# U.S. Jet Fuel Use and CO 2 

# Emissions Inventory for Aircraft b elow ICAO CO 2 

# Standard Thresholds

Final Report

Prepared for:



# U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Laurel Driver
U

. S

. E nvironmental P rotection A gency Office of Air Quality Standards and Planning
109 TW Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Prepared by:



## Eastern Research Group, Inc.

1600 Perimeter Park Drive Suite 200 Morrisville, NC 27560

May 7

, 201 5

EPA Contract No. EP

- D

- 11

- 006 Work Assignment 5

- 0 5

### This page is intentionally left blank.

## TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 I NTRODUCTION



### ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 1

2.0 T

- 100

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 4

3.0 GAATA

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 15

4.0 C OMPARISONS



### ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 18

5.0 B ACKCASTING AND 

### F ORECASTING



### ................................ ................................ ......... 19

6.0 QA/QC

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 21

7.0 R EFERENCES



### ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 26

A PPENDIX 

### A. A IR 

### T AXI 

### M ODELS BY 

### A IRCRAFT 

### C ATEGORY FOR 

### EDMS/T

- 100 D ATA



### ................ A

- 1

i

## LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2

- 1. Number of Aircraft in each Aircraft Category

................................ ............................... 5

Table 2

- 2. Time and Mode Data

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 6

Table 2

- 3. Engine Assignments by Aircraft Make and Model

................................ ........................ 8

Table 2

- 4. Summary ofT

- 100Activity Data

................................ ................................ ................... 10

Table 2

- 5. Aircraft and Engine Specific Emission Factors from EDMS Run

............................... 11

Table 2

- 6. Aircraft and Engine Specific Cruising Fuel Consumption Rates

................................ . 12

Table 2

- 7. 2012 T

- 100AircraftandEngine Specific Fuel Use and CO 2 

### Emissions

......................... 14

Table 3

- 1. FAA Registry Aircraft Population by MTOM Range

................................ .................. 15

Table 3

- 2. Finalized G AATA Activity for Aircraft Below the MTOM CO 2 

### Standard
Thresholds

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 16

Table 3

- 3. GAATA Fuel Consumption Rates by Aircraft Type (Block fuel/Block time)

............ 16

Table 3

- 4. 2012 Fuel Use and CO 2 

### Emission Estimates by Aircraft Below the CAEP MTOM Thresholds by Type and Mode

................................ ................................ .............. 17

Table 4

- 1. T

- 100 and GAATA Combine CO 2 

### Emissions (tons) Summary

................................ ... 18

Table 5

- 1. Historical Fraction of Jet, Turboprop Powered Aircraft, and Helicopters Below the
CAEP MTOM Thresholds for the ICAO CO 2 

### Standards

................................ ...... 19

Table 5

- 2. Adjustment Factors for General Aviation Aircraft Based on Jet Fuel Energy Consumption

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 20

Table 5

- 3. Growt h Factors Based on Forecasted Jet Fuel Energy Consumption

.......................... 20

Table 5

- 4. Backcasted/Forecasted Small Jet, Turboprop, and Helicopter CO 2 

### Emissions (tons)

. 21

Table 6

- 1. QA Summary Table

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 23

ii

## LIST OF FIGURE

Page

Figure 1

- 1. Summary of Activity Data Used to Quantify Fuel and CO 2 

### Emissions from Aircraft Below ICAO Reporting Thresholds

................................ ................................ ......... 3

iii

## 1.0 **Introduction**

In 2010, the I nternational C ivil A viation O rganization ’s Committee on Aviation Environmental
Protection (CAEP)

, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) participation, agreed to develop a n aircraft carbon dioxide (CO 2 

### ) standard , and CAEP expects to finalize the standard in February 2016

. In November 2010, CAEP decided that the CO 2 

### standard will be applicable to subsonic jets with a weight threshold of m aximum t ake o ff m ass (MTOM) 1 

### greater than 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs) and aircraft equipped with turboprop engines with a MTOM great er than 8,618 kg
(19,000 lbs)

. Applying these MTOM thresh olds, ERG identified four categories of aircraft, large transport jets, regional jets, large turboprops, and large business jets 2 

### that correspond to the

above applicability thresholds that CAEP has agreed to for the aircraft CO 2 

### standard

. We have

also identified the aircraft categories that do not meet the CAEP applicability thresholds into the following aircraft classes: small turboprops and small business jets

. In addition, CAEP’s applicability exclude piston

- engine aircraft 3 

### and helicopters, 4 

### a nd because CAEP requirements apply only to civil aircraft, the aircraft CO 2 

### standard also does not apply to military aircraft

. The objective of this study is to estimate jet fuel usage and CO 2 

### emissions (from this jet fuel usage) in

the U nited S tates for aircraft below the CAEP MTOM thresholds (excluding jet fuel usage by military aircraft)

.

To evaluate the current and projected CO 2 

### emissions for the aircraft ( that us e jet fuel) below the

CAEP MTOM thresholds , fuel use and CO 2 

### emissions were developed for these aircraft ( below

the MTOM thresholds ) for domestic flights and international flights that originate from a U.S. airport. Emissions estimates were calculated for the base year 2012 and project ed for years 2020,
2030, and 2040 using Federal Aviation Administration Forecast data

. The 201 5 EPA I nventor y of U

. S

. G reenhouse G as E missions and Sinks (EPA, 201 5 ) report include s a category for

emissions from general aviation aircraft jet fuel

. The category includes large and small business jets, large and small turboprops, and helicopters (with gas turbine engines) , which is more inclusive than the CAEP applicability thresholds

. Data from the 201 5 EPA Inventory of U.S.

1 The terms maximum takeoff mass and maximum takeoff weight are used interchangeably throughout the report.

2 T he classes of aircraft are broken down in a general manner for the purpose of showing which aircraft are

included and excluded from the ICAO aircraft CO 2 standard

. As described earlier, CAEP has specifically identified MTOM thresholds for subsonic jet and turboprop aircraft that clearly indicate which aircraft will be covered by the international CO 2 standard being developed (and which aircraft will not be covered by the international standard)

. For the aircraft classes that will be covered by the CAEP CO 2 standard, ICAO generall y refers to them as follows: turboprops, business jets, regional jets, single aisle aircraft, small twin aisle aircraft, large twin aisle aircraft, and large quad aircraft

. However, a subset of turboprops and business jets will not be
included in the CO 2 s tandard (based on the MTOM thresholds).

3 Piston

- engine aircraft primarily operate using aviation gasoline , though it is recognized that a small number use

Jet A fuel (i.e., diesel

- powered piston aircraft)

. 4 There are both piston

- engine and turbine

- engine helicopters. CAEP’s applicability thresholds exclude both types

of helicopters.



### 1

### Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (EPA, 201 5 ) was used to back cast 2012 emiss ions to
1990, 1995, 2000 , 2005 , 2010 and to develop 2013 estimates.

The 2015 EPA Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sink s (EPA 2015) states that

U.S. aircraft emissions include emissions from the U.S. international aviation bunker fuels

categor y, and this U.S. international aviation bunker fuels category includes emissions from

combustion of fuel purchased in and used by aircraft departing from the U nited S tates (regardless of whether they are a U.S. flagged carrier)

. To ensure the products of this project align with data

used in the 2015 GHG Emission and Sinks document , data obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) 2012 General Aviation Part 135 Activity Surveys (GAATA, 2013) was assumed to be fuel purchased and used within the U nited S tates

. Data obtained from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) T

- 100 Domestic Segment also accounted of activity within the

U nited S tates ; while the International Segment accounted for aircraft departing from the U.S.
(assumed to be inclu ded in the U.S. international aviation bunker fuel category) (FAA, 2012).

In general

, aviation activities can be classified as:

• Part 91 5



### – non

- commercial general aviation, corporate flight departments, limited for

hire activity (flight training, etc

. )

• On

- Demand Part 135 6 

### operations

• Scheduled Part 135 operations

• Part 121 7 

### (large aircraft)

The GAATA survey covers Part 91 and On

- Demand Part 135, while the T

- 100 dataset covers

Part 121 and Part 135 operators with more than $20 M illion in annual revenue

. T his provides

both an overlap and a gap between the two datasets. The overlap occur s between GAATA and

T

- 100 for large On

- Demand Part 135 operators with more than $20M in annual revenue that include commercial air taxi operations. Conversely

, neither databa se cover s smaller Part 135 Scheduled operators with less than $20 million in revenue. Regarding the overlap, adjustments were made to the GAATA data to account for air taxis reported in the T

- 100 data. H owever , note that the missing scheduled Part 135 oper ators with revenues less $20 million may have high er
utilization levels and fuel consumption rates than represented in the GAATA survey. It is

believed that the aircraft with MTOM less than the ICAO CO 2 

### Standard thresholds are

a nticipated to be a relatively small portion of the Part 135 operators with revenues less than $20

million.

The G A ATA data include all activity ( by aircraft type ) for general aviation and air taxis , while

the T

- 100 data set include commercial activity by specific aircraft make and model , which

include air taxis but not non

- commercial general aviation

. A ircraft fleet data sources were also

5 14 CFR Part 91 is General Operating and Flight Rules.

6 14 CFR Part 135 is Operating Requirements: Commuter and On Demand Operations and Rules Governing

Pers ons on Board Such Aircraft.

7 14 CFR part 121 is Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental Operations.



### 2

### used in this analysis including aircraft and airline data from the A scend Online Fleets D ata base

, ( Flightglobal, Ascend, 201 5 )

, and aircraft registration information from the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Aircraft Registry

– Releasable Aircraft Database Download (FAA,
2014a)

. 8 

### Figure 1

- 1 shows how the different sources of activity data were integrated to generate

CO 2 

### emission est imates for this analysis.

Figure 1

- 1

. Summary of Activit y Data Used to Quantify Fuel Use and CO 2 

### Emissions from
Aircraft Below ICAO MTOM Thresholds

Because the T

- 100 dataset provides aircraft

- specific data

, priority was given to include these data

in this anal ysis. Where possible, adjustments were made to the GAATA aircraft type data to avoid double counting. GAATA data do not differentiate aircraft type by maximum takeoff weight categories. T herefore, different approaches were used to approximate maximum takeoff weight for jets, turboprop

, and helicopter estimates. For example, t o approximate the weight categories for the U.S. general aviation and air taxi jet

- powered fleet

, t he percentage of active

bu siness jet s below the CAEP MTOM threshold was determined using the latest FAA Aircraft Registry data ( FAA, 2014 a )

. 9 

### A different approach was taken to determine the turboprop activity

data below the CAEP MTOM threshold. For turboprops, t he aircraft make and model from the

T

- 100 data set above and below the CAEP MTOM threshold were determined using the MTO M listed for each aircraft make and model in the FAA’s Emissions Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) system tables (FAA, 2013)

. Because both the GA A TA data includes commercial air

taxi activit ies and the T

- 100 data set also includes commercial flights , including commercial air

taxis

, the T

- 100 turboprop annual landing take off ( LTO ) and annual air time values for aircraft

below the CAEP MTOM t hreshold were subtracted from the GAATA turboprop annual LTO

and annual airtime values for turboprop aircraft below the CAEP MTOM threshold to avoid double counting

.

8 The FAA Aircraft Registry

– Releas able Aircraft Database Download provide s information about current registered

aircraft owners, document s filed, aircraft dealers, and more.

9 The FAA Aircraft Registry data provides data by the following MTOM thresholds: up to 5,699 kg, 5,670

– 9, 071

kg, and 9,072 kg. FAA Registration Data Aircraft Below

ICAO Threshold EDMS/ASCEND Data T

- 100 Domestic/

International

Segment

GAATA Fuel Usage EDMS LTO

Emissions GAATA Flight Time

Combined LTO/Cruising Fuel/Emission

Estimates T

- 100 Flight Time

Manufacturer Cruising Fuel Usage

Emission/Fuel

Estimates Adjustment for Double Counting Aircraft Specific Data GAATA Survey

CO 2 Emission Estimates



### 3

### In comparing the active turboprop a ircraft above the CAEP MTOM threshold in Ascend and the

T

- 100 data

, all but two airframe models could be matched in the two datasets

. 10 

### This matching suggested that except for these two aircraft models , all of the remaining turboprop aircraft in

GAATA annual LTOs were less than the CAEP MTOM threshold

. Note that t h is assumption slightly overestimates activity below the CAEP MTOM threshold because the GA A TA data

include the two unmatched aircraft models and any turboprops above the CAEP MTOM

threshold but not used in commercial activities. It is beli e ve d that this later group is likely to be

small due to the economics of aircraft ownership.

The remaining GAATA turboprop data were combined with the T

- 100 activity data identified as being less than the CAEP MTOM threshold

, providing the activity data used to esti mate annual fuel usage and emissions from turboprops included in this analysis ( below the CAEP MTOM

threshold )

.

The emissions for the small business jet s and turboprop s below the CAEP MTOM threshold were calculated by applying fuel consumption rates and CO 2 

### emission factors 11 

### to the activity

data. Emissions from aircraft below the CAEP MTOM threshold were calculated separately for

the LTO cycle as well as the cruising mode.

Section 2 describes the emission inventory development associated with the T

- 100 data , and Section 3 describes the development of the GA ATA emission inventory

. Section 4 compares the 2012 results of this study with data presented in t he 2015 EPA Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas

Emissions and Sink s (EPA 2015)

. Section 5 documents how the projections were developed and

S ection 6 discusses QA/QC activities implemented

.



## 2.0 **T**

**- 100** 

Activity

For base year 2012, t he T

- 100 activity data include annual air time and LTO by specific aircraft

make and model (FAA, 2012)

. The aircraft a re categorized based on aircraft type (e.g., aviation gas powered propeller, helicopter, turboprop, and jet) and linked to their MTOM information

obtained from the EDMS system tables

. Table 2

- 1 shows the number of air taxi models in each

category , average MTOM s from EDMS, and the MTOM threshold categories used in this analysis

- the highlighted rows represent the air taxi categories included in this analysis. Note the average MTOM values presented in Table 2

- 1 represent a wide range of individual aircraft

values. Appendix A includes a complete list of air taxi models noted in Table 2

- 1.

Five additional aircraft models were directly matched to equivalent aircra ft in the EDMS list of

aircraft. One aircraft (Helio H

- 250/295/395) (Plane & Pilot, 2010) was matched to an alternative

model in EDMS aircraft characteristics list (included in Table 2

- 1 under the small turboprop

10 Ascend data documents 64 Jetstream J41 and one Nord N 262 were active, but not included in the T

- 100 data.

11 EPA CO 2 emission factors are in terms of the carbon content of the fuel and are presented as kgs of CO 2 per gallon of fuel.



### 4

### category ). T hree aircraft were out of scope : two were piston engines, and one was a military aircraft. The single remaining aircraft, Quest Kodiak 100, was identified as a small turboprop.

The MTOM was obtained from the manufacturer ( Quest, 2014 ), and the aircraft type was pulled

from the T

- 100 da taset.

Table 2

- 1. Number of air taxi models by a ircraft c ategory for EDMS/T

- 100 data

General Aircraft Category EDMS Category Number of
Aircraft
Models Average
MTOM

(lbs) MTOM
Threshold Categories (lbs) Piston powered aircraft Propeller 17 3,652 N/A Helicopter a 

### Light Helicopter 1

- N/A

Small Turboprop a 

### Turboprop 18 11,984 <19,000 Large r Turboprop b 

### Turboprop 18 50,391 >19,000 Large Business Jet b 

### Business Jet 21 37,374 >12,566 Large Business Jet b 

### Regional Jet 21 77,249 >12,566

a Aircraft below weight thresholds included in this study.

b Aircraft above the weight thresholds used to adjust the GAATA activity data in Section 3.



### The annual LTO cycles a re a summation of the number of departures for each aircraft make and

model listed in the T

- 100 dataset

. The annual cruising time was calculated by subtracting the airborne portion of the annual LTO cycle based on the average takeoff, climbout, and approach

time from EDMS (see Table 2

- 2) from the airtime listed in the T

- 100 dataset

. Because the Quest
Kodiak 100 did not have aircraft information in EDMS, comparable value s w ere used from a
similar aircraft in EDMS

.

Engine make s and model s for the aircraft were needed to ensure proper matching with EDMS

emission factors. For the aircraft types below the CAEP MTOM threshold, w eight ed emission

factors were based on engine market share reported in the A scend data

. This approach was

limited to the nine small aircraft that encompassed 90% of the LTO activity. The remaining

airc raft below the CAEP MTOM threshold were assigned engines from the most popular aircraft engine combination listed in the Ascend dat a . For two cases where aircraft were not included in

the Ascend data

, engine assignments were made that represent conservative aircraft engine

combination in EDMS based on the highest CO 2 

### emission factor

. The aircraft makes and models

above the CAEP MTOM threshold were assigned engines from the most popular aircraft engine

combination listed in the Ascend data

, or fro m the only valid aircraft engine combination listed

in EDMS. Where the engines from the most popular aircraft engine combination listed in Ascend

but were not listed in EDMS, a comparable engine was assigned. For the aircraft makes and

models above the CAE P MTOM threshold that were not listed in the Ascend data , typical engines based on I nternet research ( Section 6 ) were assigned. Table 2

- 3 lists the engine assignments for each aircraft make and model and the basis for assign ing each engine.

The finalized activity data are summarized by aircraft and engine combination in Table 2

- 4.

