[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 245 (Tuesday, December 22, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79461-79466]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30818]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0300; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-163-AD;
Amendment 39-18339; AD 2015-25-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 757-200, 757-200CB, and 757-200PF airplanes.
This AD was prompted by a report that a forward-most cam latch of the
forward center cam latch pair on a main cargo door (MCD) broke during
flight. This AD requires doing a general visual inspection for broken
or missing cam latches, latch pins, and latch pin cross bolts;
torqueing the cross bolts in the latch pins; measuring the extension of

the latch pins; replacing all alloy steel cross bolts through the latch
pins with corrosion resistant steel (CRES) cross bolts; doing a general
visual inspection of all cam latches for lip deformation; doing an
inspection of cam latch 1 and cam latch 2 for cracks and replacing all
cracked or broken parts; checking the rig of the MCD and re-rigging as
applicable; and doing related investigative and corrective actions, if
necessary. This AD also requires doing certain repetitive inspections
until MCD rigging is done. This AD also requires repetitive MCD post-
rigging inspections and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct discrepancies of the cam latches, latch
pins, and latch pin cross bolts, which could reduce the structural
integrity of the MCD, and result in potential loss of the cargo door
and rapid decompression of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective January 26, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 26,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2013-0300.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0300; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly DeVoe, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 757-200, 757-200CB, and 757-200PF airplanes. The NPRM published
in the Federal Register on April 11, 2013 (78 FR 21576). The NPRM was
prompted by a report that a forward-most cam latch of the forward
center cam latch pair on a MCD broke during flight. The NPRM proposed
to require performing repetitive inspections of the MCD cam latches;
replacing cam latches, certain bolts, and door hinge fittings;
performing related investigative and corrective actions, if necessary;
and MCD rigging. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
discrepancies of the cam latches, latch pins, and latch pin cross
bolts, which could reduce the structural integrity of the MCD, and
result in potential loss of the cargo door and rapid decompression of
the airplane.

Actions Since the NPRM (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013) Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013), we have
reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2014. We referred to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
52A0091, dated March 9, 2010, as the appropriate source of service
information for accomplishing the actions specified in the NPRM. Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19,
2014, clarifies the inspection conditions and the on-condition actions
for certain conditions. Certain inspections of the cam latches and
latch pins were changed from detailed inspections to general visual
inspections. Also, a detailed inspection of mating parts and
immediately adjacent cam latches and latch pins for any cracks, or any
gouges in critical areas was added to certain on-condition actions
specified in the service information.
    Also, the on-condition action for latch pin extensions that are
between 0.84 and 0.89 inch or between 0.91 and 0.94 inch was changed.
For those latch pins, Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, dated
March 9, 2010, specifies repetitive detailed inspections and certain
other specified actions. However, for those latch pins, Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014,
specifies replacement of the discrepant latch pin, a detailed
inspection, and certain other specified actions (which are the same on-
condition actions specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
52A0091, dated March 9, 2010, for latch pin extensions that are less
than 0.84 inch or greater than 0.94 inch).

Explanation of Certain Changes to NPRM (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013)

    We have revised paragraphs (c), (g), (h), (j)(1), and (j)(2) of
this AD to refer to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision
1, dated December 19, 2014. We have also added new paragraph (k) of
this AD to give credit for doing actions before the effective date of
this AD in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091,
dated March 9, 2010. We have redesignated subsequent paragraphs
accordingly.
    In addition, since certain inspections and conditions were revised
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2014, we have revised the description of the actions in
this AD to correspond with the terminology in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014. As a result,
certain paragraphs in the proposed AD (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013)
have been rearranged and the corresponding paragraph identifiers have
been redesignated in this AD, as listed in the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Action in the NPRM (78 FR 21576,    Corresponding requirement in this
          April 11, 2013)                             AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             paragraph (g)                        paragraph (g)
             paragraph (h)                        paragraph (g)
             paragraph (i)                        paragraph (h)
             paragraph (j)                        paragraph (h)
             paragraph (k)                        paragraph (i)
             paragraph (l)                        paragraph (j)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have also revised the Costs of Compliance paragraph in this
final rule to reflect the work-hours in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments

received on the NPRM (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013) and the FAA's
response to each comment.

Clarification of Applicability

    FedEx stated that it would withhold its comments because the FedEx
Express Model 757 fleet was converted to freighters under ST Aerospace
Mobile Engineering Inc. Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST03562AT
(http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/C21335554C0E37C4862574B20065BA46?OpenDocument&Highlight=st03562at),
which was not mentioned in the applicability of the NPRM (78 FR 21576,
April 11, 2013). Fedex stated it would withhold its comments unless and
until an NPRM is issued for STC ST03562AT.
    We acknowledge FedEx's comment. As specified in paragraph (c) of
this AD, this AD applies to Model 757-200, 757-200CB, and 757-200PF
airplanes as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091,
Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014. The effectivity of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014,
identifies the affected airplanes by variable number.

Request To Emphasize Inspection Conditions/Findings of the NPRM (78 FR
21576, April 11, 2013)

    Boeing requested that paragraph (h) of the proposed AD (78 FR
21576, April 11, 2013) be rewritten to clarify the relative severity of
the inspection conditions and the appropriate actions needed. Boeing
stated that the actions in paragraph (h) of the proposed AD should
progress from the most serious condition findings to the least serious
findings while providing logical evaluation paths for the conditions.
    We agree that the progression of the inspection conditions and
their appropriate related investigative and corrective actions should
correspond with what is described in the referenced service
information. As stated previously, we have revised the terminology in
this final rule to match the actions (e.g., inspections and related
investigative and corrective actions) specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014, which
addresses the commenter's concerns.

