Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63017 

Standard day conditions means the 

following ambient conditions: 

temperature = 15 °C, specific humidity 

= 0.00634 kg H2O/kg dry air, and 

pressure = 101.325 kPa. 

* * * * * 

Subpart C—Exhaust Emissions (New 

Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines) 

■ 3. Amend § 34.23 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 34.23 Exhaust Emission Standards for 

Engines Manufactured on and after July 18, 

2012. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(2) Except as provided in §§ 34.9(b) 

and 34.21(c), for Classes TF, T3 and T8 

engines manufactured on and after July 

18, 2012, and for which the first 

individual production model was 

manufactured on or before December 31, 

2013 (Tier 6): 

TIER 6 OXIDES OF NITROGEN EMISSION STANDARDS FOR SUBSONIC ENGINES

Class Rated pressure ratio—rPR Rated output rO 

(kN) 

NOX

(g/kN) 

TF, T3, T8 ............................ rPR ≤ 30 ............................ 26.7 < rO ≤ 89.0 ................ 38.5486 + 1.6823 (rPR) ¥ 0.2453 (rO) ¥ (0.00308 

(rPR) (rO)). 

rO > 89.0 ........................... 16.72 + 1.4080 (rPR). 

30 < rPR < 82.6 ................ 26.7 < rO ≤ 89.0 ................ 46.1600 + 1.4286 (rPR) ¥ 0.5303 (rO) + (0.00642 

(rPR) (rO)). 

rO > 89.0 ........................... ¥1.04 + 2.0 (rPR). 

rPR ≥ 82.6 ......................... rO > 26.7 ........................... 32 + 1.6 (rPR). 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) For Classes TF, T3 and T8 engines 

of a type or model of which the first 

individual production model was 

manufactured after December 31, 2013 

(Tier 8): 

TIER 8 OXIDES OF NITROGEN EMISSION STANDARDS FOR SUBSONIC ENGINES

Class Rated pressure ratio—rPR Rated output rO 

(kN) 

NOX

(g/kN) 

TF, T3, T8 ............................ rPR ≤ 30 ............................ 26.7 < rO ≤ 89.0 ................ 40.052 + 1.5681 (rPR) ¥ 0.3615 (rO) ¥ (0.0018 

(rPR) (rO)). 

rO > 89.0 ........................... 7.88 + 1.4080 (rPR). 

30 < rPR < 104.7 .............. 26.7 < rO ≤ 89.0 ................ 41.9435 + 1.505 (rPR) ¥ 0.5823 (rO) + (0.005562 

(rPR) (rO)). 

rO > 89.0 ........................... ¥9.88 + 2.0 (rPR). 

rPR ≥ 104.7 ....................... rO ≥ 26.7 ........................... 32 + 1.6 (rPR). 

* * * * * 

Issued under authority of 49 U.S.C. 106 

and section 232 of the Clean Air Act (42 

U.S.C. 7571) in Washington, DC, on October 

1, 2013. 

Lirio Liu, 

Director, Office of Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2013–24712 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 34 and 45 

[Docket No.: FAA–2012–1333; Amendment 

Nos. 34–5 and 45–28] 

RIN 2120–AK15 

Exhaust Emissions Standards for New 

Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines and 

Identification Plate for Aircraft Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; disposition of 

comments. 

SUMMARY: On December 31, 2012, the 

FAA published a final rule with a 

request for comments amending the 

emission standards for turbine engine 

powered airplanes to incorporate the 

standards that were promulgated by the 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) on June 18, 2012. The 

FAA’s final rule fulfilled its 

requirements under the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1970 to issue 

regulations ensuring compliance with 

the EPA standards. Although the public 

had an opportunity to comment on the 

EPA’s rule, and the FAA adopted the 

same requirements, the FAA sought 

public comment on its final rule. This 

action addresses the comments the FAA 

received. 

DATES: October 23, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may review the public 

docket for this rulemaking (Docket No. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
63018 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

FAA–2012–1333) at the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

of the West Building Ground Floor at 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, 20590–0001 between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. You 

may also review the public docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Aimee Fisher, Emissions 

Division (AEE–300), Office of 

Environment and Energy, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–7705; email Aimee.Fisher@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

action contact Karen Petronis, 

International Law, Legislation and 

Regulations Division (AGC–200), Office 

of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3073, email 

Karen.Petronis@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 231(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7571) directs the 

Administrator of the EPA to propose 

aircraft emission standards applicable to 

the emission of any air pollutant from 

classes of aircraft engines which, in the 

EPA Administrator’s judgment, causes 

or contributes to air pollution that may 

reasonably be anticipated to endanger 

public health or welfare. These emission 

standards have been promulgated by the 

EPA in 40 CFR part 87. 

Section 232 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 

7572) then directs the FAA to prescribe 

regulations to ensure compliance with 

the EPA’s standards. The FAA has 

promulgated these emission standards 

in 14 CFR part 34, and in the engine 

marking requirements in part 45. 

