductions of the these stringency options. More recently, FESG agreed to also analyze the six options for an implementation date of 2008.

41ICAO, CAEP, Steering Group Meeting, Paris, France, September 10 13, 2002, " Summary of Discussions and Decisions of the First Meeting of the Steering Group," September 10, 2002,

CAEP SG20022 SD/ 1. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030,

Document No. _____). Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 39 Manufacturers should be able to achieve additional reductions with more lead time than is provided by today's proposal. After CAEP/ 6, we would assess whether or not the new international consensus and longer term standards ( which are expected to be adopted) would be stringent enough to protect the U. S. public health and welfare. If so, we would propose to adopt the CAEP/ 6 NOx standards soon thereafter. If not, we would plan to seek additional emissions reductions by either pursuing further stringency in emission standards at the next meeting of CAEP ( CAEP meetings typically occur every three years) or soon begin taking action independently in the U. S. ( e. g., initiate EPA rulemaking for more stringent standards or voluntary agreements as described in section VI). Prior to deciding on the course of action to take after CAEP/ 6, EPA would consult with the FAA.

Deferring EPA regulatory action on more stringent future standards until after CAEP/ 6 will allow us to obtain important additional information on the costs and emissions reductions of such standards. As discussed earlier, FESG is currently analyzing the costs and emission benefits ( taking into account lead time) for the six options of further NOx stringency ( beyond the CAEP/ 4 standards) being considered for CAEP/ 6. After evaluating such information, we will then be better situated to make decisions on an appropriate level of stringency and implementation timing that maximizes emission reductions from aircraft engines, taking into consideration cost.

In addition, if we address more stringent future standards in accordance with CAEP/ 6 action, we would have the benefits of harmonizing with international standards. 42 Due to the 42As discussed earlier, the U. S. has an obligation to be compatible with the ICAO program if Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 40 international nature of the aviation industry, setting NOx standards at the appropriate level to meet U. S. air quality needs through international consensus provides the potential for greater environmental benefits. Aircraft and aircraft engines are international commodities, and they are designed and built to meet international standards. Adoption of international standards ensures emission reductions from domestic and foreign aircraft in the U. S. In addition, international consensus standards lead to air quality benefits in the U. S. and throughout the world.

As described earlier in this notice, section 231 of the CAA authorizes EPA from " time to time" to revisit emission standards, and it requires that any standards' effective dates permit the development of necessary technology, giving appropriate consideration to the cost. As we discussed above, we are not proposing more stringent NOx standards today primarily because we need more time to better understand the cost of compliance of such standards, and additional cost data is expected to be available from CAEP/ 6 in early 2004. Producing ( and/ or developing) new engines or engine technologies requires significant financial investments from engine manufacturers, which takes time to recoup ( the amount of time depends upon sales of engines,

replacement parts, etc.), and deferring action on further stringency until after CAEP/ 6, would enable us to be more informed regarding such investments and better positioned to make decisions on more stringent standards. In addition, working through the international consensus process for more stringent standards would have the benefits described earlier in this section.

We request comment on the six options for further NOx stringency being considered for CAEP/ 6,

including the implementation timing. Commenters suggesting further stringency at this time deemed appropriate. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 41 should specify the stringency option( s) and implementation date( s) they prefer, and to the extent possible provide cost, technical, and other justification for such options and dates. Also, we solicit comment on our intent to defer action on more stringent standards until after CAEP/ 6,

which is scheduled to occur in early 2004.

3. Future NOx Standards for Newly Certified Low Thrust Engines As described earlier in section IV. A. 2., there is a need for more stringent standards in the future, and low thrust engines would be included in EPA's future plans to pursue further NOx stringency. For the six stringency options being analyzed by CAEP's Working Group 3 and FESG for CAEP/ 6, they each have different standards for low thrust engines. These potential low thrust engine standards are all more stringent than the standards proposed today for lowthrust engines. With more lead time than provided in today's proposal, manufacturers should be able to meet these levels of further stringency. Similar to the future standards for mid to highthrust engines, we would assess the appropriateness of international standards for low thrust engines after CAEP/ 6.