Request To Delay AD Issuance Pending Revised Service Information

    European Air Transport Leipzig GmbH/DHL Air Ltd. (EATL/DHL)
requested that we delay issuing the AD until applicable service
information is revised. EATL/DHL stated that despite accomplishing the
re-rigging using the current service information, it continues to find
wear on the cam latches during post-rigging inspections, and has had to
replace a total of 69 cam latches and 17 latch pins in one year. As a
result, EATL/DHL stated that the financial impact is higher than the
inspection costs only.
    EATL/DHL stated that a rigging check of the cam hook mechanism must
be included in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091 to address the
identified unsafe condition. EATL/DHL stated that unintended wear of
the cam latches can be avoided only by first re-rigging the cam hook
mechanism to either side of the door to ensure that the cam latches and
latch pins are involved only in the door-locking process and not in the
door-closing process. EATL/DHL stated that it has been adjusting the
cam hook mechanism using the cam hook adjustment procedure in the
applicable airplane maintenance manual (AMM), but that it is difficult
to attain the tolerances stated in that AMM procedure. EATL/DHL
concluded that the AMM procedure must be clarified and simplified.
    We disagree with delaying this AD until revised service information
that includes a new AMM procedure is available. We understand that
there could be additional root causes and procedures that need to be
clarified if operators, experienced with accomplishing the current
procedures, determine that there are more effective means of
accomplishing the repairs. However, we disagree with delaying issuance
of this final rule until service information containing revised re-
rigging procedures becomes available. We have determined that the
actions specified in this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014, are an effective means of
accomplishing the repairs. Accomplishing the actions required by this
AD adequately addresses the identified unsafe condition. We have
determined that to delay this final rule would be inappropriate,
because inspections and repairs to the MCD cam latches are needed to
reduce the risk of the identified unsafe condition. Operators should
continue to communicate any findings resulting from failures, as well
as deficiencies in maintenance documentation, to Boeing so that
inspection and repair procedures can be reviewed and revised as
necessary. Operators can always request approval of an AMOC under the
provisions of paragraph (l) of this AD if alternative re-rigging
procedures are available and address the identified unsafe condition.
We have not changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Revise Compliance Time

    UPS requested that we revise paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of the
proposed AD (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013) to remove all references to
service information containing compliance times stated in calendar
days. UPS stated that crack initiation and subsequent propagation is
dependent on flight cycles due to pressurization and/or flight loads,
and not to MCDs sitting idle, so the use of calendar days is
irrelevant. UPS stated that removing calendar days should have no
negative effect on safety, and that a calendar-based compliance
schedule merely imposes economic, maintenance, and scheduling burdens.
UPS also questioned the need for repetitive inspections of the MCD cam
latches, and stated that it does not concur with the finding that
improper door rigging is the root cause of failure. UPS stated that the
only identified direct cause of cam latch failure is a sheared cross
bolt that migrated into the cam envelope, and that initial inspections
would identify cases of sheared cross bolts, migrated pins, corrosion,
lip deformation, etc. UPS asked what changes occur to the system that
warrant reinspection if the latch system far exceeds 10-\9\
reliability, after the root cause of the failed latch is resolved.
    We disagree with the request to remove all compliance times stated
in calendar days from this final rule or to remove the repetitive
inspections because the damage was determined to have been brought on
by a poorly rigged MCD and the torque impact from the cam latch
rotation during latching and unlatching operations. Therefore, it is
possible for the MCD system to be changed after a failed latch has been
repaired.
    For this reason, a calendar-based inspection interval has been
calculated along with the flight cycle interval, as specified in table
1 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014. Paragraph (g) of this
AD requires compliance within the times specified in table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014.
    However, paragraph (h) of this AD requires compliance within the
times specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19,
2014, which specifies repetitive intervals in flight cycles only.

    Specific changes in compliance time or inspection intervals may be
requested by submitting a request for approval of an AMOC according to
the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD. We have not
changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

    UPS requested that if calendar-based compliance times are retained,
for airplanes that had successfully passed the initial detailed
inspections of the cam latches and latch pins, torqued the cross bolts,
and measured the latch pin extension, the next inspection be extended
by 3,000 flight cycles or 24 months.
    We disagree with extending the compliance times of this AD.
However, we note that certain inspections required by this AD are at
the intervals specified by the commenter. In developing an appropriate
compliance time for these actions, we considered the urgency associated
with the subject unsafe condition, the practical aspect of
accomplishing the required modification and the normal scheduled
maintenance times for most affected operators. In consideration of
these items, we have determined that the repetitive intervals specified
in tables 1 and 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014, will
ensure an acceptable level of safety. No change has been made to this
AD in this regard.

Request To Allow Ferry Flight

    UPS requested that we revise the proposed AD (78 FR 21576, April
11, 2013) to allow an airplane having a discrepant cam/pin to be
ferried to a location where the airplane can be modified. UPS stated
that, since significant loads are the result of the pressurization and/
or flight loads, and not the result of whether the door is closed, an
airplane with findings needs to be ferried to a maintenance facility
for repair, especially in view of the given proposed time frames for
the inspection.
    We agree that special flight permits should be allowed because the
inspection intervals do not necessarily correspond to scheduled
maintenance intervals, and allowance should be made for operators to
ferry an airplane to a location where repairs can be made without the
need to request a special flight permit. Unpressurized flight does not
subject the airplane to possible rapid decompression of the airplane
should the damaged cam latch, latch pin, or latch pin cross bolt fail,
resulting in loss of the MCD during flight.
    However, it is not necessary to revise this final rule because
special flight permits are already allowed. Unless otherwise specified
in the AD, special flight permits are currently allowed as described in
section 21.197 and section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the airplane can be modified (if the operator elects to do so),
provided no passengers are onboard. We do not find it necessary to
change the final rule in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously--and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     [Agr]re consistent with the intent that was proposed in
the NPRM (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 21576, April 11, 2013).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1,
dated December 19, 2014. The service information describes procedures
for doing a general visual inspection for broken or missing cam
latches, latch pins, and latch pin cross bolts; torqueing the cross
bolts in the latch pins; measuring the extension of the latch pins;
replacing all alloy steel cross bolts through the latch pins with CRES
cross bolts; doing a general visual inspection of all cam latches for
lip deformation; doing a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) or magnetic
particle inspection of cam latch 1 and cam latch 2 for cracks and
replacing all cracked or broken parts; checking the rig of the MCD and
re-rigging as applicable; and doing related investigative and
corrective actions. The service information also describes doing
repetitive inspections for certain conditions specified in the service
information, which end after the MCD rigging is done as specified in
the service information. The service information also describes
procedures for doing MCD post-rigging inspections and corrective
actions. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 9 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost             Parts cost           product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections, torque, and            4 work-hours x $85     None.................            $340          $3,060
 measurement.                        per hour = $340.
Rigging MCD and replacing bolts...  49 work-hours x $85    0 \[1]\..............           4,165          37,485
                                     per hour = $4,165.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[1]\ We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide parts cost for the bolt replacement
  specified in this AD.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary related
investigative actions and certain replacements that would be required
based on the results of the inspections. We have no way of determining
the number of aircraft that might need these actions:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related investigative actions.................  2 work-hours x $85 per hour =                 $0            $170
                                                 $170.
Replacements of broken/missing parts..........  2 work-hours x $85 per hour =            \[2]\ 0             170
                                                 $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[2]\ We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide parts cost for the part replacements
  specified in this AD.

    We also have received no definitive data that would enable us to
provide cost estimates for the on-condition repair specified in this
AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2015-25-01 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18339; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0300; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-163-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 26, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200, 757-200CB,
and 757-200PF airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2014.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that a forward-most cam latch
on the forward center cam latch pair on a main cargo door (MCD)
broke during flight. We are issuing to detect and correct cracked or
damaged cam latches, latch pins, and latch pin cross bolts, which
could reduce the structural integrity of the MCD, and result in
potential loss of the cargo door and rapid decompression of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive MCD Inspections, Other Specified Actions, Related
Investigative Actions, and Corrective Actions (Including Bolt
Replacement and MCD Rigging)

    At the applicable times specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091,
Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014, except as provided by paragraph
(j)(1) of this AD: Do a general visual inspection for broken or
missing cam latches, latch pins, and latch pin cross bolts; torque
the cross bolts in the latch pins; measure the extension of the
latch pins; replace all alloy steel cross bolts through the latch
pins with corrosion resistant steel (CRES) cross bolts; do a general
visual inspection of all cam latches for lip deformation; do a high
frequency eddy current (HFEC) or magnetic particle inspection of cam
latch 1 and cam latch 2 for cracks and replace all cracked or broken
parts; check the rig of the MCD and re-rig as applicable; and do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions; and
thereafter do all applicable repetitive inspections specified in
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014, except as required
by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions at the applicable time
specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19,
2014. Do all applicable repetitive inspections at the applicable
time and intervals specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091,
Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014, until the rig of the MCD has
been checked in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2014.
    (1) For Condition 2 as defined in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014: Do repetitive
general visual inspections for broken or missing cam latches, latch
pins, and latch pin cross bolts.
    (2) For Condition 3 as defined in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014: Repetitive general
visual inspections for broken or missing cam latches, latch pins,
and latch pin cross bolts and repetitive detailed inspections of the
discrepant cam latch and mating latch pin for any cracks, or gouges
in critical areas.
    (3) For Condition 4 as defined in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014: Repetitive general
visual inspections for broken or missing cam latches, latch pins,
and latch pin cross bolts; repetitive detailed inspections of the
cam latches and latch pins for any cracks, or any gouges in critical
areas; and, unless replaced with new or reworked parts, repetitive
HFEC or magnetic particle

inspections of cam latch 1 and cam latch 2 for any cracks.

(h) Repetitive MCD Post-Rigging Inspections and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable times specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091,
Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014: Do general visual inspections
for any broken or missing cam latches, latch pins, and latch pin
cross bolts; a detailed inspection of the cam latches and latch pins
for any cracks, or any gouges in critical areas; and an HFEC or
magnetic particle inspection of cam latch 1 and cam latch 2 for
cracks; and do all applicable corrective actions, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014; except as required
by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions
before further flight. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the
applicable times specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091,
Revision 1, dated December 19, 2014.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an
alloy steel bolt as a cross bolt through any latch pin fitting
assembly in the lower sill of the MCD on any airplane.

(j) Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications

    The following exceptions apply in this AD.
    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1,
dated December 19, 2014, specifies a compliance time after the
original issue date of that service bulletin, this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1,
dated December 19, 2014, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action: Before further flight, repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this
AD.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the corresponding actions
required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were
done before the effective date of this AD, using Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, dated March 9, 2010, which is not
incorporated by reference in this AD.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Kimberly DeVoe,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch,
ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 425-
917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-52A0091, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2014.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 25, 2015.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-30818 Filed 12-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5378-5380]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01812]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 1b, 2, 157, and 380

[Docket No. RM15-26-000; Order No. 821]

Transferring Certain Dispute Resolution Service Matters to the
Commission's Landowner Helpline

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy
(DOE).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission is revising its regulations to reflect an
internal reorganization. On June 14, 2013, the Dispute Resolution
Service moved from the Commission's Office of Administrative Litigation
(OAL) to the Commission's Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ),
and the resulting new office was named the Office of Administrative Law
Judges and Dispute Resolution (OALJDR). On January 11, 2015, the
Commission designated a Landowner Helpline function in the OALJDR. The
revised regulations substitute the Commission's recently established
Landowner Helpline in place of the Commission's Dispute Resolution
Service (DRS) as the contact for handling dispute-related calls,
emails, and letters, pertaining to the construction and operation of
jurisdictional infrastructure projects. This revision does not preclude
disputants from utilizing other means to address disputes at the
Commission. The transfer of responsibility for dispute-related calls,
emails, and letters pertaining to infrastructure projects to the
Landowner Helpline reflects an allocation of dedicated resources to
serve the public interest.