The EPA initially regulated gaseous 

exhaust emissions, smoke and fuel 

venting from aircraft in 1973, with 

occasional revision. Since the EPA’s 

adoption of the initial regulations, the 

FAA has taken subsequent action to 

ensure that the regulations in 14 CFR 

are kept current with the EPA’s 

standards. 

On July 27, 2011, the EPA proposed 

new aircraft engine emission standards 

for oxides of nitrogen (NOX), 

compliance flexibilities, and other 

regulatory requirements for aircraft 

turbofan or turbojet engines with rated 

thrusts greater than 26.7 kilonewtons 

(kN) (76 FR 45012). The EPA also 

proposed adopting the gas turbine 

engine test procedures of the 

International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO). The final rule 

adopting these proposals was published 

on June 18, 2012 (77 FR 36342), and was 

effective July 18, 2012. 

On December 31, 2012, the FAA 

published a final rule with a request for 

comments (77 FR 76842) adopting the 

EPA’s new emissions standards in part 

34. Although the EPA’s NPRM 

presented an opportunity to comment 

on the proposed regulations and the 

EPA addressed them in its final rule, the 

FAA sought public comment on its final 

rule. 

Discussion of Comments 

The FAA received three comments on 

the final rule. 

Aerospace Industries Association 

(AIA) expressed support for the 

requirements in the final rule, noting 

that the changes would harmonize U.S. 

regulations with those of ICAO. The 

AIA noted that some language in both 

the FAA and EPA rules differ from that 

which was agreed to by ICAO’s 

Committee of Aviation Environmental 

Protection. The AIA stated that these 

differences would result in some 

unnecessary complication and 

manufacturer cost, and cited as an 

example the term ‘‘excepted’’ for spare 

engines that do not need to meet the 

production cutoff requirements. Current 

engine labeling allows the terms 

‘‘COMPLY’’ or ‘‘EXEMPT’’ for 

emissions, and AIA believed these terms 

should continue to be used. 

Rolls-Royce Group stated that it 

participated in generating the comments 

submitted by AIA, and endorsed AIA’s 

comments. 

The FAA notes that AIA raised this 

same issue in its comments to the EPA’s 

NPRM. In its final rule, the EPA offered 

the following support for its decision 

not to change what it proposed despite 

AIA’s comment: 

• The Tier 6 production cutoff does 

not apply to the continued production 

of engines that are designated spares. 

Spare engines are produced to replace a 

similar engine already in service that 

was removed from service for 

maintenance purposes. Accordingly, the 

production of a spare engine is not 

restricted by the production cutoff, and 

the regulation does not apply to these 

engines. 

• The non-applicability of the cutoff 

eliminates the need to process an 

exemption for continued production of 

these engines beyond December 31, 

2012. 

• Conversely, engines that are 

intended to be produced for new 

installations (i.e., not replacing an 

engine already in service) are subject to 

the production cutoff regulation and the 

continued production of such engines 

beyond the cutoff date would require a 

grant of exemption. 

• Since the production of spare 

engines is not subject to the new cutoff 

regulations, the FAA proposed and the 

EPA accepted the idea that referring to 

these engines as exceptions to the 

regulation was more appropriate than 

requiring case-by-case consideration of 

exemptions when the regulation did not 

apply. 

• The word ‘‘exemption’’ has a 

specific legal meaning. In 14 CFR Part 

11 the FAA uses it to mean that an 

applicant is subject to a particular 

regulation and is requesting time 

limited relief under a specific set of 

criteria. It is a specialized form of 

rulemaking. 

• When an entity or its product is 

specifically excluded from a regulatory 

provision, it is considered ‘‘excepted.’’ 

The FAA believes that the rationale 

for using the word ‘‘excepted’’ 

continues to be valid, and both agencies 

use the term in the final rules with the 

same meaning and intent. No change is 

being made to the rule based on the 

comments of AIA and Rolls Royce. 

Pratt & Whitney supported the FAA’s 

implementation of the NOx emission 

standards promulgated by the EPA, as 

the EPA rule reflects U.S. efforts to 

harmonize domestic emission standards 

with the international standards 

adopted by ICAO. In the event that a 

substantive difference between the 

FAA’s and EPA’s final rules is 

discovered, Pratt & Whitney attached its 

comments to the EPA’s proposed 

rulemaking. Pratt & Whitney’s comment 

did not specify any instance where 

substantive differences might exist 

between the FAA and EPA final rules. 

No change is being made to the rule 

based on Pratt & Whitney’s comment. 

Conclusion 

After analyzing the comments 

submitted in response to this final rule, 

the FAA has determined that no 

revisions to the rule are warranted based 

on the comments received. 

Issued under authority of 49 U.S.C. 106 

and section 232 of the Clean Air Act (42 

U.S.C. 7571) in Washington, DC, on October 

1, 2013. 

Lirio Liu, 

Director, Office of Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2013–24713 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES