Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US

04/28/2008 10:31 AM

To

Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

next batch for Pb RIA docket

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:30 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 03/28/2008 09:24 AM

To

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

Did EPA identify a time for Ap 10 interagency Pb RIA mtg?

Kathy,

We spoke of identifying a time for interagency briefing on the Pb NAAQS RIA on the morning of 4/10, ending by 11:30.  Would 10 - 11:30 work for your team?  I'd like to update the interagency mtg invitation today if possible.

Thanks very much, I hope all is well,

heidi

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:30 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 03/28/2008 09:55 AM

To

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

RE: Did EPA identify a time for Ap 10 interagency Pb RIA mtg?

Consider it definite!  I was waiting for confirmation from EPA - so

we're good to go.

Thanks Kathy, have a good weekend,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 9:35 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Subject: Re: Did EPA identify a time for Ap 10 interagency Pb RIA mtg?

PS -- looks good -- please let us know when it is definite.  We're

planning on that time from this end.

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             03/28/2008 09:24                                        cc

             AM                       Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      Did EPA identify a time for Ap 10

                                      interagency Pb RIA mtg?

Kathy,

We spoke of identifying a time for interagency briefing on the Pb NAAQS

RIA on the morning of 4/10, ending by 11:30.  Would 10 - 11:30 work for

your team?  I'd like to update the interagency mtg invitation today if

possible.

Thanks very much, I hope all is well,

heidi

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:30 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 03/31/2008 12:17 PM

To

Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Charlotte Bertrand/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Schwartz article

Thanks Neal !

h

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 10:55 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Schwartz article

Heidi,

I apologize for the delaying e-mailing you this article, but I didn't

have an electronic copy available. I have also attached a spreadsheet

that documents the steps we followed to calculate the value of an IQ

decrement. Please see the tab marked "unit values summary." Please don't

hesitate to call if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Neal

(See attached file: Schwartz1994.pdf)(See attached file:

Lead_Model_Valuation_Estimates.xls)

_________________________________

Neal Fann

USEPA

Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Air Benefit and Cost Group

C439-02

RTP, NC 27711

voice:<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:30 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 04/03/2008 05:56 PM

To

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Hi Kathy -

I thought we had already discussed process, and that we would discuss

both benefits and costs methodology and whatever estimates might be

available at this point.  The objective of this meeting is to align on

whether the analyticsl approach is consistent with circular a-4; if it

is too early to discuss all elements of the analysis to assess those

elements in the context of a-4, then perhaps we should reschedule.

Thanks for getting us on the same page, Kathy,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 5:17 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Heidi -- just to get on the same page for tomorrow's 1:00 meeting -- our

plan is to discuss process and benefits methodology tomorrow.  That

seems like plenty to start out with.

Thanks!

-- Kathy

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:30 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 04/03/2008 07:31 PM

To

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Thanks Ron, that's great.  I'm at your disposal either way.

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 6:47 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Hi Heidi, I was checking out the setup on my laptop and saw your note.

We are prepared to engage with you substantively tomorrow.   Based on

last week's conversation and my expectations, I think that the benefits

methodology discussion is going to take most of the scheduled hour.

The purpose of Kathy's e-mail was to indicate that.  I expect that we

will need to look for additional time early next week (preferably

Monday) to finish the conversation, including the dicussion of the cost

methodology.  Talk to you @ 1:00.

 Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             04/03/2008 05:56                                        cc

             PM                       Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal

                                      Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Hi Kathy -

I thought we had already discussed process, and that we would discuss

both benefits and costs methodology and whatever estimates might be

available at this point.  The objective of this meeting is to align on

whether the analyticsl approach is consistent with circular a-4; if it

is too early to discuss all elements of the analysis to assess those

elements in the context of a-4, then perhaps we should reschedule.

Thanks for getting us on the same page, Kathy,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 5:17 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Heidi -- just to get on the same page for tomorrow's 1:00 meeting -- our

plan is to discuss process and benefits methodology tomorrow.  That

seems like plenty to start out with.

Thanks!

-- Kathy

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 28 (Friday, February 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5769-5770]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02661]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0141; FRL-9972-05]

Certain New Chemicals or Significant New Uses; Statements of
Findings for October 2017

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Section 5(g) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
requires EPA to publish in the Federal Register a statement of its
findings after its review of TSCA section 5(a) notices when EPA makes a
finding that a new chemical substance or significant new use is not
likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment. Such statements apply to premanufacture notices (PMNs),
microbial commercial activity notices (MCANs), and significant new use
notices (SNUNs) submitted to EPA under TSCA section 5. This document
presents statements of findings made by EPA on TSCA section 5(a)
notices during the period from October 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information contact: Greg Schweer, Chemical Control
Divison (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].
    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. As such, the
Agency has not attempted to describe the specific entities that this
action may apply to. Although others may be affected, this action
applies directly to the submitters of the PMNs addressed in this
action.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0141, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center
(EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-
0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    This document lists the statements of findings made by EPA after
review of notices submitted under TSCA section 5(a) that certain new
chemical substances or significant new uses are not likely to present
an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This
document presents statements of findings made by EPA during the period
from October 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017.

III. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    TSCA section 5(a)(3) requires EPA to review a TSCA section 5(a)
notice and make one of the following specific findings:
     The chemical substance or significant new use presents an
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment;
     The information available to EPA is insufficient to permit
a reasoned evaluation of the health and environmental effects of the
chemical substance or significant new use;
     The information available to EPA is insufficient to permit
a reasoned evaluation of the health and environmental effects and the
chemical substance or significant new use may present an unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment;
     The chemical substance is or will be produced in
substantial quantities, and such substance either enters or may
reasonably be anticipated to enter the environment in substantial
quantities or there is or may be significant or substantial human
exposure to the substance; or
     The chemical substance or significant new use is not
likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment.
    Unreasonable risk findings must be made without consideration of
costs or other non-risk factors, including an unreasonable risk to a
potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation identified as relevant
under the conditions of use. The term ``conditions of use'' is defined
in TSCA section 3 to mean ``the circumstances, as determined by the
Administrator, under which a chemical substance is intended, known, or
reasonably foreseen to be manufactured, processed, distributed in
commerce, used, or disposed of.''
    EPA is required under TSCA section 5(g) to publish in the Federal
Register a statement of its findings after its review of a TSCA section
5(a) notice when EPA makes a finding that a new chemical substance or
significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment. Such statements apply to PMNs,
MCANs, and SNUNs submitted to EPA under TSCA section 5.
    Anyone who plans to manufacture (which includes import) a new
chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose and any
manufacturer or processor wishing to engage in a use of a chemical
substance designated by EPA as a significant new use must submit a
notice to EPA at least 90 days before commencing manufacture of the new
chemical substance or before engaging in the significant new use.
    The submitter of a notice to EPA for which EPA has made a finding
of ``not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or
the environment'' may commence manufacture of the chemical substance or
manufacture or processing for the significant new use notwithstanding
any remaining portion of the applicable review period.

IV. Statements of Administrator Findings Under TSCA Section 5(a)(3)(C)

    In this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent
that such information is not claimed as Confidential Business
Information (CBI)) on the PMNs, MCANs and SNUNs for which, during this
period, EPA has made findings under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C) that the
new chemical substances or significant new uses are not likely to
present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment:
     EPA case number assigned to the TSCA section 5(a) notice.
     Chemical identity (generic name, if the specific name is
claimed as CBI).
     Website link to EPA's decision document describing the
basis of the ``not likely to present an unreasonable risk'' finding
made by EPA under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C).
    EPA Case Number: J-17-0014; Chemical identity: organic acid
producing yeast, modified, genetically stable; website link: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/tsca-section-5a3c-determination-75.

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: January 24, 2018.
 Greg Schweer,
Chief, New Chemicals Management Branch, Chemical Control Division,
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
[FR Doc. 2018-02661 Filed 2-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 84 (Thursday, May 1, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24548-24551]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09413]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0864; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-108-AD;
Amendment 39-17841; AD 2014-09-06]
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 777F series airplanes. This AD was prompted by
a report of a fire that originated near the first officer's seat and
caused extensive damage to the flight deck. This AD requires replacing
the low-pressure oxygen hoses with non-conductive low-pressure oxygen
hoses in the stowage box and supernumerary ceiling area. We are issuing
this AD to prevent electrical current from passing through an internal,
anti-collapse spring of the low-pressure oxygen hose, which can cause
the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn and lead to an oxygen-fed
fire near the flight deck.

DATES: This AD is effective June 5, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of June 5,
2014.

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, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-
0864; 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: Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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 777F series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register
on October 23, 2013 (78 FR 63130). The NPRM proposed to require
replacing the low-pressure oxygen hoses with non-conductive low-
pressure oxygen hoses in the stowage box and supernumerary ceiling area
in order to prevent electrical current from passing through an
internal, anti-collapse spring of the low-pressure oxygen hose, which
can cause the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn and lead to an
oxygen-fed fire near the flight deck.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(78 FR 63130, October 23, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM (78 FR 63130, October 23, 2013)

    The National Transportation Safety Board, The Air Line Pilots
Association International (ALPA), and Alex Naife expressed support for
the NPRM (78 FR 63130, October 23, 2013).

Request To Shorten Compliance Time

    ALPA recommended that we reduce the 36-month compliance time to
replace the low-pressure oxygen hoses to 12 months because of the
impact that an oxygen-fed fire on the flight deck would have on flight
safety.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request to reduce the
compliance time. In developing an appropriate compliance time, we
considered the safety implications, parts availability, and normal
maintenance schedules for timely accomplishment of replacing the low-
pressure oxygen hoses with non-conductive low-pressure oxygen hoses. In
consideration of all of these factors, we determined that the
compliance time, as proposed, represents an appropriate interval in
which the low-pressure oxygen hoses can be replaced in a timely manner
within the fleet, while still maintaining an adequate level of safety.
    Also, reducing the compliance time of the NPRM (78 FR 63130,
October 23, 2013) would necessitate (under the provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act) reissuing the notice, reopening the
period for public comment, considering additional comments subsequently
received, and eventually issuing a final rule. In light of this, and in
consideration of the amount of time that has already elapsed since
issuance of the original notice, we have determined that further delay
of this final rule is not appropriate.
    Operators are permitted to accomplish the requirements of an AD at
a time earlier than the specified compliance time; therefore, an
operator may choose to replace the low-pressure oxygen hoses before 36
months after the effective date of this final rule. If additional data
are presented that would justify a shorter compliance time, we may
consider further rulemaking on this issue. We have not changed this
final rule in this regard.

