[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 8, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47267-47273]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18627]

========================================================================
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.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2012 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0607; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-024-AD;
Amendment 39-17142; AD 2012-15-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Model 747-100B SUD, 747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series
airplanes; and Model 747-200B series airplanes having a stretched upper
deck. The existing AD currently requires repetitively inspecting for
cracking or discrepancies of the fasteners in the tension ties, shear
webs, and frames at body stations 1120 through 1220; and related
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. That AD requires
modifying the frame-to-tension-tie joints at body stations 1120 through
1220 (including related investigative actions and corrective actions if
necessary), which provides a terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. That AD also requires new repetitive inspections after the
modification, corrective actions if necessary, and additional
modification requirements at a specified time after the first
modification. That AD also removed certain airplanes from the
applicability. That AD was prompted by reports of cracked and severed
tension ties, broken fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web, and
shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the upper deck. This AD revises
the existing AD by adding repetitive open hole high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) inspections for cracking in the forward and aft tension
tie channels, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, this AD
also requires a one-time angle inspection to determine if the angle is
installed correctly, and re-installation if necessary; and a one-time
open hole HFEC inspection at the fastener locations where the tension
tie previously attached to the frame prior to certain modifications,
and repair if necessary. This AD also, for the Stage 2 inspections,
reduces the initial compliance times for those inspections. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the tension ties,
shear webs, and frames of the upper deck, which could result in rapid
decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective September 12, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 12,
2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of
November 28, 2007 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this 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>; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document 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: Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6428; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72
FR 65655, November 23, 2007). The SNPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 2, 2012 (77 FR 5195). The SNPRM applied to all
Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, 747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series
airplanes; and Model 747-200B series airplanes having a stretched upper
deck. The original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009) proposed to
supersede an existing AD that currently requires repetitively
inspecting for cracking or discrepancies of the fasteners in the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body stations 1120 through
1220; and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary.
The original NPRM proposed to require modifying the frame-to-tension-
tie joints at body stations (STA) 1120 through 1220 (including related
investigative actions and corrective actions if necessary), which would
provide a terminating action for the repetitive inspections. The
original NPRM also proposed to require new repetitive inspections after
the modification, corrective actions if necessary, and additional
modification requirements at a specified time after the first
modification. The original NPRM also proposed to remove certain
airplanes from the applicability. The SNPRM proposed to add repetitive
open hole high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for cracking
in the forward and aft tension tie channels, and repair if necessary.
For certain airplanes, the SNPRM also proposed to require a one-time
angle inspection to determine if the angle is installed correctly, and
re-installation if necessary; and a one-time open-hole HFEC inspection
at the fastener locations where the tension tie previously attached to
the frame prior to certain modifications, and repair if

necessary. The SNPRM also, for the Stage 2 inspections, proposed to
reduce the initial compliance times for those inspections.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the SNPRM (77
FR 5195, February 2, 2012) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Requests To Include Related Rulemaking

    Boeing asked that we include AD 2007-16-19, Amendment 39-15158 (72
FR 45151, August 13, 2007), in the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012)
as related rulemaking. Boeing stated that AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-
15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), is identified as being
superseded by the actions proposed in the SNRPM, as specified in
paragraph (b) of the SNPRM (titled ``Affected ADs''). Boeing noted that
AD 2007-16-19 is also affected by those actions. Boeing added that AD
2007-16-19 has inspection requirements at the affected tension tie
locations, and doing the modification in paragraph (m) of the SNPRM
also ends the inspections required by AD 2007-16-19 for the modified
locations. Boeing asked that we change paragraph (b) of the SNPRM to
specify that the AD may modify the compliance requirements in AD 2007-
16-19.
    Boeing also asked that we change paragraph (m) of the SNPRM (77 FR
5195, February 2, 2012) because the modification identified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011,
eliminates the need for the inspection requirements in paragraphs (g),
(j), (p), and (q) of AD 2007-16-19, Amendment 39-15158 (72 FR 45151,
August 13, 2007). Boeing stated that the corresponding requirements,
for body stations 1120 through 1220 only, terminate the inspections
required by AD 2007-16-19, and all requirements for body stations 880
through 1100 still apply.
    We acknowledge the commenter's requests and agree that AD 2007-16-
19, Amendment 39-15158 (72 FR 45151, August 13, 2007), is affected by
certain actions in the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012). However,
when Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4,
2011, was issued it contained an alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval for certain actions in AD 2007-16-19 for the tension
tie locations that were modified using Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011. AD 2007-16-19 also mandated
inspections for tension ties between body stations 880 and 1100, which
are not included in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1,
dated August 4, 2011. We do not agree to include AD 2007-16-19 in the
affected ADs section identified in paragraph (b) of this AD because
paragraph (b) of this AD identifies ADs that are superseded, and we are
not superseding that AD. In addition, we have not changed paragraph (m)
of the SNPRM--(paragraph (p) of this AD) because the inspections of
tension ties between body stations 880 and 1100 required by AD 2007-16-
19 are not related to this AD. We have made no change to the AD in this
regard.