Deferring EPA regulatory action on more stringent future standards for low thrust engines until after CAEP/ 6 will enable us to obtain additional information on the technological feasibility, costs, and emission reductions of such standards. After analyzing such information,

we would be in a better position to determine the appropriate level of stringency for standards in the future. We request comment on our intent to defer action on more stringent standards for low thrust engines until after CAEP/ 6, which is scheduled to occur in early 2004. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 42 B. Already Certified, Newly Manufactured Engines Under current rules, the proposed NOx standards would not apply to already certified,

newly manufactured engines ( in production engines or engines built after the effective date of the proposed standards), and the rationale for not applying these standards to already certified low, mid, and high thrust engines is discussed below. Nearly all already certified engines ( 94 percent of in production engine models in the ICAO Engine Exhaust Emissions Data Bank43)

currently meet or perform better than the standards we are proposing to adopt today. 44 ( See 43 International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO), Engine Exhaust Emissions Data Bank, July 2002. This data bank is available at http:// www. QinetiQ. com/ aviation_ emissions_ databank. A copy of this data can also be found in Docket No. OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____. In addition, a copy of a table including data of engine NOx emissions from the ICAO data bank and their margin to the proposed NOx standards can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____.

44 116 out of 124 engines ( 94 percent of engine models in production) perform better than the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards. The 8 in production mid and high thrust engines that are not achieving the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards are three different Pratt and Whitney ( PW) engine types or families   engine and their thrust variants with the same build standard   as follows: ( 1) JT8D 217C and Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 43 Figure 1 below for a comparison of the NOx emission levels of current in production engines to the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards. 45) At the time the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards were adopted in 1998, all JT8D 219, ( 2) PW4077D, PW4084D, and PW4090 and ( 3) PW4164, PW4168, and PW4168A.

( See Figure 1 below that specifically shows these 8 in production models in relation to the proposed or CAEP/ 4 standards.) The JT8D 217C and JT8D 219 engines have combustors described as environmental kits ( E kit) in the ICAO Engine Exhaust Emissions Data Bank.

In addition, these 116 engine models represent 98 percent of the total population of engines installed on in production aircraft. If out of production aircraft for the environmental kits listed above are included ( potentially these E kits could be installed in engines utilized on out of production aircraft), the 8 engines that are not achieving the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards could represent about 10 percent of the in production market ( JP Fleet International Data from Peter Norman of QinetiQ , June 2002). [ Note to FAA: Do you have data available to verify the percentage of market values listed above and to determine the fraction of U. S. LTOs from in production aircraft with these engines ( relative to total in production aircraft U. S.

LTOs)? Maybe we could work together to generate a table for the docket that lists the number of engines in the market for each in production engine listed in the ICAO Data Bank. Such data would help the reader better understand the effect of the proposed standards.]

45 For Figure 1, the Allison, Rolls Royce, and Textron Lycoming engines with rated pressure ratios less than 20 and NOx levels above the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards actually perform better than the standards, since there are different CAEP/ 4 NOx standards for these low thrust engines ( see Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 44 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. 46 Based on a recent FESG analysis of applying the CAEP/ 4 standards to already certified engines ( at dates 2, 4, and 6 years after the implementation date for newly certified engines), from those 16 engine models identified in 1998 today there are only 4 already certified engine models or two engine families remaining that would not meet the CAEP/ 4 standards. 47 The other engine models have either, through additional testing or section IV. A. 1. ii. for further discussion of NOx standards for low thrust engines). ( 16 of the 124 engines, 13 percent of engine models in production, in Figure 1 and the ICAO Engine Exhaust Emissions Data Bank are low   thrust engines   engines with thrust greater than 26.7 kN but not more than 89 kN.)

46 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.

47CAEP Steering Group Meeting, " FESG Economic Assessment of Applying a Production Cut

Off To the CAEP/ 4 NOx Standard", Presented by the FESG Co Rapporteurs, Paris, September 10 13, 2002 ( CAEP SG20022 WP/ 20, September 12, 2002). The remaining already certified engine models are the JT8D 217C, JT8D 219, PW4084D, and PW4090. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 45 modifications, been improved to meet the standards or the engines are no longer in production. 48 ( There is only one remaining newly designed engine model   out of the five identified in 1998   that may be certified after 2003, and thus, it would need to meet the CAEP/ 4 or proposed standards for newly certified engines, which are effective beginning in 2004.) 49 48 Only the first and second engine types of the three PW types described earlier would not meet the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards if they were applied to newly manufactured or already certified engines. The PW4077D is a derated version of the PW4084D, and it is essentially considered the same engine. In addition, the PW4077D has a NOx level that is 0.2 percent greater than the CAEP/ 4 standards. FESG rounded this margin to zero and considered the PW4077D to be meeting the NOx levels of the CAEP/ 4 standards. The third engine type   PW4164, PW4168 and PW4168A engines  are now certified with the PW 4168 Technologically Affordable Low NOx ( Talon) II engine combustor technology, which performs significantly better than the CAEP/ 4 standards.