Request for Credit for Previous Actions

    FedEx requested that accomplishment of the actions described in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, dated June 6, 2012, be
considered as an acceptable means of compliance with the final rule.
(The NPRM (78 FR 63130, October 23, 2013) specifies using Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, Revision 1, dated April 29, 2013.) FedEx
commented that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, Revision 1,
dated April 29, 2013, on page 12, indicates that no more work is
required for airplanes on which the defective hoses were removed, as
described in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, dated June 6,
2012. FedEx stated that it has already accomplished the modification on
5 of its 18 applicable airplanes, as described in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 777-35A0029, dated June 6, 2012.
    We partially agree with the commenter. We agree because the
commenter indicated that the unsafe condition has already been removed
on several of its airplanes. However, paragraph (i) of the NPRM (78 FR
63130, October 23, 2013), and this final rule specifies credit for
replacing the defective hoses before the effective date of this final
rule using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, dated June 6,
2012. Therefore, no changes are necessary to this final rule in this
regard.

Change Made to This Final Rule

    We have revised the unsafe condition statement in the SUMMARY, the
Discussion, and paragraph (e) of this final rule to clarify that the
unsafe condition is near the flight deck, rather than on the flight
deck.

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 change described previously and minor editorial changes. We
have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 63130, October 23, 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 63130, October 23, 2013).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 18 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace oxygen hoses................  7 work-hours x $85 per          $1,450           $2,045           $36,810
                                       hour = $595.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

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):

2014-09-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17841; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0864; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-108-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective June 5, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777F series
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, Revision 1, dated April 29,
2013.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a fire that originated near
the first officer's seat and caused extensive damage to the flight
deck. We are issuing this AD to prevent electrical current from
passing through an internal, anti-collapse spring of the low-
pressure oxygen hose, which can cause the low-pressure oxygen hose
to melt or burn and lead to an oxygen-fed fire near the flight deck.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Oxygen Hose Replacement

    Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD: Replace
the low-pressure oxygen hoses in the stowage box and supernumerary
ceiling area with new, non-conductive, low-pressure oxygen hoses, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777-35A0029, Revision 1, dated April 29, 2013.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
low-pressure oxygen hose, part number (P/N) 57034-08A050140, P/N
57034-08A050215, or P/N 57034-09A050270, on any airplane.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
35A0029, dated June 6, 2012, provided that the low-pressure oxygen
hoses described in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-35A0029,
Revision 1, dated April 29, 2013, were replaced with new, non-
conductive, low-pressure oxygen hoses. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777-35A0029, dated June 6, 2012, is not incorporated by reference in
this AD.

(j) 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 (k) 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 required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to
be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Susan L. Monroe,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch,
ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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 may be obtained at the addresses specified
in paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD.

(l) 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 777-35A0029, Revision 1, dated
April 29, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Boeing 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<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at 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 April 17, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-09413 Filed 4-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 186)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 59167-59170]
[DOCID:fr27se10-37]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0858; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-183-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, -900, and -900ER Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series
airplanes. This proposed AD would require modifying the thrust reverser
inner walls, inspecting for damage of the upper and lower inner wall
insulation blankets, measuring the electrical conductivity on the
aluminum upper compression pads 2 and 3 as applicable, inspecting for
discrepancies of the inner wall of the thrust reverser, and corrective
actions if necessary. This proposed AD would also require, for certain
airplanes, doing various concurrent actions (including replacing the
inner wall blanket insulation, installing updated full-authority
digital electronic control software, and modifying the thrust reverser
inner wall and insulation blankets). This proposed AD results from
reports of heat damage to the inner wall of the thrust reversers. We
are proposing this AD to detect and correct such heat damage, which
could result in separation of adjacent components and consequent
structural damage to the airplane, damage to other airplanes, and
injury to people on the ground.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 12,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
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>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Parker, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
425-917-6496; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0858;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-183-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports of heat-related damage to the inner wall
of the thrust reverser. During an inspection of a thrust reverser, one
operator found heat damage at different locations of the inner wall: At
the top, in the area of the number 2 and number 3 upper compression
pads, and at the lower aft edge. A flight test at Boeing showed that
the temperatures applied to the inner walls of the thrust reversers are
too high. Higher temperatures are due to hot precooler air leakage
between the inner wall of the thrust reverser and the insulation
blankets and heat transfer through the upper compression pad area and
the fireseal bracket support flange. Heat damage to the thrust reverser
inner wall, if not corrected, could result in separation of adjacent
components and consequent structural damage to the airplane, damage to
other airplanes, and injury to people on the ground.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed the service bulletins identified in the following
table.

                           Service Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Service Bulletin          Revision level            Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Service Bulletin         Original........  March 25, 2010.
 737[dash]78[dash]1082.
Boeing Service Bulletin         Original........  May 12, 2010.
 737[dash]78[dash]1088.
Boeing Service Bulletin         2...............  June 7, 2010.
 737[dash]78[dash]1079.
Boeing Service Bulletin         4...............  June 16, 2005.
 737[dash]78[dash]1069.
Boeing Service Bulletin         2...............  October 7, 1999.
 737[dash]78[dash]1063.
CFM CFM56-7B Service Bulletin   Original........  March 30, 2007.
 73[dash]0135.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1082 describes procedures for
modifying the thrust reverser inner wall by drilling a hole through the
inner wall behind the number 3 upper compression pad, and installing a
bushing, applying sealant to areas of the insulation blankets, and
installing flange insulation assemblies at the top aft edge of the
upper insulation blanket.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088 describes procedures for the
following:
     Detailed inspection for damage of the engine side and
inner wall side of the upper and lower insulation blankets.
     Measurement of the electrical conductivity on the aluminum
upper compression pads 2 and 3, as applicable.
     Inspections for discrepancies of the inner wall of the
thrust reverser, including an ultrasonic inspection of the thrust
reverser inner wall for interplay delamination and skin-to-core
disbond.
     Detailed inspection, for certain airplanes, of the thrust
reverser inner wall for signs of heat damage.
     Detailed inspection of the thrust reverser inner wall for
indications of loose fasteners where the inner wall attaches to the
hinge beam and at the fasteners for the compression pads.
     Corrective actions, including repairing or replacing
damaged insulation blankets and repairing the thrust reverser inner
wall (including replacing loose fasteners and contacting Boeing for a
repair procedure), and replacing any unserviceable compression pad with
a new one.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1079 describes procedures for
essentially the same actions (including inspections and modification)
specified in Boeing Service Bulletins 737-78-1082 and 737-78-1088.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1082 also specifies the concurrent
accomplishment of the actions specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
78-1063: replacement of the inner wall blanket insulation.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1082 also specifies the concurrent
accomplishment of the actions specified in CFM CFM56-7B Service
Bulletin 73-0135: installation of updated full-authority digital
electronic control (FADEC) software.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088 specifies the concurrent
accomplishment of the actions specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
78-1069: modification of the thrust reverser inner walls and insulation
blankets. The modification involves installing additional supports on
the inner wall of the thrust reverser for the attachment of the
insulation blankets, installing new brackets to attach the forward edge
of the upper and lower insulation blankets, installing additional
attachment grommets to the blankets, and sealing the blankets at the
forward edge of the fan duct inner walls.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously, except as
discussed below.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information

    Although Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088 specifies that
operators may contact the manufacturer for disposition of certain
repair conditions, this proposed AD would require operators to repair
those conditions using a method approved by the FAA.

Clarification of Certain Terminology

    Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088 refers to
``unsatisfactory'' findings, this proposed AD assumes those parts or
locations are ``unserviceable.''

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 710 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, at an average labor
rate of $85 per hour.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
    Actions (Service Bulletin)            Work hours               Parts            Cost per product    registered airplanes          Fleet cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification (Boeing Service        14 per engine........  $2,065 or 3,702......  $4,445 or 6,082.....  710.................  Up to $4,318,220.
 Bulletin 737[dash]78[dash]1082).
Insulation replacement (Boeing      18 per engine........  0....................  3,060...............  15..................  45,900
 Service Bulletin
 737[dash]78[dash]1063).
Software update (CFM CFM56-7B       1....................  0....................  85..................  Up to 710...........  Up to 60,350.
 Service Bulletin 73[dash]0135).
Inspections (Boeing Service         35...................  0....................  2,975...............  710.................  2,112,250
 Bulletin 737-78-1088).
Modifications (Boeing Service       110..................  0....................  9,350...............  306.................  2,861,100
 Bulletin 737-78-1069).
Inspections and modification        37 per engine........  2,070 or 3,391.......  8,360 or 9,681......  Optional action.....  Optional action.
 (Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-
 1079) (if done as an option to
 Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-
 1088 and Boeing Service Bulletin
 737-78-1082).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    3. 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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-0858; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-183-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 12, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes; certificated in any
category; as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1082,
dated March 25, 2010.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 78: Engine
exhaust.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of heat damage to the inner
wall of the thrust reversers. The Federal Aviation Administration is
issuing this AD to detect and correct such heat damage, which could
result in separation of adjacent components and consequent
structural damage to the airplane, damage to other airplanes, and
injury to people on the ground.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Modification of Thrust Reverser Inner Wall

    (g) Except as required by paragraph (m) of this AD: Within 24
months after the effective date of this AD, modify the thrust
reverser inner wall, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1082, dated March 25,
2010.

Actions Concurrent With Paragraph (g)

    (h) Before or concurrently with accomplishment of the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD, do the actions

specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For Model 737-600, -700, and -800 series airplanes
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1063, Revision 2, dated
October 7, 1999: Replace the inner wall blanket insulation, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-78-1063, Revision 2, dated October 7, 1999.
    (2) For airplanes equipped with engines identified in CFM CFM56-
7B Service Bulletin 73-0135, dated March 30, 2007: Install updated
full-authority digital electronic control (FADEC) software, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of CFM CFM56-7B
Service Bulletin 73-0135, dated March 30, 2007.

Inspection/Measurement

    (i) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (j) of this
AD: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and
(i)(3) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088, dated May 12,
2010. If any damage or discrepancy is found, before further flight,
do all applicable corrective actions, in accordance with
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088,
dated May 12, 2010; except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD;
and except where the service bulletin refers to ``unsatisfactory''
findings, this AD assumes those parts or locations are
``unserviceable.''
    (1) Do a detailed inspection for damage of the engine side and
inner wall side of the upper and lower insulation blankets.
    (2) Measure the electrical conductivity on the aluminum upper
compression pads 2 and 3, as applicable.
    (3) Inspect for discrepancies of the thrust reverser inner wall
(including an ultrasonic inspection for interplay delamination and
skin-to-core disbond, a detailed inspection for signs of heat damage
as applicable, and a detailed inspection for loose fasteners where
the inner wall attaches to the hinge beam and at the fasteners for
the compression pads).

Compliance Times for Paragraph (i)

    (j) Do the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD at the
applicable time specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3),
(j)(4), or (j)(5) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes with thrust reverser part number (P/N)
315A2295-003 through 315A2295-154 inclusive: Do the actions within
30 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes with thrust reverser P/N 315A2295-155 through
315A2295-174 inclusive: Do the actions within 60 months after the
effective date of this AD.
    (3) For airplanes with thrust reverser P/N 315A2295-175 through
315A2295-190 inclusive: Do the actions within 72 months after the
effective date of this AD.
    (4) For airplanes with thrust reverser P/N 315A2295-191 through
315A2295-198 inclusive: Do the actions within 84 months after the
effective date of this AD.
    (5) For airplanes with thrust reverser P/N 315A2295-199 through
315A2295-202 inclusive: Do the actions within 96 months after the
effective date of this AD.

Exception to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088 Procedures

    (k) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1088, dated May 12,
2010, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action, repair
before further flight in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. For a
repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification
basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to
this AD.

Actions Concurrent With Paragraph (i)

    (l) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-
1069, Revision 4, dated June 16, 2005: Before or concurrently with
the accomplishment of the requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD,
modify the thrust reverser inner wall and insulation blankets, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-78-1069, Revision 4, dated June 16, 2005. A
modification done before the effective date of this AD is also
acceptable if done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
78-1069, Revision 1, dated June 13, 2002; Revision 2, dated February
6, 2003; or Revision 3, dated August 5, 2004.
    (m) If the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD are done
before the compliance time specified in paragraph (g) of this AD:
Before or concurrently with the accomplishment of the actions
required by paragraph (i) of this AD, the modification required by
paragraph (g) of this AD must be done.

Option to Requirements of Paragraphs (g) and (i)

    (n) Accomplishment of all of the actions (including inspections
and modification) specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1079,
Revision 2, dated June 7, 2010, within 24 months after the effective
date of this AD, is acceptable for compliance with the requirements
of paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD and is acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of this AD, provided applicable
repairs are done before further flight, and provided the applicable
actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (l) of this AD
have been done. Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-78-1079, dated August 6,
2007; or Revision 1, dated December 17, 2007; are also acceptable
for compliance with the corresponding actions specified in this
paragraph.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (o)(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. Send information to
ATTN: Chris Parker, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S,
FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 425-
917-6590. Information may be e-mailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington on September 15, 2010.
Robert D. Breneman,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.

[FR Doc. 2010-24175 Filed 9-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 124 (Thursday, June 29, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29467-29469]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13670]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0004; FRL-9964-07-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Revisions to Jefferson County
Emissions Monitoring and Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On March 22, 2011, and April 20, 2011, the Commonwealth of
Kentucky, through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ),
submitted revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP) on
behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District
(District). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the April 20, 2011, submittal and the portions of the March 22,
2011, submittal concerning revisions to the District's stationary
source emissions monitoring and reporting requirements because the
Commonwealth has demonstrated that these changes are consistent with
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2017-0004 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Wong can be reached by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve only certain
changes related to the District's stationary source emissions
monitoring and reporting requirements in Regulation 1.06 \1\ in the
March 22, 2011, and April 20, 2011, SIP revisions. This regulation
provides the District with the authority to require emissions
monitoring at stationary sources and requires certain sources to
maintain emissions records and provide annual emissions statements to
the District. It does not impose any emissions limits or control
requirements on any emissions source. The March 22, 2011, submission
also included changes to Jefferson County Regulation 1.02--Definitions;
Regulation 3.01--Ambient Air Quality Standards; Regulation 3.02--
Applicability of Ambient Air Quality Standards; Regulation 3.03--
Definitions; Regulation 3.04--Ambient Air Quality Standards; and
Regulation 3.05--Methods of Measurement. EPA approved these changes,
with the exception of the requested addition of certain definitions in
Regulation 1.02, on December 6, 2016 (81 FR 87815).\2\ In addition, the
March 22, 2011, submission also included changes to Regulation 1.07--
Emissions During Startups, Shutdowns, Malfunctions and Emergencies. EPA
approved the change to Regulation 1.07 on June 10, 2014 (79 FR 33101).
The April 20, 2011, submission revises only Regulation 1.06.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2003, the City of Louisville and Jefferson County
governments merged and the ``Jefferson County Air Pollution Control
District'' was renamed the ``Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control
District.'' However, each of the regulations in the Jefferson County
portion of the Kentucky SIP still has the subheading ``Air Pollution
Control District of Jefferson County.'' Thus, to be consistent with
the terminology used in the SIP, EPA refers throughout this notice
to regulations contained in Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky
SIP as the ``Jefferson County'' regulations.
    \2\ EPA did not approve the addition of definitions for the
terms ``acute noncancer effect,'' ``cancer,'' ``carcinogen,'' and
``chronic noncancer effect,'' because these definitions are not
related to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). See
81 FR 87815.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Analysis of Kentucky's SIP Revisions

A. March 22, 2011, Submittal

    The March 22, 2011, SIP submission contains a version of Regulation
1.06 adopted by the District on June 21, 2005 (referred to as ``Version
7'' by the District) and a version of Regulation 1.06 adopted by the
District on September 21, 2005 (referred to as ``Version 8''). The
version currently incorporated into the SIP is referred to as ``Version
6'' (District effective on December 15, 1993). See 65 FR 53660 (October
23, 2001). Collectively, Versions 7 and 8 change the heading of
Regulation 1.06 to ``Stationary Source Self-Monitoring, Emissions
Inventory Development, and Reporting,'' and change aspects of Section
1--``In Stack Self-Monitoring and Reporting'' (including a change in
the title to ``In-Stack Self-Monitoring and Reporting); Section 2--
``Ambient Air Monitoring''; and Section 3--``Emissions and Related Data
Reporting'' (including a change in the title to ``Provisions for
Section 4 and Section 5 Emissions Data''). The submission adds four new
sections: Section 4--``Emissions Data for Criteria Pollutants, HAPs,
and Ammonia''; Section 5--``Enhanced Emissions Data for Toxic Air
Contaminants''; Section 6--``Certification by a Responsible Official'';
and Section 7--``Confidentiality and Open Records Requirements.'' The
changes to the heading of Regulation 1.06, the changes to Sections 1
and 2, and the addition of Sections 6 and 7 are administrative in

nature. The changes to Section 3 modify and add provisions regarding
emissions reporting data requirements, methods of emissions
calculations, and stationary source emissions statements, and remove
outdated reporting dates; the addition of Section 4 details
requirements for submitting emissions statements on an annual basis for
particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide,
lead, ozone precursor emissions of volatile organic compounds and
oxides of nitrogen, ammonia, and hazardous air pollutants; and Section
5 contains requirements for enhanced emissions statements for listed
``toxic air contaminants.'' Because the reporting of toxic air
contaminants is not related to the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for the criteria pollutants, EPA is not proposing to
act on Section 5.\3\ EPA is proposing to approve the changes to
Regulation 1.06 contained in the March 22, 2011, SIP revision, with the
exception of Section 5 and references to Section 5 located in Section
3, to the extent that these changes are not superseded by the changes
in the April 20, 2011, submittal discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The criteria pollutants are particulate matter, sulfur
dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, and ground-level
ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. April 20, 2011, Submittal

    The April 20, 2011, SIP submission contains a version of Regulation
1.06 adopted by the District on January 19, 2011 (referred to as
``Version 9'' by the District). After acknowledging that the District
had sent Versions 7 and 8 to Kentucky for submittal to EPA, the
District requests that EPA incorporate Version 9 into the SIP and
identifies changes in Regulation 1.06 between Version 8 and Version 9.
Version 9 revises Version 8 by changing aspects of Section 1 (including
a change in the title to ``Stack Monitoring and Reporting''); Section 2
(including a change in title to ``Ambient Air Monitoring and
Reporting''); Section 3 (including a change in the title to
``Requirements for Section 4 and Section 5 Emissions Statements'');
Section 4 (including a change in the title to ``Emissions Statements
for Criteria Pollutants, HAPs, and Ammonia''); Section 5 (including a
change to the title to ``Emissions Statements for Toxic Air
Contaminants''); and Section 6. Version 9 also eliminates Section 7.
The submitted changes clarify and streamline the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for stationary sources by
deleting and combining redundant and outdated provisions. The changes
to Section 4 also modify the emissions threshold for sources to submit
annual emissions statements to the District. For the reasons discussed
above, EPA is not proposing to act on Section 5 or on the references to
Section 5 located in Section 3.
    EPA has reviewed the changes to Regulation 1.06 in the March 22,
2011, and April 20, 2011, SIP submissions, and has made the preliminary
determination that the changes that EPA proposes to incorporate into
the SIP are consistent with the CAA. EPA has preliminarily determined
that these changes will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment or any other applicable requirement of the CAA,
and therefore satisfy section 110(l), because they are either
administrative or modify requirements that do not have an air quality
impact such that removal will interfere with attainment or maintenance
of the NAAQS. If EPA's proposed approval of changes to Regulation 1.06
is finalized, the text of the regulation in the SIP will reflect
Version 9, with the exception of Section 5 and any references to
Section 5 located in Section 3.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text
that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District Regulation
1.06--Stationary Source Self-Monitoring, Emissions Inventory
Development, and Reporting, District effective on January 19, 2011,
with the exception of Section 5 and any references to Section 5 located
in Section 3. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials
generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA
Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's March 22, 2011, and April
20, 2011, SIP revisions as discussed in section II, above. If this
proposal is finalized, the text of Jefferson County Regulation 1.06 in
the SIP will reflect the version of the rule effective on January 19,
2011 (Version 9) with the exception of Section 5 and any references to
Section 5 located in Section 3. EPA is not proposing to act on Section
5 for the reasons discussed above.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Sulfur
dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 14, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2017-13670 Filed 6-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31643-31644]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14059]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86204; File No. SR-BYX-2012-019]

Self-Regulatory Organization; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting an Extension to Limited Exemption From Rule 612(c) of
Regulation NMS in Connection With the Exchange's Retail Price
Improvement Program

June 26, 2019.
    On November 27, 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') issued an order pursuant to its authority under Rule
612(c) of Regulation NMS (``Sub-Penny Rule) \1\ that granted the BATS
BYX-Exchange, Inc. (k/n/a ``Cboe BYX'' or the ``Exchange'') a limited
exemption from the Sub-Penny Rule in connection with the operation of
the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement (``RPI'') Program (the
``Program''). The limited exemption was granted concurrently with the
Commission's approval of the Exchange's proposal to adopt the Program
for a one-year pilot term.\2\ The exemption was granted coterminous
with the effectiveness of the pilot Program and has been extended seven
times; \3\ both the pilot Program and exemption are scheduled to expire
on December 31, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 242.612(c).
    \2\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68303 (November 27,
2012), 77 FR 71652 (December 3, 2012) (``RPI Approval Order'') (SR-
BXY-2012-019).
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 71249 (January 7,
2014), 79 FR 2229 (January 13, 2012) (SR-BYX-2014-001) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 71250 (January 7, 2014), 79 FR
2234 (January 13, 2012) (Order Granting an Extension to Limited
Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection With the
Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program); 74111 (January 22,
2015), 80 FR 4598 (January 28, 2015) (SR-BYX-2015-05) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); and 74115 (January 22, 2015),
80 FR 4324 (January 27, 2015) (Order Granting an Extension to
Limited Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection
With the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program); 76965
(January 22, 2016), 81 FR 4682 (January 27, 2016) (SR-BYX-2016-01)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change to Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 76953 (January 21,
2016), 81 FR 4728 (January 27, 2016) (Order Granting an Extension to
Limited Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection
With the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program); 78180 (June
28, 2016), 81 FR 43306 (July 1, 2016) (SR-BYX-2016-15) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 78178 (July 5, 2016), 81 FR
43689 (July 5, 2016) (Order Granting an Extension to Limited
Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection With the
Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program); 81368 (August 10,
2017), 82 FR 38960 (August 16, 2017) (SR-BatsBYX-2017-18) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 81364 (August 8, 2018), 82 FR
38733 (August 15, 2017) (Order Granting an Extension to Limited
Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection With the
Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program); 83758 (August 1,
2018), 83 FR 38757 (August 7, 2018) (SR-CboeBYX-2018-015) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 83756 (August 1, 2018), 83 FR
38748 (August 7, 2018) (Order Granting an Extension to Limited
Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection With the
Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program); 84830 (December 17,
2018) 83 FR 65769 (December 21, 2018) (SR-CboeBYX-2018-025) (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 84845 (December 18, 2018), 83
FR 66329 (December 26, 2018) (Order Granting an Extension to Limited
Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection With the
Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program). The Exchange filed to
make the pilot program permanent, but subsequently withdrew that
filing. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83831 (August 13,
2018), 83 FR 41128 (August 17, 2018) (SR-CboeBYX-2018-014); 85586
(April 10, 2019), 84 FR 15657 (April 16, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2018-014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now seeks to extend the exemption until September 30,
2019.\4\ The Exchange's request was made in conjunction with an
immediately effective filing that extends the operation of the Program
until September 30, 2019.\5\ In its request to extend the exemption,
the Exchange notes that the Program was implemented gradually over
time. Accordingly, the Exchange has asked for additional time to allow
itself and the Commission to analyze data concerning the Program, which
the Exchange committed to provide to the

Commission, as well as to allow additional opportunities for greater
participation in the Program.\6\ For this reason and the reasons stated
in the Order originally granting the limited exemption, the Commission
finds that extending the exemption, pursuant to its authority under
Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS, is appropriate in the public interest
and consistent with the protection of investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See letter from Adrian Griffiths, Assistant General Counsel,
Cboe BYX, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated June
25, 2019.
    \5\ See SR-CboeBYX-2019-010.
    \6\ See RPI Approval Order, supra note 2, at 77 FR at 71657.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, it is hereby ordered, that, pursuant to Rule 612(c) of
Regulation NMS, the Exchange is granted a limited exemption from Rule
612(c) of Regulation NMS that allows it to accept and rank orders
priced equal to or greater than $1.00 per share in increments of
$0.001, in connection with the operation of its RPI Program.
    The limited and temporary exemption extended by this Order is
subject to modification or revocation if at any time the Commission
determines that such action is necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Responsibility
for compliance with any applicable provisions of the federal securities
laws must rest with the persons relying on the exemptions that are the
subject of this Order.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(83).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-14059 Filed 7-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 86 (Friday, May 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26026-26027]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10430]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9808-5; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2013-0232]