DATES: This rule will become effective March 3, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Sharp, Office of the General
Counsel, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Order No. 821

Final Rule

(Issued January 21, 2016)

    1. 1. By this instant Final Rule, the Commission is revising its
regulations \1\ to substitute the Commission's recently established
Landowner Helpline in place of the Commission's Dispute Resolution
Service (DRS) as the point of contact for dispute-related calls,
emails, and letters, pertaining to the construction or operation of
jurisdictional natural gas and hydroelectric projects. The Commission
is implementing this Final Rule as a result of a recent internal
reorganization, which designated a Landowner Helpline function in the
Commission's Office of Administrative Law Judges and Dispute Resolution
(OALJDR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 1b.21(g-h), 2.55(c)(1)(ii)(C), 157.203(d)(1)(iii)(D),
and 380.15(c)(1)(ii)(C) (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. The Commission's Enforcement Hotline has been in existence since
June 1987. In April 1999, the Enforcement Hotline was codified under
section 1b.21 of the Commission's regulations.\2\ In addition to
providing information to the public, and informal, non-binding staff
opinions, any person may seek the Enforcement Hotline's assistance in
the informal resolution of a dispute, provided that the dispute is not
before the Commission in a docketed proceeding.\3\ The Enforcement
Hotline is staffed by personnel from the Division of Investigations in
the Office of Enforcement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 1b.21 (2015).
    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. On April 15, 2010, the Commission substituted the DRS, with its
expertise in conflict resolution, for the Enforcement Hotline as the
contact for landowners that have unresolved disputes with natural gas
companies following use of the companies' environmental complaint
resolution procedure.\4\ The Commission also transferred the
responsibility of dispute-related calls pertaining to the construction
and operation of hydroelectric projects to DRS.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Instant Final Rule Transferring Certain Enforcement Hotline
Matters to the Dispute Resolution Service, 75 FR 21503, at 21504
(April 26, 2010); FERC Stat. & Regs. ] 31,308 (2010) (cross-
referenced at 131 FERC ] 61,018 (2010)).
    \5\ Id. These include calls to OEP's Division of Hydropower
Administration and Compliance (DHAC) regarding compliance with
hydroelectric project licensing conditions which DHAC elects to
refer to DRS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The Commission's regulations require that natural gas companies
seeking automatic authorization for replacement facilities or blanket
certificate authorization for a project under the Natural Gas Act (NGA)
must provide all affected landowners with a description of the
company's environmental complaint resolution procedures, including
company contact telephone numbers which landowners can use to identify
and resolve environmental mitigation problems and concerns during
construction of the project and restoration of the right-of-way.\6\
Companies must also provide affected landowners with the current
telephone number and email address of the DRS and instruct them that if
they are not satisfied with the company's response to their complaints,
they may contact the DRS.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 18 CFR 157.203(d)(1)(iii) (2015).
    \7\ 18 CFR 157.203(d)(1)(iii)(D) (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Going forward, the above-described DRS responsibilities will be
handled by the new OALJDR Landowner Helpline.

II. Discussion

    6. This Final Rule amends 18 CFR 157.203(d)(1)(iii)(D) to
substitute the Commission's recently established Landowner Helpline for
the DRS Helpline as the contact for members of the public that have
unresolved disputes with pipeline companies following use of the
pipeline companies' environmental complaint resolution procedure.\8\
This Final Rule also removes and renumbers 18 CFR 1b.21 (g) and (h) to
create 18 CFR 1b.22 (a) and (b), which substitutes the Commission's
recently established Landowner Helpline for the DRS Helpline as the
contact for any person affected by either the construction or operation
of natural gas facilities under the NGA or by the construction or
operation of a project under the Federal Power Act (FPA), who may wish
to seek the informal resolution of a dispute. This final rule makes
this same substitution in 18 CFR 2.55(c)(1)(ii)(C) and 18 CFR
380.15(c)(1)(ii)(C). These

changes reflect the allocation of a dedicated Commission resource to
serve the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Notwithstanding the name of the helpline, in accordance with
section 1b.21(g), any person affected by a jurisdictional project--
whether a landowner or not--may make use of the Landowner Helpline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Information Collection Statement

    7. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require OMB to
approve certain information collection requirements imposed by agency
rule.\9\ However, this instant Final Rule does not contain or modify
any information collection requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 5 CFR 1320.12 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Environmental Analysis

    8. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\10\ Part
380 of the Commission's regulations lists exemptions to the requirement
to draft an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement,
and this rulemaking qualifies under the exemption for procedural,
ministerial or internal administrative actions.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC
Stats. & Regs. Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \11\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(1) (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    9. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \12\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This instant Final Rule concerns agency procedures. The Commission
certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact upon
participants in Commission proceedings. Therefore, an analysis under
the RFA is thus not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Document Availability

    10. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426.
    11. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in
the docket number field.
    12. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    13. These regulations are effective as an instant Final Rule
without a period for public comment. Under 5 U.S.C. 533(b), notice and
comment procedures are unnecessary where a rulemaking concerns only
agency procedure or practice, or where the agency finds that notice and
comment is unnecessary. This rule concerns only matters of agency
procedure, and will not significantly affect regulated entities or the
general public. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of
the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
of OMB, that this rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section
351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.
    14. These regulations are effective March 3, 2016.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 1b

    Investigations.

18 CFR Part 2

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric utilities, Natural
gas, Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

18 CFR Part 157

    Administrative practice and procedure, Natural gas, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

18 CFR Part 380

    Environmental impact statements, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: January 21, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends Parts 1b,
2, 157, and 380, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows.

PART 1b--RULES RELATING TO INVESTIGATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 1 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 16 U.S.C. 792-828c,
2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App. U.S.C. 1-85
(1988); E.O. 12009, 3 CFR 1978 Comp., p. 142.

Sec.  1b.21  [Amended]

0
2. Section 1b.21 is amended by removing paragraphs (g) and (h).

0
3. Section 1b.22 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  1b.22  Landowner Helpline.

    (a) Any person affected by either the construction or operation of
a certificated or authorized natural gas project under the Natural Gas
Act or by the construction or operation of a project under the Federal
Power Act may seek the informal resolution of a dispute by contacting
the Commission's Landowner Helpline. The Commission's Landowner
Helpline may be reached by calling toll-free at 1-877-337-2237, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or writing to: Commission's Landowner
Helpline, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    (b) Any person who contacts the Landowner Helpline is not precluded
from filing a formal action with the Commission if discussions assisted
by the Landowner Helpline staff are unsuccessful at resolving the
matter. A caller may terminate the use of alternative dispute
resolution procedures at any time.

PART 2--GENERAL POLICY AND INTERPRETATIONS

0
4. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 601; 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 16
U.S.C. 792-828c, 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 4321-4370h, 7101-7352.

0
5. Section 2.55(c)(1)(ii)(C) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  2.55  Auxiliary installations and replacement facilities.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (C) A description of the Commission's Landowner Helpline, which an
affected person may contact to seek an informal resolution of a dispute
as explained in Sec.  1b.22(a) of this chapter and the Landowner
Helpline number.
* * * * *

PART 157--APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY AND FOR ORDERS PERMITTING AND APPROVING ABANDONMENT UNDER
SECTION 7 OF THE NATURAL GAS ACT

0
6. The authority citation for Part 157 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717z.

0
7. Section 157.203(d)(1)(iii)(D) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  157.203  Blanket certification.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (D) Instruct landowners that, if they are still not satisfied with
the response, they may contact the Commission's Landowner Helpline at
the current telephone number and email address, which is to be provided
in the notification.
* * * * *

PART 380--REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT

0
8. The authority citation for Part 380 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321-4370h, 7101-7352; E.O. 12009, 3 CFR
1978 Comp., p. 142.

0
9. Section 380.15(c)(1)(ii)(C) is amended to read as follows:

Sec.  380.15  Siting and maintenance requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (C) A description of the Commission's Landowner Helpline, which an
affected person may contact to seek an informal resolution of a dispute
as explained in Sec.  1b.22(a) of this chapter and the Landowner
Helpline number.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-01812 Filed 2-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 20, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43037-43039]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17696]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2019 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0632; Special Conditions No. 25-19-08-SC]

Special Conditions: The Boeing Company Model 747-8 Series
Airplane; Certification of Cooktops

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the The Boeing Company
(Boeing) Model 747-8 series airplane. This airplane, as modified by
Boeing will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the
state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for
transport category airplanes. This design feature is associated with
the replacement and re-certification of existing cooktops with advanced
technology induction coil cooktops in the main deck galleys on a Boeing
Model 747-8 series airplane. The proposed modification is limited to
removing the existing cooktops and replacing them with new technology
cooktops. No changes to the galley surfaces, smoke detection system,
ventilation system, warning systems, and fire suppression systems are
included in this modification. The applicable airworthiness regulations
do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design
feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on The Boeing Company on August 20,
2019. Send comments on or before October 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2019-0632 using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478).
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Sinclair, FAA, Airframe/Cabin
Safety Branch, AIR-675, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The substance of these special conditions
has been published in the Federal Register for public comment in
several prior instances with no substantive comments received.
Therefore, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment
are unnecessary, and finds that, for the same reason, good cause exists
for adopting these special conditions upon publication in the Federal
Register.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On July 2, 2018, Boeing applied for a supplemental type certificate
for the replacement of existing cooktops in the Boeing Model 747-8
series airplane. The Boeing Model 747-8 currently approved under Type
Certificate No. A20WE, is an extended range passenger version of the
Boeing Model 747-400 series airplanes with four General Electric
engines having changes to increase its strength and fuel capacity.
    The modification incorporates the installation of an electrically
heated surface, called a cooktop. Cooktops introduce high heat, smoke,
and the possibility of fire into the passenger cabin environment. These
potential hazards to the airplane and its occupants must be
satisfactorily addressed. Since existing airworthiness regulations do
not contain safety standards addressing cooktops, special conditions
are therefore needed.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Boeing must show that the Model 747-8 series airplane, as
changed, continues to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
listed in Type Certificate No. A20WE or the applicable regulations in
effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier
amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards

for the Boeing Model 747-8 airplane because of a novel or unusual
design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions
of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type
certificate to modify any other model included on the same type
certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature,
these special conditions would also apply to the other model under
Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Boeing Model 747-8 airplane must comply with the fuel
vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The modification of the Boeing Model 747-8 series airplane will
incorporate a novel or unusual design feature, which is the
installation of cooktops in the passenger cabin. Cooktops introduce
high heat, smoke, and the possibility of fire into the passenger cabin
environment. The current airworthiness standards of part 25 do not
contain adequate or appropriate safety standards to protect the
airplane and its occupants from these potential hazards.

Discussion

    Currently, ovens are the prevailing means of heating food on
airplanes. Ovens are characterized by an enclosure that contains both
the heat source and the food being heated. The hazards represented by
ovens are thus inherently limited, and are well understood through
years of service experience. Cooktops, on the other hand, are
characterized by exposed heat sources and the presence of relatively
unrestrained hot cookware and heated food, which may represent
unprecedented hazards to both occupants and the airplane. Cooktops
could have serious passenger and airplane safety implications if
appropriate requirements are not established for their installation and
use. These special conditions apply to cooktops with electrically
powered burners. The use of an open flame cooktop (for example, natural
gas) is beyond the scope of these special conditions and would require
separate rulemaking action. The requirements identified in these
special conditions are in addition to those considerations identified
in Advisory Circular (AC) 20-168, Certification Guidance for
Installation of Non-Essential, Non-Required Aircraft Cabin Systems &
Equipment (CS&E), dated July 22, 2010, and those in AC 25-17A,
Transport Airplane Cabin Interiors Crashworthiness Handbook, Change 1,
dated May 24, 2016. The intent of these special conditions is to
provide a level of safety that is consistent with that on similar
airplanes without cooktops.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Boeing 747-8 series airplane as modified by Boeing. Should Boeing apply
at a later date for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other
model included on Type Certificate No. A20WE to incorporate the same
novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply
to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only a certain novel or unusual design feature
on the Boeing Model 747-8 series airplane. It is not a rule of general
applicability and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for
approval of these features on the airplane.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for the Boeing Model 747-8 series
airplane, as modified by The Boeing Company:

Cooktop Installations With Electrically-Powered Burner

    1. Means, such as conspicuous burner-on indicators, physical
barriers, or handholds, must be installed to minimize the potential for
inadvertent personnel contact with hot surfaces of both the cooktop and
cookware. Conditions of turbulence must be considered.
    2. Sufficient design means must be included to restrain cookware
while in place on the cooktop, as well as representative contents,
e.g., soup, sauces, etc., from the effects of flight loads and
turbulence. Restraints must be provided to preclude hazardous movement
of cookware and contents. These restraints must accommodate any
cookware that is identified for use with the cooktop. Restraints must
be designed to be easily utilized and effective in service. The
cookware restraint system should also be designed so that it will not
be easily disabled, thus rendering it unusable. Placarding must be
installed which prohibits the use of cookware that can not be
accommodated by the restraint system.
    3. Placarding must be installed which prohibits the use of cooktops
(i.e., power on any burner) during taxi, takeoff, and landing.
    4. One of the following options must be provided to address the
possibility of a fire occurring on or in the immediate vicinity of the
cooktop:
    a. Placarding must be installed that prohibits any burner from
being powered when the cooktop is unattended (Note: That this would
prohibit a single person from cooking on the cooktop and intermittently
serving food to passengers while any burner is powered). A fire
detector must be installed in the vicinity of the cooktop, which
provides an audible warning in the passenger cabin, and a fire
extinguisher of appropriate size and extinguishing agent must be
installed in the immediate vicinity of the cooktop. Access to the
extinguisher must not be blocked by a fire on or around the cooktop.
    b. An automatic, thermally activated fire suppression system must
be installed to extinguish a fire at the cooktop and immediately
adjacent surfaces. The agent used in the system must be an approved
total flooding agent suitable for use in an occupied area. The fire
suppression system must have a manual override. The automatic
activation of the fire suppression system must also automatically shut
off power to the cooktop.
    5. The surfaces of the galley surrounding the cooktop, which could
be exposed to a fire on the cooktop surface or in cookware on the
cooktop must be constructed of materials that comply with the
flammability requirements of Part III of Appendix F of part 25. This
requirement is in addition to the flammability requirements typically
required of the materials in these galley surfaces.

During the selection of these materials, consideration must also be
given to ensure that the flammability characteristics of the materials
will not be adversely affected by the use of cleaning agents and
utensils used to remove cooking stains.
    6. The cooktop must be ventilated with a system independent of the
airplane cabin and cargo ventilation system. Procedures and time
intervals must be established to inspect and clean or replace the
ventilation system to prevent a fire hazard from the accumulation of
flammable oils and be included in the instructions for continued
airworthiness. [Note: The applicant may find additional useful
information in Society of Automotive Engineers, Aerospace Recommended
Practice 85, Rev. E, entitled ``Air Conditioning Systems for Subsonic
Airplanes,'' dated August 1, 1991.]
    7. Means must be provided to contain spilled foods or fluids in a
manner that will prevent the creation of a slipping hazard to occupants
and will not lead to the loss of structural strength due to corrosion.
    8. Cooktop installations must provide adequate space for the user
to immediately escape a hazardous cooktop condition.
    9. A means to shut off power to the cooktop must be provided at the
galley containing the cooktop and in the cockpit. If additional
switches are introduced in the cockpit, revisions to smoke or fire
emergency procedures of the AFM will be required.
    10. If the cooktop is required to have a lid to enclose the
cooktop, there must be a means to automatically shut off power to the
cooktop when the lid is enclosed.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on August 13, 2019
Mary A. Schooley,
Acting Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-17696 Filed 8-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 27, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13295-13298]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04594]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0023; FRL-9380-2]

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document announces the Agency's receipt of several
initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or
on various commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 29, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the docket
identification (ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of
interest as shown in the body of this document, by one of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person, with telephone
number and email address, is listed at the end of each pesticide
petition summary. You may also reach each contact person by mail at
Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
    [emsp14]Crop production (NAICS code 111).
    [emsp14]Animal production (NAICS code 112).
    [emsp14]Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
    [emsp14]Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed at the end of
the pesticide petition summary of interest.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, 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 claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes 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.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
(21 U.S.C. 346a), requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in
or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking public comment on
the requests before responding to the petitioners. EPA is not proposing
any particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the
pesticide petitions described in this document contain the data or
information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not
fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or
whether the data support granting of the pesticide petitions. After
considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and
what action may be warranted. Additional data may be needed before EPA
can make a final determination on these pesticide petitions.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions
that

are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket
for each of the petitions is available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)),
EPA is publishing notice of the petitions so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on the requests for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petitions may be obtained
through the petition's summary referenced in this unit.