49 The PW Canada growth engine is the one remaining newly designed engine model. The ICAO Engine Exhaust Emissions Data Bank currently does not have emissions certification data for such an engine, and thus, we anticipate that the PW Canada growth engine would still be affected by the proposed standards. Yet, due to the CAEP/ 4 standards already established, we expect that PW Canada has already planned modifications for this engine or any other newly certified engines to meet today's proposed standards. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 46 INSERT FIGURE 1 The recent FESG analysis indicates that the environmental benefit ( or NOx emissions reduction) of applying the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards to already certified engines, which would only affect these 4 remaining engines, would be very small. As mentioned earlier, the remaining four already certified ( or in production) engines that perform worse than the CAEP/ 4 or proposed standards are the following Pratt and Whitney ( PW) mid and high thrust engines: JT8D 217C,

JT8D 219, PW4084D, and PW4090. The in production JT8D 217C and JT8D 219 engines could potentially apply to future supersonic business jets, and the aircraft application for PW4084D and 4090 engines would be the Boeing 777 200s and  300s. Since business jets have a very low utilization ( about 100 to 200 annual departures per aircraft), the emission reductions from potential new JT8D 217C and JT8D 219 applications would be very small irregardless of the size of the supersonic business jet market. If the potential JT8D 217C and JT8D 219 supersonic business jets were to capture the entire projected supersonic business jet market ( 200 to 400 aircraft over a 10 year period or 20 to 40 aircraft per year), the total estimated annual departures would be about 2,000 to 8,000. For the years 2005 and 2010, there are estimated to be from 23 to 27 million departures from the global passenger aircraft fleet ( the potential supersonic business jet market could potentially be about .01 to .03 percent of these global fleet departures), so the resulting NOx emission benefits would be very small. 50 In regard to Boeing 50CAEP Steering Group Meeting, " FESG Economic Assessment of Applying a Production Cut Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 47 777 aircraft with PW4084D/ 4090 engines, the incremental departures for such aircraft are projected to be no greater than 0.1 percent per year ( up to 25,500 departures in 2010); therefore,

the resulting NOx emissions reductions would also be considered very small. ( The FESG assessment also showed that the costs of applying the CAEP/ 4 standards to already certified engines would be relatively small on an industry wide basis.) 51 Consequently, we would expect there to be minimal environmental benefit to also apply the proposed and CAEP/ 4 NOx standards for newly certified engines to already certified, newly manufactured engines for an effective date after 2003 ( the implementation date of today's proposed standards is December 31, 2003).

Also, if an already certified engine design meets the standards that we are proposing today, then it is unlikely that either existing or future engine designs built to that design or type ( derivatives or thrust variants with the same build standard) will not meet these standards. When design modifications are made to an existing engine type, then this engine type would likely need to be re certified. A re certified engine type would be required to comply with the CAEP/ 4 and new proposed NOx standards.

For the remaining 4 engines ( or two engine families) being built that do not meet the CAEP/ 4 standards, Pratt and Whitney has other in production engine models ( potentially derived Off To the CAEP/ 4 NOx Standard", Presented by the FESG Co Rapporteurs, Paris, September 10 13, 2002 ( CAEP SG20022 WP/ 20, September 12, 2002). In particular, see Table 5.1 entitled, " Excerpt from FESG CAEP/ 5 Traffic and Fleet Mix Forecast."

51The costs of applying CAEP/ 4 standards to already certified engines would impact just one engine manufacturer. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 48 versions or thrust variants of engines with the same build standard) or replacement/ alternative engines that perform better than the proposed NOx standards and that are also similar in size and aircraft application. 52 For example, the PW 4098 engine would achieve the NOx levels of the proposed standards, and similar to the PW4090 it is utilized on the Boeing 777 200 and 777 300.

Due to the 1998 CAEP/ 4 NOx standards, Pratt and Whitney has recently certified and manufactured these other or replacement engines. Also, based upon the CAEP/ 4 standards, they have already targeted future ( after 2003) engine designs for modification so that newly certified or designed engines would meet today's proposed NOx standards. Therefore, it appears unlikely that a substantial number of the 4 remaining engines would be built or sold in the future, unless they were produced as spare engines ( replacement engines for existing aircraft instead of newly manufactured aircraft).

1. Effect of Market Forces In 1998, FESG indicated at CAEP/ 4 that "... market forces and potential local/ regional operating restrictions might encourage the manufactures to modify their existing products, so 52Although the remaining 4 engines ( or two engine families) currently being built are expected to still be in production in year 2004, they would not be required to meet the proposed standards. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 49 that they, too, comply with the proposed stringency." 53 These modifications to in production engines would be considered " voluntary environmental enhancement." 54 Thus, there was significant consideration at CAEP/ 4 given to the effect that new NOx standards for newly certified engines would potentially have on in production or already certified engines. Many parties within CAEP and its working groups consider market forces to have a real and tangible effect on newly manufactured or already certified engines, even though such engines are not required to comply with the new standards. We are unaware of any new local/ regional operating 53ICAO, CAEP/ 4, Working Paper 4, " Economic Assessment of the EPG NOx Stringency Proposal," March 12, 1998, Presented by the Chairman of FESG, Agenda Item 1: Review of proposals relating to NOx emissions, including the amendment of Annex 16, Volume II, section 3.3.2 of the paper. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No.

_____)

54However, FESG indicated that the "... the development of production engine emissions enhancements would only occur if the market place showed enough interest in the enhancements or if the failure to meet the proposed stringency became a competitive disadvantage." ( ICAO,

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

March 12, 1998, Presented by the Chairman of FESG, Agenda Item 1: Review of proposals relating to NOx emissions, including the amendment of Annex 16, Volume II, section 5.6.2 of the paper. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____) Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 50 restrictions being implemented throughout the world due to the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards.

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

2. Impact of Existing Fleet Aircraft An element of the emissions proposals made at CAEP/ 4 was to increase NOx stringency as far as possible without affecting the existing fleet aircraft asset values, and this was proposed to be achieved by applying the new stringency to new engine designs only ( newly certified engines). 55 Two studies on whether the financial value of existing aircraft assets were affected by the CAEP/ 2 NOx standards were reviewed for CAEP/ 4, and the studies did not reveal any correlation between approval of the CAEP/ 2 emissions standards and aircraft values. Thus,

FESG was unable to definitively assess the effect CAEP/ 4 NOx standards would have on fleet aircraft values. 56 ( The scope of the two studies and their ground rules were set by FESG.) These 55ICAO, CAEP, Fourth Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, April 6 8, 1998, Report, Document 9720,

CAEP/ 4.

56ICAO, CAEP/ 4, Working Paper 4, " Economic Assessment of the EPG NOx Stringency Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 51 studies showed that a large number of factors impact aircraft asset values.

3. Request for Comment on Applying the Proposed NOx standards to Already Certified Engines We are requesting comment on whether to apply the proposed NOx standards to engines built to already certified engine designs. 57 Although there is expected to be minimal environmental benefits ( as well as relatively small costs) from such a requirement, it would ensure that manufacturers could not indefinitely produce existing engines that do not meet these standards ( four such in production or already certified engines models exist today). 58 Historically, EPA and ICAO have applied emission standards to already certified engines, and thus, such requirements for today's proposed standards would maintain this practice. 59 Yet, in Proposal," March 12, 1998, Presented by the Chairman of FESG, Agenda Item 1: Review of proposals relating to NOx emissions, including the amendment of Annex 16, Volume II, section 4 of the paper. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No.

_____.

57Spare engines for existing aircraft would not be covered by such a requirement.

58Nearly all engines built to already certified engine designs are unlikely to be out of compliance with the proposed NOx standards.

59EPA promulgated a HC standard in 1982 that applied to newly manufactured engines beginning in 1984. Also, the original ICAO NOx, HC, and CO standards approved in 1981 Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 52 contrast to past practices for aircraft engine standards, all current CAA Title II ( Emission Standards for Moving Sources) emission standard programs involving new standards ( besides aircraft engine NOx standards) apply to newly manufactured engines or vehicles based on the certification model year ( new standards apply to newly and already certified engines or vehicles in the same year). In these programs, EPA has incorporated emission averaging programs to make a more orderly product phase in and phase out. However, averaging is not part of the ICAO protocol, and it is not clear that it is of any value here since most in production engines already meet the proposed standards. In particular, we solicit comment on the rationale discussed above for applying the proposed standards to already certified engines, including whether an emission averaging program for such engines would be useful.

As discussed earlier, FESG and Working Group 3 are currently considering applying the 1998 CAEP/ 4 NOx standards to already certified engines. The implementation dates being analyzed for such a requirement are 2, 4, and 6 years after December 31, 2003 ( the implementation date for newly certified engines). Based on the results of the complete assessment ( which are not yet available), FESG and Working Group 3 are expected to recommend an implementation date for applying the CAEP/ 4 standards to already certified applied to newly manufactured engines starting in 1986. In 1997, EPA adopted this CO standard, which was to be implemented later that same year for newly manufactured engines. In addition, the March 24, 1993 ICAO amendment to tighten the original NOx standard by 20 percent ( CAEP/ 2 standards), which EPA adopted in 1997, applied to newly certified engines beginning in 1996 and newly manufactured engines in 2000. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 53 engines at CAEP/ 6 in early 2004 ( a decision on this date is also expected at CAEP/ 6). 60 If this requirement and date is accepted at CAEP/ 6, EPA would plan to propose the new requirement soon thereafter ( see section IV. B. above for a discussion of the emission benefit of applying the proposed standards to already certified engines). We request comment on applying standards for already certified engines at a date 2, 4, and 6 years after the implementation date for new designs ( 2006, 2008, and 2010). Commenters suggesting different dates should specify the date( s) they prefer and, to the extent possible, provide technical and other justification for such suggested dates. Also, we request comment on our current intent to not propose standards for already certified engines until after a CAEP/ 6 decision is made on this issue.

C. Amendments to Criteria on Calibration and Test Gases for Gaseous Emissions Test and Measurement Procedures 60The FESG analysis mentioned earlier ( CAEP SG20022 WP/ 20, September 12, 2002) addresses the impact of applying the CAEP/ 4 NOx standards to already certified engines at 2, 4, and 6 years after the implementation date of the CAEP/ 4 standards for newly certified engines. Yet,

further assessment of the NOx emission reductions was requested by the Steering Group for the next meeting in mid 2003. ( ICAO, CAEP, Steering Group Meeting, Paris, France, September 10 13, 2002, " Summary of Discussions and Decisions of the First Meeting of the Steering Group," September 10, 2002, CAEP SG20022 SD/ 1. See page 3. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____). Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 54 In today's proposed rule, EPA proposes to incorporate by reference ICAO's 1997 amendments to the criteria on calibration and test gases for the test procedures of gaseous emissions ( ICAO International Standards and Recommended Practices Environmental Protection, Annex 16, Volume II,    Aircraft Engine Emissions,'' Second Edition, July 1993;

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

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

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

" Corrections to Annex 16, Volume II," that stated the following: 61 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 61Russian Federation, " Corrections to Annex 16, Volume II," Agenda Item 2: Review of reports of working groups relating to engine emissions and the development of recommendations to the Council thereon, Working Paper 19, Presented by A. A. Gorbatko, November 11, 1995 ( distributed November 30, 1995), CAEP/ 3, Montreal, December 5 to 15, 1995. A copy of this paper can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No. _____) Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 55 with " CO2 in air" gas. At the same time the following sub paragraph was newly introduced into Attachment B ( Appendices 3 and 5) :

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

Since the best way to carry out this checking procedure is to calibrate the analyzer first with CO2 in nitrogen and then with CO2 in air, both " CO2 in N2" and " CO2 in air" gases have to be retained in the list. It seems then that " CO in air," " CO2 in air," " NO in N2" and now " CO2 in N2" have to be replaced with " CO in zero air," " CO2 in zero air," " CO2 in zero nitrogen" and " NO in zero nitrogen" just by analogy with the gaseous mixtures of different hydrocarbons diluted by zero air and listed in the same table.

In addition, at CAEP/ 3 the United Kingdom then presented a working paper on this same issue. 62 They indicated that CAEP's Working Group 3 ( Emissions Working Group) had 62United 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 Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 56 accepted the above proposals of the Russian Federation paper on correcting inconsistencies in the list of calibration and test gases specified in Annex 16, Volume II, Attachment D to Appendices 3 and 5, and Working Group 3 had recommended that these proposals be presented at CAEP/ 3. The United Kingdom also recommended the adoption of these Russian Federation proposals   to utilize CO2 in nitrogen gas mixture to check the effect of oxygen on CO2 analyzers. In addition, they recommended the specification of all calibration and test gases required for all the gaseous emissions tests required in Annex 16.

At CAEP/ 3, the CAEP members agreed that the above amendments to the calibration and test gases were justified, and thus, these amendments were then adopted. 63 In today's notice,

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

The amendments would include the following: ( 1) listing all calibration gases separately from test gases for HC, CO2, CO and NOx analyzers, ( 2) changing " N2" to " zero nitrogen" in relation to the test gases for the HC and NOx analyzers, ( 3) adding " CO2 in zero nitrogen" as a test gas for Paper 20, Presented by M. E. Wright, November 14, 1995 ( distributed November 30, 1995),

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

2002 0030, Document No. _____)

63ICAO/ CAEP, Report of Third Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, December 5 15, 1995, Document 9675, CAEP/ 3. A copy of this report can be found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document No.