Draft Plan for Development of the Integrated Science Assessment
for Nitrogen Oxides--Health Criteria

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. EPA is announcing the availability of the ``Draft
Plan for Development of the Integrated Science Assessment for Nitrogen
Oxides--Health Criteria.'' The draft document was prepared by the
National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) within EPA's Office
of Research and Development as part of the review of the primary
(health-based) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The purpose of this draft document
is to communicate the plan for the development of the Integrated
Science Assessment (ISA) for the health effects of nitrogen oxides
(NOX), which will provide a comprehensive assessment of the
current scientific literature pertaining to known and anticipated
effects on public health associated with the NOX in the
ambient air.
    EPA is releasing this draft document to seek consultation by the
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the public (meeting
date and time to be specified in a separate Federal Register notice).
The draft document does not represent and should not be construed to
represent any final EPA policy, viewpoint, or determination. EPA will
consider any public comments submitted in response to this notice when
revising the draft plan for development of the NOX ISA.

DATES: The public comment period begins, May 3, 2013, and ends May 31,
2013. Comments must be received on or before May 31, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The ``Draft Plan for Development of the Integrated Science
Assessment for Nitrogen Oxides--Health Criteria'' will be available
primarily via the Internet on the NCEA home page under the Recent
Additions and Publications menus at http://www.epa.gov/ncea or in the
public docket at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-
2013-0232). A limited number of CD-ROM or paper copies will be
available. Contact Ms. Marieka Boyd by phone<PHONE_NUMBER>), fax (919-
541-5078), or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to request either of these,
and please provide your name, your mailing address, and the document
title, ``Draft Plan for Development of the Integrated Science
Assessment for Nitrogen Oxides--Health Criteria'' to facilitate
processing of your request.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information, contact Dr.
Molini Patel, NCEA; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information About the Document

    Section 108(a) of the Clean Air Act directs the Administrator to
identify certain pollutants, which among other things, ``cause or
contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare'' and to issue air quality criteria
for them. These air quality criteria are to ``accurately reflect the
latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of
all identifiable effects on public health or welfare, which may be
expected from the presence of [the] pollutant in the ambient air . . .
.'' Under section 109 of the Act, EPA is then to establish NAAQS for
each pollutant for which EPA has issued criteria. Section 109(d) of the
Act subsequently requires periodic review and, if appropriate, revision
of existing air quality criteria to reflect advances in scientific
knowledge on the effects of the pollutant on public health or welfare.
EPA is also to revise the NAAQS, if appropriate, based on the revised
air quality criteria.
    NO2 is one of six criteria pollutants for which EPA has
established NAAQS. Periodically, EPA reviews the scientific basis for
these standards by preparing an ISA (formerly called an Air Quality
Criteria Document). The ISA, in conjunction with additional technical
and policy assessments, provide the scientific basis for EPA decisions
on the adequacy of the current NAAQS and the appropriateness of
possible alternative standards. The CASAC, an independent science
advisory committee whose review and advisory functions are mandated by
Section 109(d)(2) of the Clean Air Act, is charged (among other things)
with independent scientific review of EPA's air quality criteria.
    On February 10, 2012 (77 FR 7149), EPA formally initiated its
current review of the air quality criteria for the health effects of
NOX and the primary (health-based) NO2 NAAQS,
requesting the submission of recent scientific information on specified
topics. EPA held a workshop February 29 to March 1, 2013, to discuss
with invited scientific experts, key science and policy issues relevant
to the review of the health effects of NOX (77 FR 7149).
NCEA has prepared a draft plan for development of the ISA for the
health effects of NOX, which communicates the scope,
organization, methodology, and key policy-relevant issues for the ISA.
EPA is planning to release the first external review draft of the
health effects ISA for NOX for review by CASAC and the
public later on in 2013.
    Development of the ISA is one phase of the NAAQS review, and a
draft Integrated Review Plan (IRP) is being developed that will
characterize all of the phases of the review of the primary NAAQS for
NO2, including the schedule for the entire review, the
process for conducting the various phases of the review, and the key
policy-relevant science issues that will guide the review. The draft
IRP will be released for review by CASAC and the public later on in
2013 and after consideration of CASAC and public comments, a final IRP
will be issued in early 2014. The IRP will incorporate a revised plan
for ISA development after consideration of CASAC and public comments.

II. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2013-
0232 by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket
(Mail Code: 28221T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-
566-1752.
     Hand Delivery: The OEI Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the

Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide
comments by mail or hand delivery, please submit three copies of the
comments. For attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively
with the comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2013-0232. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will
be marked ``late,'' and may only be considered if time permits. It is
EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket
without change and to make the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information through
www.regulations.gov or email that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials,
such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: April 18, 2013.
Debra B. Walsh,
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2013-10430 Filed 5-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P