New Tolerance

    1. PP 2E8126. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0980). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton,
NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the fungicide, mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-
(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, in
or on basil, fresh at 30 parts per million (ppm); basil, dried at 200
ppm; ginseng at 0.3 ppm; bean, succulent at 0.90 ppm; cowpea, forage at
15 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0 ppm; fruit, small, vine
climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit at 2.0 ppm; onion,
bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 0.1 ppm; and onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at
7.0 ppm. Analytical method RAM 415-01 was developed for determination
of mandipropamid residues in crops. This method involves extraction of
mandipropamid residues from crop samples by homogenization with
acetonitrile: water (80:20 v/v). Extracts are centrifuged and aliquots
diluted with water prior to being cleaned-up using polymeric solid-
phase extraction cartridges. Residues of mandipropamid are quantified
using high performance liquid chromatography with triple quadruple mass
spectrometric detection (HPLC-MS/MS). Contact: Laura Nollen, (703) 305-
7390, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 2E8136. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0056). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of the herbicide, clomazone, including its
metabolites and degradates, determined by measuring only clomazone, 2-
[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone, in or on
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 0.10 ppm; rhubarb at 0.30 ppm;
pea, southern, succulent, seed at 0.05 ppm; pea, southern, dry seed at
0.05 ppm; and pea, southern, hay at 0.05 ppm. There is a practical
analytical method for detecting and measuring levels of clomazone in or
on raw agricultural commodities with a limit of detection that allows
monitoring of food for residues at or above the levels proposed in this
tolerance. Samples are analyzed using an analytical method consisting
of an acid reflux, a C18 solid phase extraction (SPE), a
Florisil SPE clean-up followed by gas chromatography (GC)-mass
selective detection (MSD). Contact: Sidney Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. PP 3E8147. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0626). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of the insecticide, acetamiprid, (1E)-N-[(6-
chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N'-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with husks removed at 0.01 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 15 ppm; and
corn, sweet, stover at 30 ppm. Based upon the metabolism of acetamiprid
in plants and the toxicology of the parent and metabolites,
quantification of the parent acetamiprid is sufficient to determine
residues of concern for enforcement purposes. As a result a method was
developed that involves extraction of acetamiprid from crop matrices
with a solvent followed by a decantation and filtration and finally
analysis by a Liquid Chromotagraphy with tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/
MS/MS) method. Contact: Andrew Ertman,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. PP 2F8088. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0038). ISK Biosciences Corporation,
7470 Auburn Road, Suite A, Concord, OH 44077, requests to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for the combined residues of the
insecticide, flonicamid, N-(cyanomethyl)-4-(trifluoromethyl)-3-
pyridinecarboxamide, and its metabolites, TFNA (4-trifluoromethyl
nicotinic acid), TFNA-AM (4-trifluoromethylnicotinamide), and TFNG, N-
(4-trifluoro methylnicotinoyl)glycine, calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of flonicamid, in or on tree, nuts, crop group 14-12 at 0.09
ppm; almond at 0.09 ppm; pecan at 0.04 ppm; and almond, hulls at 10.0
ppm. The residue analytical method for the majority of crops includes
an initial extraction with acetonitrile/deionized water, followed by a
liquid-liquid partition with ethyl acetate. The residue method for
wheat straw is similar, except that a C18 solid phase
extraction (SPE) is added prior to the liquid-liquid partition. The
final sample solution is quantitated using LC equipped with a reverse
phase column and triple quadruple mass spectrometer (MS/MS). Contact:
Carmen Rodia,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    5. PP 2F8130. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0576). Arysta LifeScience North
America, LLC, 15401 Weston Parkway, Suite 150, Cary, NC 27513, requests
to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the
fungicide fluoxastrobin, (1E)-[2-[[6-(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4-
pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro-1,4,2-dioxazin-3-yl)methanone O-
methyloxime, and its Z isomer, (1Z)-[2-[[6-(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-
4-pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro-1,4,2-dioxazin-3-yl)methanone O-
methyloxime, in or on wheat, grain at 0.15 ppm. Adequate analytical
methodology is available for enforcement purposes. The method comprises
microwave solvent extraction followed by a solid phase extraction clean
up and quantification by HPLC/MS/MS. The individual detector responses
for measured E- and Z-isomers is summed to give total residue. Contact:
Heather Garvie,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    6. PP 2F8133. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0071). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis
Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to establish a
tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide
pendimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6- dinitrobenzenamine,
and its 3,5-dinitrobenzyl alcohol metabolite (CL202347), in or on
almond, hulls at 6.0 ppm. In plants, the practical method for detecting
and measuring levels of pendimethalin is aqueous organic solvent
extraction, column clean up, and quantitation by GC. Contact: Erik
Kraft,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    7. PP 2F8135. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0051). Syngenta Crop Protection
LLC., P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300, requests to establish
a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide
propiconazole, 1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-yl]
methyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole and its metabolites determined as 2,4,-
dichlorobenzoic acid and expressed as parent compound, in or on
rapeseed, subgroup 20A at 0.3 ppm. The metabolism data in plants and
animals suggest that analytical methods to detect either the phenyl or
the triazole ring would be appropriate for the measurement of residues.
However, because of the natural occurrence of

compounds that interfere with the measurement of triazoles, methods
designed to detect this moiety have been proven unreliable and
unacceptable. Conversely, conversion of phenyl moiety to 2,4-
dichlorobenzoic acid (DCBA) has proven to be satisfactory for all
agricultural products analyzed to date. Analytical methods AG-626 and
AG-454A were developed for the determination of residues of
propiconazole and its metabolites containing the DCBA moiety.
Analytical method AG-626 has been accepted and published by EPA as the
tolerance enforcement method for crops. Contact: Erin Malone, (703)
347-0253, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    8. PP 2F8139. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0008). BASF Corporation, requests to
establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide,
saflufenacil, in or on crayfish at 0.01 ppm. Compliance with the
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only saflufenacil, 2-
chloro-5-[3,6-dihydro-3-methyl-2,6-dioxo-4-(trifluoromethyl)-1(2H)-
pyrimidinyl]-4-fluoro-N-[[methyl(1-
methylethyl)amino]sulfonyl]benzamide, in or on the commodities.
Adequate enforcement methodology (LC/MS/MS) methods D0603/02 (plants)
and L0073/01 (livestock) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. Contact: Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Amended Tolerance