Requests To Change or Add AMOC Language

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (n) of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195,
February 2, 2012) to add a provision for airplanes that were modified
per Boeing Drawing 144U0061, including any deviations during the
modification and post-modification inspections that were previously
approved as an AMOC to AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655,
November 23, 2007). The provision should specify that those actions are
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions in the SNPRM.
    We acknowledge and agree with the commenter's request. We have
added a new paragraph (r)(5) to this AD to allow AMOCs approved
previously in accordance with AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR
65655, November 23, 2007), as a terminating action, to be approved as
AMOCs for the requirements of paragraph (p) of this AD.
    Boeing also asked that we change paragraph (s)(3) of the SNPRM (77
FR 5195, February 2, 2012) to provide direction for obtaining an AMOC
for any deviations that occur when doing the modification specified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011.
    We acknowledge the commenter's request; however, the reference to
the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) specified in paragraph (s)(3) of this AD is our standard
language. After the AD is published, we may empower certain authorized
representatives of the Boeing ODA to approve AMOCs to deviations during
the modification. We have made no change to the AD in this regard.
    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (s)(4) of the SNPRM (77 FR
5195, February 2, 2012) to also refer to paragraph (j) of the AD, in
addition to the paragraphs identified as corresponding requirements for
AMOCs previously approved in accordance with AD 2007-23-18, Amendment
39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007). Boeing stated that paragraph
(j) also contains inspection requirements, and previously accomplished
repairs can be considered AMOCs for this paragraph.
    We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We
have added a reference to paragraph (j) of the AD to the AMOC language
specified in paragraph (r)(4) of this AD.

Request To Include Credit for Supplemental Structural Inspection
Document (SSID) Inspections Done per Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (b) of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195,
February 2, 2012) to include credit for related SSID inspections.
Boeing stated that AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655,
November 23, 2007), included language specifying that inspections done
per Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated
January 14, 2010, meet the requirements of the SSID inspections in
structurally significant item (SSI) F-19A.
    We agree that the subject SSID inspections are related to this AD.
When Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated
January 14, 2010; and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1,
dated August 4, 2011; were issued, they contained AMOCs to those SSID
inspections. Therefore, those inspections do meet the requirements of
the SSID inspections in structurally significant item (SSI) F-19A,
except as defined in those AMOCs. However, we do not agree to revise
paragraph (b) of this AD as that paragraph only identifies ADs that are
superseded. We have made no change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Change Reporting Requirement

    Boeing asked that we change the reporting requirement in paragraph
(l) of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012). Boeing stated that the
supplemental structural inspections (SSIs) in the SSID are replaced by
Stage 1, Stage 2, and post-modification inspections in the SSID. Boeing
added that reporting findings from these three inspections is necessary
to maintain the fleet monitoring aspects of the SSI program. Boeing
asked that paragraph (l) of the SNPRM be changed to add all three
inspections to the reporting

requirements in lieu of just the Stage 1 inspection currently
identified.
    We acknowledge the commenter's request and agree that reporting is
necessary for maintaining the fleet monitoring aspect of the SSI
program. However, maintaining the fleet monitoring of the SSI program
is not what the requirements in this AD were meant to do. We have
evaluated the need for continued reporting, as required by paragraph
(l) of this AD, and have determined that it is no longer necessary.
Therefore, we have removed paragraph (l) from this AD and reidentified
subsequent paragraphs accordingly.

Requests To Change Certain Compliance Times

    British Airways asked that we change the compliance time in
paragraphs (p) and (q) of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) to
match the compliance time for the Stage 2 inspections. British Airways
stated that this would reduce further disruption to the operator's
heavy maintenance program.
    UPS asked that the compliance time specified in paragraph (m)(1) of
the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) be changed for the Boeing
Special Freighter (BSF) and the Boeing Converted Freighter (BCF). UPS
stated that since the modifications to the BSF and BCF configurations
were done after original production, the compliance times in that
paragraph are not appropriate for the replaced structure. UPS added
that the remaining locations (stations 1140, 1180, and 1220) are not
adjacent to each other. UPS believes that the risk of widespread
fatigue damage has been greatly reduced at those locations. UPS stated
that for airplanes that have been modified to the BSF or BCF
configuration, the compliance time threshold should take into account
the replaced structure.
    We do not agree with the commenters' requests. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this action, we considered the urgency
associated with the subject unsafe condition and the practical aspect
of accomplishing the required actions within a period of time that
corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for most affected
operators. Further, we considered and agree with the compliance time
recommended by the manufacturer in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010. In addition, UPS provided
no technical justification for changing the compliance time for the BSF
and BCF airplanes. However, under the provisions of paragraph (r) of
this AD, we will consider requests for approval of changing the
compliance time if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that
the new compliance time would provide an acceptable level of safety. We
have not changed the AD in this regard.
    British Airways also asked that the modification threshold be
increased from 17,000 total flight cycles to 20,000 total flight
cycles. British Airways stated that an increased threshold would align
with the Model 747-400 design service goal and the SSID inspection
threshold of 20,000 total flight cycles.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. This request was
already addressed in the comments section of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195,
February 2, 2012) under ``Request to Extend the Modification Compliance
Time.'' As stated in the SNPRM:

    Since the issuance of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
dated April 21, 2005, further cracking in the fleet has occurred
resulting in thresholds being further reduced in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010.
The modification threshold and new inspection threshold are
appropriate given the quantity and nature of cracks found on Model
747 airplanes, which are based on extensive analysis. Due in part to
the reporting requirement of AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72
FR 65655, November 23, 2007) the manufacturer received a significant
number of inspection findings. The findings include numerous cases
of single or dual tension tie failure and one airplane with three
adjacent severed tension ties. Because the findings constituted
multiple site damage, a damage tolerance analysis alone was no
longer appropriate. Rather, a widespread fatigue damage analysis had
to be employed to properly analyze the risk of cracked and severed
tension ties, and to set inspection and modification thresholds
appropriately. The manufacturer performed widespread fatigue
analysis and the FAA accepted its findings.
    The analysis, combined with the empirical data, supported an
inspection threshold of 10,000 total flight cycles, as reflected in
Revision 1 of the Stage 2 inspection, and a modification threshold
of 17,000 total flight cycles.
    Therefore, based upon crack reports received, material analysis
completed, and widespread fatigue damage analysis performed, the
inspection and modification thresholds contained in this AD are
appropriate.

    We have made no change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Terminate Certain Inspections

    UPS asked that the inspections required by paragraphs (o) and (q)
of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) be terminated after the
modification required by paragraph (m) of the SNPRM is accomplished.
UPS stated that the structure replaced by the modification, which is
the structure that would have been inspected, has been removed.
    We agree with the commenter's request; if the structure has been
removed the inspection is not possible. Therefore, we have changed
paragraph (m) of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) (paragraph
(p) of this AD) to include a reference to paragraphs (o) and (q) of the
SNPRM--(paragraphs (l) and (n) of this AD) in the terminating action
language for the inspections. We have also included terminating action
language in those paragraphs.

Request for an Optional Modification

    British Airways asked that it be allowed to continue the Stage 1
and Stage 2 inspections with an option of doing the modification as
terminating action for the inspections. British Airways added that the
Stage 2 inspections provide an adequate level of safety, as the
discrepant structure is repaired to a similar compliance standard as
the original structure. British Airways noted that the substantial
number of work-hours necessary to do the modification would be a
significant financial burden.
    This request was already addressed in the comments section of the
SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) under ``Request for an Optional
Modification.'' As stated in the SNPRM, we do not agree with the
request to make the required modification optional. The crack finding
data and analysis performed support the inspection and modification
actions in the SNPRM. Therefore, we have not changed the AD in this
regard.

Request To Use Substitute Fasteners

    UPS asked that paragraphs (g) and (j) of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195,
February 2, 2012) be changed to specify that it is structurally
acceptable to use substitute fasteners per Chapter 51, Sections 51-40-
03 and 51-40-05, of the Model 747-400SF Structural Repair Manual (SRM).
UPS stated that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1,
dated January 14, 2010, includes a General Note which specifies that it
is acceptable to use the Model 747-400 SRM for repairs on airplanes
modified to BCF configuration, until such time as the SRM is updated
with tension tie and frame repairs. UPS noted that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, does not have
any appropriate references for Model 747-400SF airplanes regarding
fastener substitution, open-hole sizes, and installation.

    We do not agree with the request. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, identifies procedures
for fastener substitution in paragraph 3.A., Notes 4, 5, and 9 of the
Accomplishment Instructions. Therefore, we have made no change to the
AD in this regard.

Requests To Clarify/Correct Paragraph Identifiers Within Certain
Paragraphs in the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012)

    Boeing asked that we provide clarification in paragraph (g) of the
SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) that the reference to paragraph
(l) of this AD as the terminating action paragraph should instead be
paragraph (m) of this AD. Boeing added that paragraph (m) mandates the
modification in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated
August 4, 2011, which terminates the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (g) of the SNPRM.
    We agree with the commenter. Paragraph (g) of the SNPRM (77 FR
5195, February 2, 2012) specifies that doing the modification required
by paragraph (l) of the AD terminates the repetitive inspections;
however, that is in error. The modification is specified in paragraph
(m) of the SNPRM--(paragraph (p) of this AD). We have changed the
paragraph reference in paragraph (g) of this AD accordingly.
    Boeing and UPS asked that we correct the error in paragraph (i)(1)
of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) which refers to doing the
next inspection in accordance with paragraph (j) of this AD, but should
instead refer to paragraph (h) of this AD.
    We partially agree with the commenters. Paragraph (i)(1) of the
SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) specifies doing the next
inspection after the initial Stage 1 inspection done in accordance with
paragraph (j) of this AD; however, that is in error because the initial
Stage 1 inspection is in paragraph (g) of this AD (paragraph (h) only
contains the compliance times for the initial inspection). We have
changed the reference in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD accordingly.
    Boeing and UPS asked that we correct the error in paragraph (j) of
the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012), which refers to paragraph (j)
of this AD as the exception paragraph; however, the correct reference
is paragraph (k) of this AD.
    We agree with the commenters. Paragraph (k) of this AD contains the
exception to corrective action instructions. We have corrected the
reference in paragraph (j) of this AD accordingly.
    Boeing and UPS asked that we correct the error in paragraph (k) of
the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012), which refers to discrepancies
found during any inspection required by paragraph (g), (h), or (i) of
the AD. Boeing asked that the reference to paragraph (j) of this AD be
added to paragraph (k) of this AD. UPS asked that the reference to
paragraphs (j), (o), (p), and (q) of this AD be added to the paragraphs
referenced in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    We partially agree with the commenters. We agree that paragraph (j)
of this AD should be included in the corrective action paragraphs
referred to in paragraph (k) of this AD because it is included in the
existing requirements. We have changed paragraph (k) of this AD
accordingly. However, paragraphs (o), (p), and (q) of the SNPRM (77 FR
5195, February 2, 2012)--(paragraphs (l), (m), and (n) of this AD) are
part of the new requirements, and the corrective actions are contained
within those paragraphs.