5

### Table 2

- 2

. Time and Mode Data for Aircraft Below CAEP MTOM Threshold in T

- 100 data

Aircraft Type Aircraft Code Engine Type Engine

ID Time in Mode (minutes)

Approach Climbout Startup Takeoff Taxi

In Taxi
Out Aerospatiale/Aeritalia ATR

- 42 ATR42

- 4 PW121 PW121 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9 Aerospatiale/Aeritalia ATR

- 72 ATR72

- 2 PW124B PW124B 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Beech 1900 A/B/C/D BEECH1900

- C PT6A

- 65B PT6A6B 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9 Beech 200 Super Kingair BEECH200 PT6A

- 41 PT6A41 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Beech 99 Airliner BEECH99 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Beech C99 BEECH99 PT6A

- 36 PT6A36 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9 British Aerospace Jetstream 31 J31 TPE331

- 10U TPE10U 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Casa 235 CN235

- 2 CT7

- 9B CT79B 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Casa/Nurtanio C212 Aviocar CASA212

- 1 PT6A

- 28 PT6A28 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114 PT6A14 4.5 2.5 1 0.5 7 9

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 4.5 2.5 1 0.5 7 9

Cessna 406 Caravan II REIMS406 PT6A

- 112 PT6112 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 4.5 2.5 1 0.5 7 9

Convair CV

- 580 CV580 501 D13
alternative 1 501DA1 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

De Havilland DHC8

- 100 Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 1 PW120A PW120A 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

De Havilland DHC8

- 200Q Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 2 PW123D PW123D 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

De Havilland DHC8

- 300 Dash 8 DHC8Q

- 3 PW123 PW123 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

De Havilland DHC8

- 400 Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 4 PW150A PW150A 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Dornier 228 DO228

- 1 TPE331

- 5A TPE5A 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Dornier 328 DO328

- 1 PW119C PW119C 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Embraer EMB

- 120 Brasilia EMB120 PW118B PW118B 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9 Eurocompter AS350 B2 AStar SA350 TPE331

- 3 TPE3 6.5 4.33 1 2.17 7 9

6

### Table 2

- 2

. Time and Mode Data for Aircraft Below CAEP MTOM Threshold in T

- 100 data

Aircraft Type Aircraft Code Engine Type Engine

ID Time in Mode (minutes)

Approach Climbout Startup Takeoff Taxi

In Taxi
Out

Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) G21G TPE331

- 2UA TP2UA 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Gulfstream I GULF1 RDa.7 RDA7 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Helio H

- 250/295/395 MIL

- U10 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 3.5 0.8 1 0.4 7 9

Pilatus Britten

- Norman BN2/A
Islander BN2 250B17B 250B17 4.5 2.5 1 0.5 7 9

Pilatus PC

- 12 PC12 PT6A

- 67B PT67B 4.5 2.5 1 0.5 7 9 Quest Kodiak 100 CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 4.5 2.5 1 0.5 7 9

Saab

- Fairchild 340/A SAAB340

- A CT7

- 5A2 CT75A2 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Saab

- Fairchild 340/B SAAB340

- B CT7

- 9B CT79B 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Shorts 330 SD330 PT6A

- 45A PT6A4A 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Shorts 360 SD360

- 1 PT6A

- 65R PT6A6R 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Shorts Harland SC

- 7 Skyvan SC7

- 3

- 1 TPE331

- 2 TPE2 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

Socata TBM850 TBM

- 850 PT6A

- 66 PT6A66 4.5 2.2 1 0.5 7 9

7

### Table 2

- 3

. Engine Assignments by Aircraft Make and Model

Aircraft Make/ Model EDMS Aircraft
Code Engine Make/
Model EDMS Engine

Code Engine Assignment Basis

Below the CAEP MTOM Threshold

Pilatus Britten

- Norman BN2/A
Islander BN2 250B17B 250B17 Weight factors based engine market share

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114 PT6A14 Weight factors based engine market share

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A Weight factors based engine market share

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 Weight factors based engine market share

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 Weight factors based engine market share

Beech 1900 A/B/C/D BEECH1900

- C PT6A

- 65B PT6A6B Weight factors based engine market share EurocopterAS350 B2AStar SA350 TPE331

- 3 TPE3 Weight factors based engine market share

Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) G21G TPE331

- 2UA TP2UA Weight factors based engine market share

SocataTBM850 TBM

- 850 PT6A

- 66 PT6A66 Weight factors based engine market share Beech King Air C

- 90 BEECH90 PT6A

- 60 PT6A60 Most Popular Engine in Ascend Beech 200 SuperKingair BEECH200 PT6A

- 41 PT6A41 Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Beech 99 Airliner BEECH99 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Beech C99 BEECH99 PT6A

- 36 PT6A36 Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Dornier 228 DO228

- 1 TPE331

- 5A TPE5A Most Popular Engine in Ascend British Aerospace Jetstream 31 J31 TPE331

- 10U TPE10U Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Pilatus PC

- 12 PC12 PT6A

- 67B PT67B Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Cessna 406 Caravan II REIMS406 PT6A

- 112 PT6112 Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Shorts Harland SC

- 7Skyvan SC7

- 3

- 1 TPE331

- 2 TPE2 Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Casa/NurtanioC212Aviocar CASA212

- 1 PT6A

- 28 PT6A28 Conservative Engine Assignment Based on CO 2 EF

HelioH

- 250/295/395 MIL

- U10 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 Conservative Engine Assignment Based on CO 2 EF Quest Kodiak 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Above the CAEP MTOM Threshold

Shorts 360 SD360

- 1 PT6A

- 65R PT6A6R Most Popular Engine in Ascend

De Havilland DHC8

- 100 Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 1 PW120A PW120A Most Popular Engine in Ascend

De Havilland DHC8

- 200Q Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 2 PW123D PW123D Most Popular Engine in Ascend

De Havilland DHC8

- 300 Dash 8 DHC8Q

- 3 PW123 PW123 Most Popular Engine in Ascend

De Havilland DHC8

- 400 Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 4 PW150A PW150A Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Embraer EMB

- 120 Brasilia EMB120 PW118B PW118B Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Saab

- Fairchild 340/A SAAB340

- A CT7

- 5A2 CT75A2 Most Popular Engine in Ascend



### 8

### Table 2

- 3

. Engine Assignments by Aircraft Make and Model

Aircraft Make/ Model EDMS Aircraft
Code Engine Make/
Model EDMS Engine

Code Engine Assignment Basis

Saab

- Fairchild 340/B SAAB340

- B CT7

- 9B CT79B Most Popular Engine in Ascend

Dornier 328 DO328

- 1 PW119C PW119C Comparable Engine to Most Popular Engine in
Ascend

Gulfstream I GULF1 RDa.7 RDA7 One Valid EDMS Aircraft Engine Combination

ConvairCV

- 580 CV580 501 D13
alternative 1 501DA1 One Valid EDMS Aircraft Engine Combination

Casa 235 CN235

- 2 CT7

- 9B CT79B Typical Engine based on internet search

Shorts 330 SD330 PT6A

- 45A PT6A4A Typical Engine based on internet search Aerospatiale/AeritaliaATR

- 42 ATR42

- 4 PW121 PW121 Typical Engine based on internet search Aerospatiale/AeritaliaATR

- 72 ATR72

- 2 PW124B PW124B Typical Engine based on internet search



### 9

### Table 2

- 4

. Summary of T

- 100Activity Data

Aircraft Make/Model EDMS Aircraft
Code LTO Cruising Time (minutes) Category

Below the CAEP MTOM Threshold EurocopterAS350 B2AStar SA350 692 11,058 Helicopter

Beech 1900 A/B/C/D BEECH1900

- C 169,145 7,256,113 Turboprop Beech 200 SuperKingair BEECH200 4,841 131,106 Turboprop

Beech 99 Airliner BEECH99 139 3,723 Turboprop

Beech C99 BEECH99 125 3,600 Turboprop British Aerospace Jetstream 31 J31 3 230 Turboprop

Casa/NurtanioC212Aviocar CASA212

- 1 7,841 198,022 Turboprop

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 233,899 8,004,766 Turboprop

Cessna 406 Caravan II REIMS406 4,367 110,714 Turboprop

Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan CNA208 10,030 457,983 Turboprop

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 37,245 900,000 Turboprop

Dornier 228 DO228

- 1 4,585 152,302 Turboprop

Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) G21G 582 10,860 Turboprop

HelioH

- 250/295/395 MIL

- U10 113 9,996 Turboprop

Pilatus Britten

- Norman BN2/A Islander BN2 15,513 146,131 Turboprop

Pilatus PC

- 12 PC12 15,523 637,144 Turboprop Quest Kodiak 100 778 25,045 Turboprop

Shorts Harland SC

- 7Skyvan SC7

- 3

- 1 922 16,319 Turboprop

SocataTBM850 TBM

- 850 66 3,715 Turboprop Beech King Air C

- 90 BEECH90 19 1,543 Turboprop

Total 506,428 18,080,370

Above the CAEP MTOM Threshold a
Casa 235 CN235

- 2 26 3,805 Turboprop

ConvairCV

- 580 CV580 1,548 135,602 Turboprop

Gulfstream I GULF1 40 3,653 Turboprop

Shorts 330 SD330 898 36,115 Turboprop

Shorts 360 SD360

- 1 885 14,407 Turboprop Aerospatiale/AeritaliaATR

- 42 ATR42

- 4 7689 310,233 Turboprop Aerospatiale/AeritaliaATR

- 72 ATR72

- 2 14387 549,501 Turboprop

De Havilland DHC8

- 100 Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 1 116034 4,795,594 Turboprop

De Havilland DHC8

- 200Q Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 2 34930 1,386,025 Turboprop

De Havilland DHC8

- 300 Dash 8 DHC8Q

- 3 43494 1,764,646 Turboprop

De Havilland DHC8

- 400 Dash

- 8 DHC8Q

- 4 140083 7,149,258 Turboprop

Dornier 328 DO328

- 1 1360 44,760 Turboprop

Embraer EMB

- 120 Brasilia EMB120 128476 5,265,448 Turboprop

Saab

- Fairchild 340/A SAAB340

- A 1825 173,891 Turboprop

Saab

- Fairchild 340/B SAAB340

- B 59064 2,955,215 Turboprop

Total 550,739 24,588,154

a Turboprop activity for aircraft above the weight thresholds were used to adjust the GAATA activity data in Section 3

.



### 10

### Emission Factors

A nnual LTO emissions were estimated using the FAA’s EDMS (FAA, 2013). The aircraft and engine

- specific fuel consumption rates and CO 2 

### emission rates from EDMS are summarized in

Table 2

- 5

.

Table 2

- 5 . Aircraft and Engine Specific Emission Factors from EDMS Run f or Aircraft Below
CAEP MTOM Threshold in T

- 100 Data

Category Aircraft Make/Model EDMS Aircraft
Code Engine Make/
Model EDMS Engine
Code Fuel Consumption
Rate (lbs/LTO) CO 2 Emission
Rate (lbs/LTO) Helicopter EurocopterAS350 B2AStar SA350 TPE331

- 3 TPE3 170 537 Small Turboprop Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) G21G TPE331

- 2UA TP2UA 170 537 Small Turboprop SocataTBM850 TBM

- 850 PT6A

- 66 PT6A66 130 410 Small Turboprop Pilatus Britten

- Norman BN2/A Islander BN2 250B17B 250B17 119 376 Small Turboprop Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114 PT6A14 86 273 Small Turboprop Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 96 301 Small Turboprop De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 168 531 Small Turboprop De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 206 651 Small Turboprop Beech 1900 A/B/C/D BEECH1900

- C PT6A

- 65B PT6A6B 275 866

Small Turboprop Beech 200 SuperKingair BEECH200 PT6A

- 41 PT6A41 231 729 Small Turboprop Beech 99 Airliner BEECH99 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 168 531 Small Turboprop Beech C99 BEECH99 PT6A

- 36 PT6A36 219 691 Small Turboprop Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 96 301 Small Turboprop Dornier 228 DO228

- 1 TPE331

- 5A TPE5A 185 582 Small Turboprop British Aerospace Jetstream 31 J31 TPE331

- 10U TPE10U 206 651 Small Turboprop Pilatus PC

- 12 PC12 PT6A

- 67B PT67B 153 484 Small Turboprop Cessna 406 Caravan II REIMS406 PT6A

- 112 PT6112 150 473 Small Turboprop Shorts Harland SC

- 7Skyvan SC7

- 3

- 1 TPE331

- 2 TPE2 205 648 Small Turboprop Casa/NurtanioC212Aviocar CASA212

- 1 PT6A

- 28 PT6A28 206 651 Small Turboprop HelioH

- 250/295/395 MIL

- U10 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 83 263 Small Turboprop EADSSocataTBM

- 700 a TBM700 PT6A

- 64* PT6A64 125 393 Small Turboprop Beech King Air C

- 90 BEECH90 PT6A

- 60 PT6A60 264 833

a The LTO emissions for the Quest Kodiak 100 were estimated by applying the fuel consumption rate and CO 2 emission rate

from a comparable EDMS aircraft engine combination based on MTOM and engine thrust. The comparable aircraft selected

was Cessna 208 Caravan.



### The cruising emissions for aircraft below the CAEP MTOM threshold were estimated based on

the annual cruis i ng air time, fuel consumption rate s obtained from the manufacture or from
literature, Internet s earches or EDMS fuel

- based CO 2 

### emission index. The aircraft and engine specific fuel consumption rates used in this analysis are listed in Table 2

- 6 . To calculate the CO 2 

### emissions

, the EDMS fuel

- based CO 2 

### emission index of 3.15 lbs of CO 2 

### per lb of jet fuel was
used

. Note the EDMS CO 2 

### factors match those used in the 201 5 EPA Inventory of U.S.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks

.

11

### Table 2

- 6

. Aircraft and Engine Specific Cruising Fuel Consumption Rates for Aircraft Below
CAEP MTOM Threshold in T

- 100 Data

Aircraft Make/Model EDMS
Aircraft Code Engine
Make/Model EDMS Engine Code Fuel Consumption Rate (lb/min) Cruising CO 2 Emission Rate (lbs/min)

Beech 1900 A/B/C/D BEECH1900

- C PT6A

- 65B PT6A6B 8.58 27.03 Beech 200 SuperKingair BEECH200 PT6A

- 41 PT6A41 10.25 32.29

Beech 99 Airliner BEECH99 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 7.40 23.31

Beech C99 BEECH99 PT6A

- 36 PT6A36 7.40 23.31

Pilatus Britten

- Norman BN2/A
Islander BN2 250B17B 250B17 3.17 9.99

Casa/NurtanioC212Aviocar CASA212

- 1 PT6A

- 28 PT6A28 7.69 24.22

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114 PT6A14 6.92 21.80

Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 6.92 21.80

Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 6.92 21.80

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 9.67 30.46

De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 9.67 30.46

Dornier 228 DO228

- 1 TPE331

- 5A TPE5A 7.83 24.66

Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) G21G TPE331

- 2UA TP2UA 4.51 14.21 British Aerospace Jetstream 31 J31 TPE331

- 10U TPE10U 10.00 31.50

HelioH

- 250/295/395 MIL

- U10 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 7.69 24.22

Pilatus PC

- 12 PC12 PT6A

- 67B PT67B 7.40 23.31

Cessna 406 Caravan II REIMS406 PT6A

- 112 PT6112 7.69 24.22 EurocompterAS350 B2AStar SA350 TPE331

- 3 TPE3 5.65 17.80

Shorts Harland SC

- 7Skyvan SC7

- 3

- 1 TPE331

- 2 TPE2 7.69 24.22

SocataTBM850 TBM

- 850 PT6A

- 66 PT6A66 5.97 18.81
Beech King Air C

- 90 BEECH90 PT6A

- 60 PT6A60 7.33 23.09 Quest Kodiak 100 N/A N/A N/A 5.47 17.23

a Sources for fuel consumption rates can be found in the Reference Section.



### Emission Calculations

Base year 2012 fuel use and CO 2 

### emission estimates for aircraft below the CAEP MTOM

threshold were developed by applying the appropriate fuel use and CO 2 

### emission factors to the

T

- 100 activity data for both the annual LTO cycle and cruising segment of the trip. The emissions were calculated using the follo wing equation:

E = A × EF × CF

W here:

E = e missions (tons)

A = a ctivity ( n umber of LTOs or m inutes of c ruising t ime)

EF = e mission factor ( lbs/LTO or gal/hr )

12

### CF = c onversion factor

Jet Fuel density = 6.84 lbs/ ga l l ons of jet fuel ; 1 lb = 0.0005 ton ; 1 g = 1.10231 E

- 6 ton

Example Calculation:

In 2012, for the Eurocopter AS350 B2 AStar

, the total annual minute s of cruising time was 11,058 minute s and the fuel use rate is 5.65 lb s /min

.

E = A × EF × CF

E = 11,058 minutes × 5.65 lb/min × 0.0005 ton/ lbs

E = 31 tons of jet fuel

The aircraft specific fuel use and CO 2 

### emission estimates for 2012 a ircraft below CAEP MTOM

threshold and in T

- 100 data are summariz ed in Table 2

- 7

.

Example Calculation:

In 2012, for the Beech 99 Airliner , the total annual LTOs was 139 LTOs and the fuel use rate is

168 lbs/LTO.

E = A × EF × CF

E = 139 LTOs × 168 lbs/LTO × 0.0005 ton/lbs

E = 11.7 tons of jet fuel

13

### Table 2

- 7

. 2012 T

- 100 Aircraft and Engine Specific Fuel Use and CO 2 

### Emissions for Aircraft Below CAEP MTOM Threshold

Category Aircraft Make/Model EDMS Aircraft
Code Engine Make/
Model EDMS Engine
Code LTO Cruising Total

Fuel Use

(tons) CO 2 (tons) Fuel Use (tons) CO 2 (tons) Fuel Use (tons) CO 2 (tons)

Helicopter EurocopterAS350 B2AStar SA350 TPE331

- 3 TPE3 59 186 31 99 90 284 Turboprop Beech 1900 A/B/C/D BEECH1900

- C PT6A

- 65B PT6A6B 23,222 73,265 31,139 98,244 54,361 171,509 Turboprop Beech 200 SuperKingair BEECH200 PT6A

- 41 PT6A41 559 1,763 672 2,120 1.231 3,884 Turboprop Beech 99 Airliner BEECH99 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 12 37 14 43 25 80 Turboprop Beech C99 BEECH99 PT6A

- 36 PT6A36 14 43 13 42 27 85 Turboprop British Aerospace Jetstream 31 J31 TPE331

- 10U TPE10U 0.31 0.98 1.16 3.63 1.46 4.62
Turboprop Casa/NurtanioC212Aviocar CASA212

- 1 PT6A

- 28 PT6A28 809 2,554 761 2,401 1,571 4,955 Turboprop Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114 PT6A14 4,238 13,370 11,609 36,627 15,847 49,997 Turboprop Cessna 208 Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 6,486 20,462 16,074 50,714 22,559 71,176 Turboprop Cessna 406 Caravan II REIMS406 PT6A

- 112 PT6112 327 1,033 425 1,342 753 2,376 Turboprop Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan CNA208 PT6A

- 114A P6114A 479 1,511 1,584 4,997 2,063 6,508
Turboprop De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 20 PT6A20 2,960 9,337 4,109 12,962 7,068 22,298
Turboprop De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 DHC6

- 1 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 214 674 242 762 455 1,436
Turboprop Dornier 228 DO228

- 1 TPE331

- 5A TPE5A 423 1,335 597 1,882 1,020 3,217
Turboprop Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) G21G TPE331

- 2UA TP2UA 50 156 24 77 74 234 Turboprop HelioH

- 250/295/395 MIL

- U10 PT6A

- 27 PT6A27 5 15 38 121 43 136 Turboprop Pilatus Britten

- Norman
BN2/AIslander BN2 250B17B 250B17 924 2,916 231 730 1,156 3,645

Turboprop Pilatus PC

- 12 PC12 PT6A

- 67B PT67B 1,190 3,754 2,357 7,438 3,547 11,192 Turboprop Shorts Harland SC

- 7Skyvan SC7

- 3

- 1 TPE331

- 2 TPE2 95 299 63 198 157 496 Turboprop SocataTBM850 TBM

- 850 PT6A

- 66 PT6A66 4 13 11 35 16 48 Turboprop Beech King Air C

- 90 BEECH90 PT6A

- 60 PT6A60 3 8 6 18 9 26 Turboprop Quest Kodiak 100 N/A N/A N/A 49 153 69 216 59 630

Total 110,903 354,217



### 14

## 3.0 GA A TA

Activity

Turbojet/Turbofan

The GAATA activity data include all general aviation and air taxi activities. The percentage of aircraft equipped with turbojet or turbofan engines below the CAEP MTOM threshold (MTOM<5,700 kg for jets) in the GAATA data w as estimated using the FAA’s Regis try data
(FAA, 2014 a ). Table 3

- 1 shows the aircraft population breakout based on the maximum takeoff weight range from the FAA Registry data:

Table 3

- 1. FAA Registry Aircraft Population by MTOM Range

Aircraft Type Maximum Takeoff Weight (kg,

Range) Aircraft Population Percent (%)
of Aircraft Population a

Turbo

- jet/Turbo

fan Up to 5,669 3,046 16%

5,670

- 9,071 5,478 29%

9,072 and over 10,335 55%

a Percentage of the jet and turboprop population that are Below the CAEP

MTOM thresholds.



### Th e GAATA data were adjusted to include only the percentage of jets below the CAEP MTOM

threshold based on the aircraft registration

. Note that use of the 16% value likely overestimates activity for jets below the CAEP MTOM threshold because aircraft above the CAEP MTOM

threshold are likely to be used more frequently and for longer trips than aircraft below the

threshold , but the GAATA data does not account for these differences . Efforts were made to use

the T

- 100 data to quantify operations of business jets, but th e T

- 100 dataset did no t include corporate jets not used in commercial passenger travels

.

Turboprops

As noted earlier, a number of turboprop aircraft models appear t o be included in the T

- 100 data

. To avoid double counting between th e T

- 100 and GAATA turboprop s, the total T

- 100 turboprop

annual LTO and cruising time activity (above and below the threshold) w ere subtracted from the

total GAATA turboprop activity. The final adjusted activity data from GAATA are listed in

Table 3

- 2.

Helicopters

No adjustment was needed for helicopters because there is no weight threshold for this aircraft

category.

15

### Table 3

- 2. Finalized GAATA Activity for Aircraft

B elow the CAEP MTOM Thresholds

Aircraft Type Annual Cruising Time (Hours)

Small Turboprop 1,924,033

Small Jet 552,104
Helicopter 2,722,511

Total 5, 198,648



### Emission Factors

F uel use and CO 2 

### emissions were calculated based on fuel consumption rates in the GA ATA data

Surve y, listed in Table 3

- 3, and EPA’s j et f uel CO 2 

### f actor, 9. 75 kg CO 2 

### /gal of fuel (EPA, 201 5 )

. Note that fuel usage reported in the GAATA survey, is provide d as block fuel usage, so it includes fuel consumption associated with the LTO cycle. The GAATA data aggregate fuel usages rates by aircraft type, thus actual fue l usage for specific aircraft may be higher or lower than the average values presented in Table 3

- 3; for example

, it is likely that small business jets

such as the Citation 500 Series would be approximately 125 gallons per h our compare d to the

315.1 gallon s per hour value noted in the GAATA average fuel consumption data

.

Table 3

- 3. GAATA Fuel Consumption Rates by Aircraft

Type (Block fuel/Block time)

Aircraft Type Average Fuel Consumption Rate ( G allons per Hour per Aircraft ) Small Turboprop 76.4

Small Jet 315.1

Helicopter 54.7



### 16

### Emission Calculations

Base year 2012 fuel use and CO 2 

### emission estimates were developed by applying the fuel use

and CO 2 

### factors to the GAATA air time data

. The emissions were calculated using the following equation:

E = A × EF × CF

W here:

E = E missions (tons)

A = A ctivity (hours of airtime )

EF = E mission factor (gal/hr)
CF = C onversion factor Jet Fuel density = 6.84 lbs/gallons of jet fuel ; 1 lb = 0.0005 ton s ;

g = 1.10231 E

- 6 ton)

Example Calculation:

In 2012, for small turboprops, the total annual cruising time was 1,924,033 hours and the fuel use rate is 76.4 gal/hr.

E = A × EF × CF E = 1,924,033 hours × 76.4 gal/hr × 6.84 lbs/gal × 0.0005 tons/lbs

E = 502,727 tons of jet fuel

The fuel use and CO 2 

### emission estimates are summarized in Table 3

- 4

.

Table 3

- 4. 2012 Fuel Use and CO 2 

### Emission Estimates by Aircraft Below the CAEP
MTOM Thresholds by Type and Mode

Aircraft Type Total

Fuel Use

(tons) CO 2 (tons)

Small Turboprop 502,727 1,579,844

Small Jet 594,970 1,869,724

Helicopter 509,311 1,600,535



### 17

## 4.0 Comparisons

The combined T

- 100 and GAATA jet fuel CO 2 

### emission estimates are summarized in Table 4

- 1

. These combine d data for aircraft below the CAEP MTOM threshold s are compared to the

estimates in the U.S. EPA 2015 Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks to quantify the

fraction of CO 2 

### emissions associated with this group of aircraft relative to U.S. aircraft emissions (or U.S. jet fuel emissions)

, excluding emissions from piston

- engine aircraft and military aircraft

. Collectively these aircraft account for approximately 2.52 percent of U.S. jet fuel CO 2 

### emissions

. Conversely aircraft subject to the ICAO CO 2 

### standard (or “U.S. covered aircraft”) would account
for 207,167,221 of the 212,525,619 tons of CO 2 

### or 97.48 percent of U.S. jet fuel CO 2 

### emissions

in 2012 (excluding emissions from piston

- engine aircraft and military aircraft)

.

Table 4

- 1

. T

- 100 and GAATA Combine d U.S. Jet Fuel CO 2 

### Emissions (tons) Summary for
2012

Aircraft Type Commercial General
Aviation Domestic

Total International

Total Total Domestic

(T

- 100) Commercial
International (T

- 100) GAATA Survey a

Turboprop (less

than 8,618 kg MTOM) 321,784 31,854 1,534,216 1,856,000 31,854 1,887,854

Jet (less than 5,700 kg MTOM) 0 0 1,869,724 1,869,724 0 1,869,724

Helicopter 284 0 1,600,535 1,600,820 0 1,600,820

Total CO 2 (less
than CAEP MTOM threshold) 322,068 31,854 5,004,476 5,326,544 31,854 5,358,398

U.S. EPA Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks: 1990

- 2012

Total CO 2 Aviation jet fuel

- domestic 124,891,870 N/A 19,841,603 144,733,474 N/A 144,733,474

Total CO 2 Aviation jet fuel

- International
Bunker N/A 67,792,145 N/A N/A 67,792,145 67,792,145

Total aviation CO 2 (tons) 124,891,870 67,792,145 19,841,603 144,733,474 67,792,145 212,525,619

% (less than MTOM threshold) 0.26% 0.05% 25.22% 3.68% 0.05% 2.52%

a To avoid double counting, the T

- 100 commercial activity was removed from the GAATA data.



### 18

## 5.0 Back c asting and Forecasting

Before “ backcast ing” or “forecasting” the 2012 CO 2 

### emission estimates to past and future years

, an assessment of A scend data was performed to quantify the fraction of the fleet that was below

the threshold to determine whether the fraction of j et, turboprop p owered a ircraft, and h elicopters

b elow the MTOM thresholds for the ICAO CO 2 

### s tandards of the aviation fleet remained fairly

constant over the years leading up to 2012 (Table 5

- 1). A constant fraction would yield

reasonable forecast and backcast emission es timates.

Our assessment showed that o nly the jet population showed a significant change in the fleet, increasing from 28 aircraft in 2005 to 477 in 2010. However, even with this increase, the jet population still represent only 3 percent of fixed wing airc raft and helicopters below the ICAO threshold. Since 2000, these aircraft account for 23 to 25 percent of the fixed wing fleet (excluding helicopters). If helicopters are included, then the value increases to 44 to 46 percent

of the total fleet. This infor mation supports the assumption that the fraction of the fleet below the ICAO threshold has remained fairly constant; therefore extrapolation of 2012 data to other years based on changes to the total general aviation fleet is expected to provide reasonable estimates. Note the 2015 values presented in Table 5

- 1 represent the current fleet

.

Table 5

- 1

. Historical Fraction of Jet s , Turboprop Powered Aircraft, and Helicopters B elow the
CAEP MTOM Thresholds for the ICAO CO 2 

### Standards

Threshold Aircraft Type Year

1990 2000 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 < 8619 kgs Turboprop 4,623 6,253 6,802 6,953 6,899 6,854 6,914 7,092

< 5701 kgs Jets 15 16 28 477 528 587 645 706

All Helicopters 4,962 5,631 6,118 6,414 6,290 6,269 6,153 6,159

Total aircraft below ICAO threshold (excluding helicopters) 4,638 6,269 6,830 7,430 7,427 7,441 7,559 7,798

Percent of aircraft below ICAO threshold (excluding helicopters) 25% 24% 23% 25% 24% 25% 25% 25%

Total aircraft below ICAO threshold (including helicopters) 9,600 11,900 12,948 13,844 13,717 13,710 13,712 13,957

Percent of aircraft below ICAO threshold (including helicopters) 51% 45% 44% 46% 45% 45% 45% 44%

Total aircraft in fleet (that use jet fuel) 18,775 26,185 29,321 30,297 30,334 30,356 30,813 31,412
Note that the Ascend data primarily includes commercial and business aircraft powered by jet engines with a seat count greater than four

. The g eneral aviation data may not be as complete as the commercial aircraft data.



### In order to be consistent with the 2015 Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks (EPA 2015), historical general aviation jet fuel usage (in terms of British Thermal Units (Btus) from the report, was used to develop adjustment factors relative to the inventory year of 2012, for backcasting to 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2013 as noted in Table 5

- 2.

19

### Table 5

- 2. Adjustment Factors for General Aviation Aircraft Based

on Jet Fuel Energy Consumption

Year General Aviation Jet Fuel Energy Consumption (TBtu) 1 

### Adjustment Factor (relative to 2012) 2



### 1990 544.566 2.431

1995 453.669 2.026

2000 427.013 1.907

2005 483.735 2.160

2010 313.523 1.400

2011 255.837 1.142

2012 223.969 1.000

2013 271.335 1.212

1 2015 Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks (EPA 2015), actual energy usage may be higher
because the GA value does not include air taxis equipped with turboprops which are included in the commercial jet fuel data.

2 Year 2012 is the reference year, and thus provides a growth factor of 1. The growth factors for each of the other years are a ratio of the fuel consumption of the year of interest divided by the fuel consumption for 2012 for each aircraft type. Where fuel usage was less than the reference year, the values were a fraction less than 1 and w here fuels consumption was great than the reference year, the growth factors were greater than 1.



### To forecast future emissions from jet, turboprop, and helicopter activities below the ICAO

thresholds

, ERG obtained projected general aviation fuel usage dat a from the FAA’s Aerospace
Forecast, 2014

- 2034 (FAA, 2014b). T he FAA Forecast project s to year 2034. In order to estimate fuel usage for 2040, ERG applied the average annual growth for the period from 2013 to 2034 to the 2034 fuel data to approximate fuel usage in 2040. These fuel data were used to develop the growth factors noted in Table 5

- 3 that could be applied to the 2012 data to estimate
2020, 2030, and 2040 CO 2 

### emissions

. Note that at the time this document was being finalized, the FAA posted an upda ted forecast that provided lower growth rates (FAA, 2015)

. For example

2013

– 2034 aggregated growth rates was 1.4 percent , 3.3 percent , and 2.6 percent for turboprop, turbo jet, and helicopter respectively; the revised values for 2014

- 2035 are 1.2 percent , 2.7

percent and 2.8 percent. Therefore the projected growth factors should be considered a high estimate for all aircraft types, except helicopters which may be slightly underestimated.

Table 5

- 3. Growth Factors Based on Forecasted Jet Fuel Energy Consumption

Year Millions of gallons Growth Factors (from 2012)

Turbo

- prop Turbo

- jet Turbine Helicopter Turbo

prop Turbo

jet Turbine Helicopter

2012 208.8 1,077.2 148.9 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

2020 213.0 1,427.0 182.8 1.0201 1.3247 1.2277

2030 250.2 1,914.6 229.2 1.1983 1.7774 1.5393

2040 301.9 2,545.1 299.3 1.4459 2.3627 2.0101
Table 31 FAA Aerospace Forecast 2014

- 2034

.



### 20

### The backcast and forecast factors presented in Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3 were applied to the 2012 CO 2 

### emissions to approximate CO 2 

### emissions from 1990 to 2040 in Table 5

- 4 for aircraft below the

CAEP MTOM thresholds

.

Table 5

- 4. Backcasted/Forecasted Small Jet s , Small Turboprop s , and Helicopter s ( below
the CAEP MTOM Thresholds )

-- CO 2 

### E missions (tons)

Year CO 2 

### Emissions (tons)

Total Small Turbo

- prop Small J et Turbine Helicopter

1990 4,590,197 4,546,116 3,892,292 13,028,605

1995 3,824,020 3,787,296 3,242,606 10,853,922

2000 3,599,329 3,564,764 3,052,078 10,216,171

2005 4,077,448 4,038,291 3,457,503 11,573,242

2010 2,642,711 2,617,332 2,240,907 7,500,950

2011 2,156,469 2,135,760 1,828,594 6,120,824

2012 1,887,854 1,869,724 1,600,820 5,358,398

2013 2,287,107 2,265,143 1,939,369 6,491,619

2020 1,925,828 2,476,881 1,965,278 6,367,987

2030 2,262,170 3,323,221 2,464,123 8,049,514

2040 2,729,613 4,417,597 3,217,766 10,364,976



## 6.0 QA/QC

To e nsure the quality of data used in the study and reasonableness of the results

, the following quality assurance checks were implement ed :

• Checked data compi lation to ensure that the datas ets matched the original data and were

not corrupt ed during data transfer. No issues with data transfer or transcription were

found.

• Compared LTO fuel usage rates to aircraft average data to identify and evaluate aircraft

that were significan tly different for the average values

. LTO fuel usage was only used for

the T

- 100 data that were applied to EDMS, which includes separate fuel usage data for aircraft make/model engine make/model combinations. No alternative LTO fuel usage

data sources were identified or used in this study.

• Compared CO 2 

### fuel fractions found in EDMS (9.75 kg CO 2 

### / gal)

, the 2008 Climate

Leader s GHG Guidance (9.57 kg CO 2 

### /gal ) ( EPA

, 2008 ), the 2014 EPA Fast Facts:

National

- Level U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory summaries (EPA, 2014b)

, and the 201 5 Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks re port (9.75 kg/ CO 2 

### ) (EPA, 201 5 )

. The EPA recommended using the 9.75 kg/CO 2 

### because it was based on the most recent data and

was consistent with the EDMS factor.

21

### • E nsured that the LTO data used in the EDMS runs matched the data compiled from the

T

- 100 data.

• Compared fuel usage rates for cruising to Project Interactive Analysis and Optimi z ation
( PIANO ) data provided by the EPA. The PIANO f uel usage rate data were only applicable for airc raft above the CAEP MTOM threshold and were not used directly in

this assessment of aircraft below the CAEP MTOM threshold.

• A ssessed the fraction of CO 2 

### emissions associated with the aircraft relative to total jet

CO 2 

### emissions in the 2015 Inventory of U.S . GHG Emissions and Sinks (2015) and Fast

Facts: National

- Level U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory (EPA, 2014 ).

• Compared the aircraft counts from the GAATA survey, the FAA Registry, and the

Ascend database.

Table 6

- 1 shows general QA assessment factors and how they were considered in this study. In addition to these internal quality checks, the documentation and data were provided to two external reviewers who are experienced with aviation. The external reviewers ’ comments and

observations are documented in a se parate report that compiles all comments and revisions made to the report. No changes were recommended for the data developed in this study.

22

### Table 6

- 1

. QA Summary Table

General
Assessment
Factor Definition How the Factor was
Considered

Soundness The extent to which the scientific and technical procedures, measures, methods or models employed to generate the information are reasonable for, and consistent with, the intended application. ERG used accepted inventory procedures to compile available
da ta and calculate emissions.
The emission calculations
follow similar methods used in
the EPA’s 2011 National Emission Inventory

. Applicability and Utility The extent to which the information is relevant for the Agency’s intended

use. There is no singular data source currently available to quantify aircraft counts and activity
levels for aircraft with MTOM
below the CO 2 

### standard
thresholds

. To get the required data, T

- 100 datasets, which
includes aircraft make and
model

- specific information were
used in co njunction with the FAA EDMS model to identify
commercial aircraft below the
thresholds

. GAATA data along with aircraft registration data were used to quantify non

commercial aircraft (though adjustments were needed to
account for air taxis which would appe ar in both studies

.

23

### Table 6

- 1

. QA Summary Table

General
Assessment
Factor Definition How the Factor was
Considered

Clarity and Completeness The degree of clarity and completeness with which the data, assumptions, methods, quality assurance, sponsoring organizations and analyses employed to generate
the information are documented. Throughout the pro cess, data

were provided to the EPA to
show how the datasets were being developed

, including summary comparisons and analysis.

The quality checks implemented in this study were included in the project Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)

.

This document

, in conjunction with the project datasets were developed to allow for independent replication of the procedures used. Uncertainty and Variability The extent to which the variability and uncertainty (quantitative and qualitative) in the information or in the procedures, measures, methods or
models are evaluated and
characterized. The data used in this study were either detailed and specific

, such
as the T

- 100 and EDMS factors or highly aggregated data such as the GAATA activity data; making it difficult to quantitatively assess uncertainty.

To the extent possible, information was provided in this report to qualitatively indicate
whether the data over

- or under

estimated actual fuel usage or
emissions

.

24

### Table 6

- 1

. QA Summary Table

General
Assessment
Factor Definition How the Factor was
Considered

Evaluation and
Review The extent of independent verification, validation and peer
review of the information or of the procedures, measures, methods

, or models. Internally, data were reviewed at critical points of the project to insure that data were compiled
and calculations were implemented correctly.

The EPA implemented a comprehensive review of the report and data; all recommended changes were
included in this final report

.

ICF and an independent

contractor , RR Aviation Services, LLC, provided an
external review of the methodology used an d preliminary results

. Suggested changes were addressed in the current version of this report.

25

## 7.0 References

Air Charter Service, 2003. Shorts SD 330 Cargo aircraft facts. http://www.aircharterservice.ae/aircraft/sd330_shorts.htm

Airlines Inform, 2008

- 2012. ATR 42. http://www.airlines

- inform.com/commercial

- aircraft/ATR

- 42.html

Airlines Inform, 2 008

- 2012. Embraer EMB

- 120 Brasilia. http://www.airlines

- inform.com/commercial

aircraft/Embraer

- 120

- Brasilia.html

American Museum of Aviation. Convair 580 Technica l Specifications. http://www.prop

liners.com/c580tech.htm

AOPA Turbine Pilot, 2012.TBM 850 By The Numbers. http://www.tbm850.com/2014/images/tbm/newsstand/files/2012

- 01%20AOPA%20Pilot.pdf

ATR, 2014. ATR 72

- 600. http://www.atraircraft.com/products_app/media/pdf/Fiche_ 72

- 600_septembre%202014.pdf

Australian Government Civil Aviation Safety Authority, 2010. Standard Economic Values Guidelines: Aircraft Operational Values. http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/manuals/regulate/acm/256r003.pdf

Aviation English Academy. SAAB 340. http://aviationenglishacademy.com.au/resources/saab

- 340/

Blackhawk, 2 009. Financial Analysis of the Blackhawk King Air 200 XP 42 

### Engine Upgrade. http://www.banyanair.com/pdf/conklinxp42

- 200.pdf

BLM National Aviation Office. EADS CASA CN

- 235: Preliminary Aircra ft Evaluation for SASEB. http://www.nifc.gov/aviation/av_documents/av_SASEB/CN235Report.pdf

Bramson, Alan, 1977. Pilot Flight Check: HS 125 Series 700. http://www.aeroresourcesinc.com/store_/images/classifieds/456

- 1.pdf

EPA, 2008. Climate Leaders Greenhouse Gas Inventory Protocol Core Module Guidance: Direct Emissions from Mobile Combustion Sources , EPA430

- K

- 08

- 004, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. May 2008. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/climatel eadership/documents/resources/mobilesource_guidance.pdf

EPA, 2014. Fast Facts, National

- Level U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory , EPA 430

- F

- 14

- 014, May 2014.

EPA, 201 5

. I nventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks: 1990

- 201 3

, EPA 430

- R

- 15

- 004, April 15, 201 5

.

FAA, 2012. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, T

- 100 Forms, 2012.

26

### FAA, 2013. Emissions and Dispersion Modeling Systems (EDMS), Version 5.1.4.1. Federal Aviation Administration. August. Internet address: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/ headquarters_offices/apl/research/models/edms_model/

FAA, 2014a. Aircraft Registry

– Releasable Aircraft Database Download . Federal Aviation Administration. September 5, 2014.

FAA, 2014b. FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY 2014

- 2034 . Internet address: https://www.faa .gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/aerospace_forecasts/20

14

- 2034/

FAA, 2015

. FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY 2015

- 2035 . Internet address: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/aerospace_ forecasts/20

14

- 2035/media/2015_National_Forecast_Report.pdf

Flightglobal, Ascend Online Fleets Database, Aircraft and Airline Data, U.S. historical fleet as of December 31, 2012, accessed on September 17, 2014 , the data files were updated in 2015 to accoun t for 2013 and current fleet composition

.

Flight International, 1969. In The Air: Beechcraft 99A Airliner. http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1969/1969%20

- %20 2689.PDF

GAATA, 2013. General Aviation and Part 135 Activity Surveys , U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, FY 2012, December 16, 2013.

Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, 1938. Erection and Maintenance Instructions f or Grumman Amphibian Model G

- 21A. http://www.seawings.co.uk/images/manuals/Goose/Grumman%20G

21A%20Erection%20&%20Maintenance%20Manual. pdf

Jet Advisors, 2014. Bombardier Learjet 45. http://jetadvisors.com/learjet

- 45

- performance/

Jet Advisors, 2014. Cessna Citation II Performance. http://jetadvisors.com/cessna

- citation

- ii

- performance/

Jet Advisors, 2014. Citation Excel Performance. http://jetadv isors.com/citation

- excel

- performance/

Jetstream Central. J31. http://www.jetstreamcentral.com/j31/

Lufttransport, 2011. Dornier Do228. http://www.lufttransport.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=34&Itemid=16

Maritime Air Charter Limited, 2014. BN

- 2A

- 21 Britten

- Norman Islander. http:// www.maritimeair.com/islander.php

Pilatus Aircraft. Just The Facts: Pilatus PC

- 12 NG. http://www.prostarpilatuscenter.com/pdf/PC

12_Just_The_Facts.pdf

27

### Plane & Pilot, 2010. He lio Courier H

- 295/395/391, 1955

- 78 , Plane & Pilot, April 16, 2010. Internet
address: http:// www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraft/international

- aircraft

- directory/single

- engine

aircraft/helio

- courier

- h

- 295

- 395

- 391.html#.VC1

- iGdOWUk

Premier Jet Aviation, 2013. Fairchild Dornier DO

- 328

- 120 Performance Specs. http://jetav.com/fairchild

dornier

- do

- 328

- 120

- performance

- specs/

Quest, 2014. Quest Aircraft , April 2014. Internet address: http://questaircraft.com/wp

content/uploads/2014/04/Quest_Electronic_Brochure_April_2014.pdf

Twombly, Mark R, 1991. Cessna 208B

– Grand Caravan. AOPA. http://www.aopa.org/Pilot

Resources/Aircraft

- Ownership/Aircraft

- Fact

- Sheets/Cessna

- 208B

- Grand

- Caravan

Universal Helicopters, 2012. Eurocopter AS350 B2. http://www.uhnl.nf.ca/our

- fleet/eurocopter

- as350

- b2

US NOAA. DeHavilland Twin Otter (DHC

- 6). http://www.aoc.noaa.gov/aircraft_otter.htm

28

## Appendix A

**. Air Taxi Models by Aircraft Category f**  **or EDMS/T**

**- 100 D**  **ata**

### Appendix A

. Air Taxi Models by Aircraft Category f or EDMS/T

- 100 D ata

General Aircraft Category EDMS Category Aircraft Model MTOM Cutoff Weight (lbs) Avg

. MTOM (lbs)
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Beech Bonanza 35A/C/D/E/G/H/J/K/S/V/ 36A Not Included in regulation 8

, 750
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Beech Baron (55 Series) Not Included in regulation 5

, 500
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Beech 65/65A

- 80/65B

- 80 (Queen Air) Not Included in regulation 6

, 100
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna 172 Skyhawk Not Included in regulation 2

, 450
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna 180 Not Included in regulation 2

, 800
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna 180A/B Not Included in regulation 2

, 800
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna 182 Skylane Not Included in regulation 2

, 800
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna 185A/B/C Skywagon Not Included in regulation 2

, 800
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna C206/207/209/210 Stationair Not Included in regulation 3

, 000
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Cessna C

- 402/402A/402B Not Included in regulation 6

, 100
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Aero Commander (500/600 Series Excpt 680FL) Not Included in regulation 6

, 100
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine De Havilland DHC2 Beaver Not Included in regulation 2

, 100

Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine De Havilland DHC3 Otter Not Included in regulation 8

, 000
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Piper PA

- 23

- 250 (Aztec/Apache) Not Included in regulation 6

, 100
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Piper PA

- 31 (Navajo)/T

- 1020 Not Included in regulation 6

, 100
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Piper PA

- 32 (Cherokee 6) Not Included in regulation 3

, 000
Piston powered aircraft Piston Engine Piper PA

- 34/39 (Twin Commanche) Not Included in regulation 6

, 100
Helicopter Light Helicopter Eurocompter AS350 B2 AStar No Minimum MTOM 2

, 250
Large Business Jet Business Jet Bombardier BD

- 100

- 1A10 Challenger 300 12

, 566 36

, 000
Large Business Jet Business Jet Cessna Citation II/ Bravo 12

, 566 14

, 800
Large Business Jet Business Jet Cessna 510 Mustang/560XL Citation Excel 12

, 566 14

, 800
Large Business Jet Business Jet Cessna Citation X Model 650/550B/550XL 12

, 566 20

, 000
Large Business Jet Business Jet Cessna CE

- 680 Citation Sovereign 12

, 566 20

, 000
Large Business Jet Business Jet Cessna Citation X Model CE750 X 12

, 566 35

, 700
Large Business Jet Business Jet Dassault Falcon 2000 12

, 566 35

, 700
Large Business Jet Business Jet Dassault Falcon 2000EX 12

, 566 35

, 700
Large Business Jet Business Jet Dassault

- Breguet Mystere

- Falcon 12

, 566 28

, 700



### A

- 1

### Appendix A

. Air Taxi Models by Aircraft Category f or EDMS/T

- 100 D ata

General Aircraft Category EDMS Category Aircraft Model MTOM Cutoff Weight (lbs) Avg

. MTOM (lbs)
Large Business Jet Business Jet Dassault Falcon 7X 12

, 566 35

, 700
Large Business Jet Business Jet Dassault Falcon 900 12

, 566 19

, 200
Large Business Jet Business Jet Gulfstream G150 12

, 566 23

, 500
Large Business Jet Business Jet Gulfstream G200 12

, 566 36

, 000
Large Business Jet Business Jet Gulfstream Aerospace G

- III/G

- IV 12

, 566 74

, 600
Large Business Jet Business Jet Gulfstream G450 12

, 566 74

, 600
Large Business Jet Business Jet Gulfstream III/V/ G

- V Exec/ G

- 5/550 12

, 566 90

, 500
Large Business Jet Business Jet Hawker Siddeley 125 12

, 566 18

, 300
Large Business Jet Business Jet Raytheon Beechcraft Hawker 800XP 12

, 566 28

, 700
Large Business Jet Business Jet 1124A Westwind II 12

, 566 23

, 500
Large Business Jet Business Jet Learjet45 12

, 566 18

, 300
Large Business Jet Business Jet Raytheon Beechraft 390 Premier I 12

, 566 14

, 450
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Boeing 717

- 200 12

, 566 121

, 000
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Canadair CL

- 600 Challenger 12

, 566 36

, 000
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Canadair (Bombardier) Challlenger 601 12

, 566 43

, 100
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Bombardier Challenger 604/605 12

, 566 36

, 000
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Canadair RJ

- 100/RJ

- 100ER 12

, 566 59

, 250
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Canadair RJ

- 200ER /RJ

- 440 12

, 566 59

, 250
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Bombardier BD

- 700 Global Express 12

, 566 82

, 500
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Canadair RJ

- 700 12

, 566 82

, 500
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Bombardier CRJ 705 12

, 566 84

, 500

Large Business Jet Regional Jet Canadair CRJ 900 12

, 566 82

, 500

Large Business Jet Regional Jet McDonnell Douglas DC9 Super
80/MD81/82/83/88 12

, 566 114

, 000
Large Business Jet Regional Jet McDonnell Douglas DC

- 9

- 15F 12

, 566 114

, 636.3636
Large Business Jet Regional Jet McDonnell Douglas DC

- 9

- 30 12

, 566 114

, 636.3636
Large Business Jet Regional Jet McDonnell Douglas DC

- 9

- 40 12

, 566 114

, 636.3636
Large Business Jet Regional Jet McDonnell Douglas DC

- 9

- 50 12

, 566 114

, 636.3636



### A

- 2

### Appendix A

. Air Taxi Models by Aircraft Category f or EDMS/T

- 100 D ata

General Aircraft Category EDMS Category Aircraft Model MTOM Cutoff Weight (lbs) Avg

. MTOM (lbs)
Large Business Jet Regional Jet McDonnell Douglas DC9 Super 87 12

, 566 116

, 671.4286
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Embraer

- 135 12

, 566 45

, 420
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Embraer

- 140 12

, 566 45

, 420
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Embraer

- 145 12

, 566 45

, 420
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Embraer 170 12

, 566 43

, 100
Large Business Jet Regional Jet Embraer 190 12

, 566 133

, 500
Large Turboprop Turboprop Antonov 12 19

, 000 155

, 000
Large Turboprop Turboprop Aerospatiale/Aeritalia ATR

- 42 19

, 000 36

, 200
Large Turboprop Turboprop Aerospatiale/Aeritalia ATR

- 72 19

, 000 46

, 000
Large Turboprop Turboprop Casa 235 19

, 000 27

, 300
Large Turboprop Turboprop Convair CV

- 580 19

, 000 58

, 000
Large Turboprop Turboprop McDonnell Douglas DC

- 6A 19

, 000 106

, 000
Large Turboprop Turboprop De Havilland DHC8

- 100 Dash

- 8 19

, 000 34

, 500
Large Turboprop Turboprop De Havilland DHC8

- 200Q Dash

- 8 19

, 000 43

, 000
Large Turboprop Turboprop De Havilland DHC8

- 300 Dash 8 19

, 000 43

, 000
Large Turboprop Turboprop De Havilland DHC8

- 400 Dash

- 8 19

, 000 43

, 000

Large Turboprop Turboprop Dornier 328 19

, 000 30

, 843
Large Turboprop Turboprop Embraer EMB

- 120 Brasilia 19

, 000 26

, 433
Large Turboprop Turboprop Gulfstream I 19

, 000 46

, 500
Large Turboprop Turboprop British Aerospace (Hawker

- Siddeley) BAe

- 748 19

, 000 46

, 500
Large Turboprop Turboprop Saab

- Fairchild 340/A 19

, 000 27

, 300
Large Turboprop Turboprop Saab

- Fairchild 340/B 19

, 000 27

, 300
Large Turboprop Turboprop Shorts 330 19

, 000 22

, 900
Large Turboprop Turboprop Shorts 360 19

, 000 22

, 900
Small Turboprop Turboprop Beech 1900 A/B/C/D 19

, 000 16

, 950
Small Turboprop Turboprop Beech 200 Super Kingair 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Beech King Air C

- 90 19

, 000 12

, 500



### A

- 3

### Appendix A

. Air Taxi Models by Aircraft Category f or EDMS/T

- 100 D ata

General Aircraft Category EDMS Category Aircraft Model MTOM Cutoff Weight (lbs) Avg

. MTOM (lbs)
Small Turboprop Turboprop Beech 99 Airliner 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Beech C99 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Pilatus Britten

- Norman BN2/A Islander 19

, 000 6

, 550
Small Turboprop Turboprop Casa/Nurtanio C212 Aviocar 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Cessna 208 Caravan 19

, 000 11

, 200
Small Turboprop Turboprop Cessna C208B/Grand Caravan 19

, 000 11

, 200
Small Turboprop Turboprop De Havilland Twin Otter DHC

- 6 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Dornier 228 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Grumman G

- 21A (Goose) 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop British Aerospace Jetstream 31 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Helio H

- 250/295/395 19

, 000 3

, 000
Small Turboprop Turboprop Pilatus PC

- 12 19

, 000 8

, 750
Small Turboprop Turboprop Cessna 406 Caravan II 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Shorts Harland SC

- 7 Skyvan 19

, 000 12

, 500
Small Turboprop Turboprop Socata TBM850 19

, 000 9

, 900



### A

- 4