    1. PP 2E8126. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0980). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.637 for residues of the fungicide, mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3-
methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-propynyloxy)-
benzeneacetamide, by removing the previously established tolerances in
or on grape at 1.4 ppm; onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion, green at 4
ppm; okra at 1.0 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm, upon
establishment of the tolerances listed under ``New Tolerance'' for PP
2E8126, elsewhere in this document. Contact: Laura Nollen, (703) 305-
7390, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 2E8136. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0056). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), requests to amend the tolerance in 40 CFR
180.425 for residues of the herbicide, clomazone, including its
metabolites and degradates, determined by measuring only clomazone, 2-
[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone, by removing
the previously established tolerance on cabbage at 0.10 ppm, upon
approval of the petitioned-for tolerance on brassica, stem and head
subgroup 5A listed under ``New Tolerance'' for PP 2E8136, elsewhere in
this document. Contact: Sidney Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. PP 3E8147. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0626). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR
180.578 for residues of the insecticide acetamiprid, (1E)-N-[(6-chloro-
3-pyridinyl)methyl]- N'-cyano-N-methylethanimidamide, including its
metabolites and degradates, by increasing the existing tolerances in
meat, meat byproducts, and milk. Tolerances for cattle, goat, horse,
and sheep meat are proposed at 0.30 ppm; cattle, goat, horse, and sheep
fat at 0.20 ppm; cattle, goat, horse, and sheep meat byproducts at 0.70
ppm; and milk at 0.30 ppm. Based upon the metabolism of acetamiprid in
plants and the toxicology of the parent and metabolites, quantification
of the parent acetamiprid is sufficient to determine residues of
concern for enforcement purposes. As a result, a method was developed
that involves extraction of acetamiprid from crop matrices with a
solvent followed by a decantation and filtration and finally analysis
by a LC/MS/MS method. Contact: Andrew Ertman,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. PP 2F8130. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0576). Arysta LifeScience North
America, LLC, requests to revise the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.609 for
residues of the fungicide, fluoxastrobin, (1E)-[2-[[6-(2-
chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4-pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro-1,4,2-
dioxazin-3-yl)methanone O-methyloxime, and its Z isomer, (1Z)-[2-[[6-
(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4-pyrimidinyl]oxy]phenyl](5,6-dihydro-1,4,2-
dioxazin-3-yl)methanone O-methyloxime, and its phenoxy-
hydroxypyrimidine, 6-(2-chlorophenoxy)-5-fluoro-4-pyrimidinol,
increasing the milk tolerance from 0.02 ppm to 0.03 ppm; and milk, fat
from 0.50 ppm to 0.75 ppm. Adequate analytical methodology is available
for enforcement purposes. The method comprises microwave solvent
extraction followed by a solid phase extraction clean up and
quantification by HPLC/MS/MS detection. The individual detector
responses for measured E- and Z-isomers is summed to give total
residue. Contact: Heather Garvie,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
New Tolerance Exemption

    PP 2E8049. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0585). Pennzoil-Quaker State Company,
700 Milam Street, Houston, TX 77002 c/o Wagner Regulatory Associates,
7217 Lancaster Pike, Suite A, Hockessin, DE 19707, requests to
establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues
of Distillates (Fishcher-Tropsch), heavy, C18-
C50, branched, cyclic and linear (CAS Reg. No. 848301-69-9)
under 40 CFR 180.910 when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in
pesticide formulations as a solvent, diluent and dust suppressant
without limitations in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes
no analytical method is needed because it is not required for the
establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. Contact:
Mark Dow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Amended Tolerance Exemption

    1. PP 2E8080. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0098). Toxcel, LLC, 7140 Heritage
Village Plaza, Gainesville, VA 20156 on behalf of Penn A Kem, LLC, 3324
Chelsea Avenue, Memphis, TN 38108, requests to amend an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.1263 for residues of
tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol (THFA), (CAS Reg. No. 97-99-4), when used as
a pesticide inert ingredient in the form of a solvent/co-solvent in
pesticide formulations, by allowing one pre-boot herbicide application
to all small cereal grains, and by extending use on canola to early
bolting stage, and use on soybeans up to bloom stage. The petitioner
believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for
the amendment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients. Contact:
Janet Whitehurst,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP IN-10541. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0093). Nichino America, Inc., 4550
New Linden Hill Road, Suite 501, Wilmington DE 19808 c/o Wagner
Regulatory Associates, 7217 Lancaster Pike, Suite A, Hockessin, DE
19707, requests to amend an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.1130 for residues of N-(n-octyl)-2-pyrrolidone,
(CAS Reg. No. 2687-94-7), when used as a pesticide inert ingredient to
include use in pesticide formulations containing the pyraflufen ethyl
active ingredient. The petitioner believes no analytical method is
needed because it is not required for the amendment of a tolerance
exemption for inert ingredients. Contact: David Lieu,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed

additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 20, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-04594 Filed 2-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 152)]
[Notices]
[Page 45773]
[DOCID:fr06au08-74]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0202] (formerly Docket No. 2008N-0009)

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Customer/Partner Service Surveys

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Customer/Partner Service Surveys''
has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of Information
Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of April 10, 2008
(73 FR 19510), the agency announced that the proposed information
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44
U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the
information collection and has assignedOMB control number 0910-0360.
The approval expires on July 31, 2011. A copy of the supporting
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: July 30, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-17906 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S