_____). Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 57 CO2 analyzer, ( 4) changing " air" to " zero air" in relation to the test gas for CO and CO2 analyzers, ( 5) revising the accuracy to "+ 1 percent" for the " propane in zero air" test gas of HC analyzer, ( 6) amending the accuracy to "+ 1 percent" for the " CO2 in zero air" test gas of CO2 analyzer, ( 7) adding the accuracy "+ 1 percent" for the " CO2 in zero nitrogen" test gas of CO2 analyzer, ( 8) changing accuracy to "+ 1 percent" for test gas of CO analyzer, and ( 9) revising accuracy to "+ 1 percent" for test gas of NOx analyzer.

Manufacturers are already voluntarily complying with ICAO's 1997 amendments to the criteria on calibration and test gases for the test procedures of gaseous emissions. Thus, formal adoption of these ICAO test procedure amendments would require no new action by manufacturers. In addition, the existence of ICAO's requirements would ensure that the costs of 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.)

D. Correction of Exemptions for Very Low Production Models Because of an editorial error, the section in the aircraft engine emission regulations regarding Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 58 exemptions for very low production models is incorrectly specified ( see section 40 CFR part 87.7( b)( 1) and ( 2)). In the October 18, 1984 final rulemaking ( 49 FR 41000), EPA intended to amend the low production engine provisions of the aircraft regulations by revising paragraph ( b)

and deleting paragraphs ( b)( 1) and ( b)( 2) in order to eliminate the maximum annual production limit of 20 engines per year. In the revisions to paragraph ( b), EPA retained the maximum total production limit of 200 units for aircraft models certified after January 1, 1984.64 For section 87.7( b), EPA today proposes to correct this editorial error by eliminating paragraph ( b)( 1) and ( b)( 2).

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

V. Coordination with FAA The requirements contained in the notice are being proposed after consultation with the Secretary of Transportation in order to assure appropriate consideration of aircraft safety. Under section 232 of the CAA, the Secretary of Transportation ( DOT), has the responsibility to enforce 64This action was taken in 1984 to provide greater flexibility to manufacturers for scheduling engine production rates during the final years. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 59 the aircraft emission standards established by EPA under section 231.65 In addition, section 231( b) of the CAA states that "[ a] ny regulation prescribed under this section * * * shall take effect ( after consultation with the Secretary of Transportation) to permit the development and application of the requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to the cost of compliance * * *." As in past rulemakings and pursuant to the above referenced sections of the CAA, EPA has coordinated with the Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) of the DOT during the process of formulating the NOx emission standards and test procedure amendments for aircraft engine emissions proposed here.

Moreover, FAA is the official U. S. delegate to ICAO. FAA agreed to the 1997 and 1999 amendments at ICAO's Third and Fourth Meetings of the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection ( CAEP 3 and 4) after advisement from EPA. 66 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 4. After assessing emissions test procedure amendments and new NOx standards, Working Group 3 made recommendations to CAEP on these elements. These recommendations were then considered at the CAEP 3 and 4 meetings, respectively, prior to their adoption by ICAO in 1997 and 1999.

65Specifically, the FAA of the DOT has the responsibility to enforce the aircraft emission standards established by EPA.

66The Third Meeting of CAEP ( CAEP/ 3) occurred in Montreal, Quebec from December 5 through 15 in 1995. CAEP/ 4 took place in Montreal from April 6 through 8, 1998. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 60 In addition, as discussed above, FAA would have the responsibility to enforce today's proposed requirements. As a part of its compliance responsibilities, FAA conducts the emission tests or delegates that responsibility to the engine manufacturer, which is then monitored by the FAA. Since the FAA does not have the resources or the funding to test engines themselves,

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

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

VI. Possible Future Aircraft Emissions Controls ( EPA/ FAA Voluntary Aviation Emissions Reduction Initiative)

It is possible that other controls may provide effective avenues to additional emissions reduction from aircraft. The Agency encourages extensive comment on the potential approach for additional reductions discussed below and any other approaches.

Concerns by state and local air agencies and environmental and public health organizations about the ICAO standards ( primarily CAEP/ 4 NOx standard), led to EPA and FAA signing a memorandum of understanding ( MOU) in March 1998 agreeing to work to identify efforts that could reduce aircraft emissions. 67 Since that time FAA and EPA have jointly chaired 67FAA and EPA, " Agreement Between Federal Aviation Administration and Environmental Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 61 a national stakeholder initiative whose goal is to develop a voluntary program to reduce pollutants from aircraft and other aviation sources that contribute to local and regional air pollution in the United States. The major stakeholders participating in this initiative include representatives of the aviation industry ( passenger and cargo airlines and engine manufacturers),

airports, state and local air pollution control officials, environmental organizations, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA)

Initially, the discussions with stakeholders focused on aircraft engine emission reduction retrofit kits, which could be applied to certain existing aircraft engines. However, as the initiative evolved, the focus was expanded by the stakeholders to consider a range of aviation emissions sources and potential control strategies. For example, not only were control strategies being evaluated that could apply to an aircraft's main engines and auxiliary power unit ( APU),

but the group was also evaluating strategies for various types of ground service equipment ( GSE)

in use at airports ( e. g., baggage tugs and fuel trucks), as well as highway vehicles operating on airport grounds ( e. g., shuttle buses) and stationary sources at airports ( e. g., boilers and repair facilities). More recently, the stakeholder initiative was narrowed to focus on a two step program:

Protection Agency Regarding Environmental Matters Relation to Aviation," signed on March 24,

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

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

__) Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 62 S Near term: focused on GSE emissions reductions S Longer term: focused on aircraft emissions reductions68 The stakeholders are currently working on a framework for reaching consensus on the goals or targets for emissions reductions, timing, accountability, State Implementation Plan implications ( including general conformity), and numerous other issues that have been raised for GSE and aircraft emission reductions. If this initiative is successful, an agreement would be reached among all the stakeholders on a national voluntary aviation emissions reduction program. The provisions of such an agreement could eventually be proposed and finalized as EPA regulations in some fashion, or they may become enforceable through another mechanism.

The avenue to codify or enforce an eventual agreement has yet to be determined.

There is growing interest, particularly at the state and local level, in addressing emissions from aircraft and other aviation related sources. Such interest is often related to plans for airport expansion which is occurring across the country. Some state and local agencies are already moving ahead to address concerns about emissions originating at airports. The purpose of the EPA/ FAA voluntary initiative is to develop a program that will achieve significant national emissions reductions. It will not attempt to assess or evaluate specific individual airports,

although it may review and use to the extent possible emissions and other data which may have been generated by or for an individual airport. It is also important to note that this effort is 68A program for aircraft emissions reductions would not necessarily include engine emission standards. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 63 focused on reductions in air emissions and will not address aircraft noise.

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

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

VII. Regulatory Impacts Aircraft engines are international commodities, and thus, they are designed to meet international standards. Today's proposal 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 would also be applicable to all ICAO requirements. Engine manufacturers are already developing improved technology in response to the ICAO standards that match the standards proposed here, and EPA does not believe that the costs incurred by the aircraft industry as a result of the existing ICAO standards should be attributed to today's proposed regulations ( as discussed above, these standards only apply to newly certified or designed engines, but not already certified, newly manufactured or inproduction engines). Also, the test procedure amendments ( revisions to criteria on calibration and test gases) necessary to determine compliance are already being adhered to by manufacturers during current engine certification tests. Therefore, EPA believes that the proposed regulations Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 64 would impose no additional burden on manufacturers.

The existence of ICAO's requirements results in minimal cost as well as air quality benefits from today's proposed requirements. 69 Since aircraft and aircraft engines are international commodities, there is some commercial benefit to consistency between U. S. and international emission standards and control program requirements ( i. e., easier to qualify products for international markets since FAA can certify engines for ICAO compliance). While not a regulatory impact per se, EPA proposed adoption of the ICAO standards and related test procedures would meet our treaty obligations and strengthen the U. S. position in future ICAO/ CAEP processes related to emission standards.

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

69CAEP's Forecasting and Economic Analysis Support Group ( FESG) concluded at CAEP/ 4 that their assessment of these new NOx standards indicates that the direct costs of the standards would be minimal, and the benefits would be modest. ( ICAO, CAEP/ 4, Working Paper 4,

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

2002 0030, Document No. _____) Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 65 A. How Do I Submit Comments?

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

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

before the end of the comment period.

If you submit proprietary information for our consideration, you should clearly separate it from other comments by labeling it " Confidential Business Information." You should also send it directly to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT instead of to the public docket. This will help ensure that no one inadvertently places proprietary information in the docket. If you want us to use your confidential information as part of the basis for the final rule, you should send a nonconfidential version of the document summarizing the key data or information. We will disclose information covered by a claim of confidentiality only through the application of procedures described in 40 CFR part 2. If you don't identify Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 66 information as confidential when we receive it, we may make it available to the public without notifying you.

B. Will There Be a Public Hearing?

If EPA conducts public hearings on today's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( NPRM),

EPA will publish a timely document in the Federal Register that specifies the time and location of such hearings ( see DATES).

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

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency must determine whether this regulatory action is    significant'' and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The order defines " significant regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 67 ( 1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $ 100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

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

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

EPA has determined that this rule is not a " significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB review. As a result of the ICAO standards, all aircraft engines covered by today's proposed rule already meet the standards or will do so by the time the standards go into effect. Thus, the annual effect on the economy of today's proposed standards would be minimal, and none of the other thresholds identified in the executive order would be triggered by this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule would not itself impose any reporting or recordkeeping requirements. 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 Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 68 associated with FAA enforcement of these proposed regulations would likely be very small.

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

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

school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; or ( 3) a small organization that is any not for profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. The following table 1 provides an overview of the primary SBA small business categories potentially affected by this proposed regulation.

Table 1   Primary SBA Small Business Categories Potentially Affected by This Proposed Regulation Industry NAICSa Codes Defined by SBA as a small business if: b Manufacturers of new aircraft engines 336412 < 1,000 employees Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 69 Manufacturers of new aircraft 336411 < 1,500 employees Scheduled air carriers, passenger and freight 481 < 1,500 employees a North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS)

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

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

manufacturers of these engines that qualify as small businesses. We are unaware of any foreign manufacturers with a U. S. based facility that would qualify as a small business. In addition, the proposed rule will not impose significant economic impacts on engine manufacturers. As discussed above in section VII, engine manufacturers are already developing improved technology in response to the ICAO standards that match the standards proposed here, and EPA does not believe that the costs incurred by the aircraft industry as a result of the existing ICAO standards should be attributed to today's proposed regulations. Also, the test procedure amendments ( revisions to criteria on calibration and test gases) necessary to determine Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 70 compliance are already being adhered to by manufacturers during current engine certification tests. Therefore, EPA believes that the proposed regulations would impose no additional burden on manufacturers. The existence of ICAO's requirements results in minimal cost from today's proposed requirements.

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

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

in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $ 100 million or more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the 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 Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 71 government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.

EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure of $ 100 million or more for State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate or the private sector in any one year. As a result of the ICAO standards, all aircraft engines covered by today's proposal would already meet the proposed standards. Thus, the annual effect on the economy of today's proposed standards will be minimal. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 13132, entitled " Federalism" ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure " meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications."

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

This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 72 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. This proposed rule creates no mandates on State, local or tribal governments. The rule imposes no enforceable duties on these entities, because they do not manufacture any engines that are subject to this rule. This rule will be implemented at the Federal level and impose compliance obligations only on private industry. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

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

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175, entitled " Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments" ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure " meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications."

This proposed rule does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. The proposed emission standards and other related requirements for private industry in this rule have national applicability and therefore do not uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal Governments. This rule will be implemented at the Federal level and impose compliance obligations only on engine manufacturers. Tribal governments will be affected only Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 73 to the extent they purchase and use aircraft having regulated engines. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health & Safety Risks Executive Order 13045, " Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks" ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that ( 1) is determined to be " economically significant" as defined under Executive Order 12866, and ( 2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, Section 5 501 of the Order directs the Agency to evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children,

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

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

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

EPA believes, however, that the emission reductions from this rulemaking will further reduce air toxics and the related adverse impacts on children's health. Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 74 H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, " Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

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

This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards for testing emissions for commercial aircraft gas turbine engines. EPA proposes to use test procedures contained in ICAO International Standards and Recommended Practices Environmental Protection, with the Preliminary Draft   Do not cite, quote, or distribute 2/ 28/ 03 75 proposed modifications contained in this rulemaking. 70 These procedures are currently used by all manufacturers of commercial aircraft gas turbine engines ( with thrust greater than 26.7 kN) to demonstrate compliance with ICAO emissions standards.

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

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 87 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,

Incorporation by reference, Aircraft engines.

Dated: ______, 200_

Christine Todd Whitman,

Administrator.

70ICAO International Standards and Recommended Practices Environmental Protection, Annex 16, Volume II, " Aircraft Engine Emissions," Second Edition, July 1993  Amendment 3, March 20, 1997. Copies of this document can be obtained from ICAO ( www. icao. int) or found in Docket OAR 2002 0030, Document _____.