Request To Clarify Undefined Requirement

    UPS stated that the actions specified in paragraph (m) of the SNPRM
(77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) also require an additional modification,
which is currently undefined in Boeing Service Bulletin 747 53A2559,
Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011. UPS understands that, at this time,
Boeing does not believe this additional modification will cause an
undue burden. UPS noted that Boeing should include such a requirement
in that service information, given the age of the affected fleet and
available resources, as opposed to adjusting the limit of validity of
the 747 fleet. UPS added that based on its fleet age and current
utilization, it does not believe it will be affected; however, UPS is
concerned with the precedent of mandating undefined requirements.
    We infer that UPS wants clarification of the subject undefined
requirement. Boeing has elected not to design the additional
modification since Boeing foresees few, if any, operators that would
require this modification. For this reason, Boeing Service Bulletin 747
53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011, specifies that operators
contact Boeing for instructions. We have addressed this issue by
requiring AMOC approval when operators are instructed to contact Boeing
for instructions. We have made no change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Change Cost Information

    UPS asked that the Costs of Compliance section in the SNPRM (77 FR
5195, February 2, 2012) be changed. UPS stated that the costs specified
do not accurately reflect the actual costs. UPS added that, based on
its review of the modification instructions and the experiences of
other operators that have performed similar modifications, the actual
modification work, not including incidental costs, may take at least
1,000 work-hours to accomplish. UPS stated that this is a substantial
increase, and the cost section should be updated in the analysis of
this rulemaking.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. This request was
already addressed in the comments section of the SNPRM (77 FR 5195,
February 2, 2012) under ``Request to Change Cost Information.'' As
stated in the SNPRM:

    The cost information in this supplemental NPRM describes only
the direct costs of the specific required actions. Based on the best
data available, the manufacturer provided the number of work hours
necessary to do the required actions. This number represents the
time necessary to perform only the actions actually required by this
supplemental NPRM. We recognize that, in doing the actions required
by an AD, operators might incur incidental costs in addition to the
direct costs. But the cost analysis in AD rulemaking actions
typically does not include incidental costs such as the time
necessary for planning, airplane down time, or time necessitated by
other administrative actions. Those incidental costs, which might
vary significantly among operators, are almost impossible to
calculate.

    We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously--and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM (77 FR 5195, February 2, 2012)
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 67 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage 1 inspections (required by  19 work-hours x     $0................  $1,615 per          $108,205 per
 AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-      $85 per hour =                          inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
 15266 (72 FR 65655, November      $1,615
 23, 2007)).
Stage 2 inspections (required by  83 work-hours x     $0................  $7,055 per          $472,685 per
 AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-      $85 per hour =                          inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
 15266 (72 FR 65655, November      $7,055
 23, 2007)).
Modification (new action).......  Between 257 and     Between $341,334    Between $363,179    \1\ Between
                                   263 work-hours, =   and $345,490.       and $367,845.       $24,332,993 and
                                   between $21,845                                             $24,645,615.
                                   and $22,355
Post-modification inspections     6 work-hours x $85  $0................  $510 [per           $34,170 [per
 (new action).                     per hour = $510                         inspection cycle].  inspection
                                                                                cycle].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Depending on airplane configuration.

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 have determined that 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 removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), and
adding the following new AD:

2012-15-13 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17142; Docket No. FAA-
2009-0607; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-024-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective September 12,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR
65655, November 23, 2007).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100B SUD,
747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series airplanes; and Model 747-200B
series airplanes having a stretched upper deck; certificated in any
category; excluding airplanes that have been converted to a large
cargo freighter configuration.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53: Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD results from reports of cracked and severed tension
ties, broken fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web, and
shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the upper deck. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the tension ties,
shear webs, and frames of the upper deck, which could result in
rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Repetitive Stage 1 Inspections With Reduced Repetitive
Interval

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007). For
all airplanes: Do detailed inspections for cracking or discrepancies
of the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body
stations 1120 through 1220, and related investigative and corrective
actions as applicable, by doing all actions specified in and in
accordance with ``Stage 1 Inspection'' of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005, except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD; or
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January
14, 2010. As of the effective date of this AD only Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010,
may be used. Do the Stage 1 inspections at the applicable times
specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, except as provided
by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD. Accomplishment of the
initial Stage 2 inspection required by paragraph (j) of this AD
terminates the requirements of this paragraph. Any applicable
related investigative and corrective actions must be done before
further flight. Doing the modification required by paragraph (q) of
this AD terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of this
paragraph.
    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, specifies a
compliance time relative to ``the original issue date on this
service bulletin,'' this AD requires

compliance before the specified compliance time after April 26, 2006
(the effective date of AD 2006-06-11, Amendment 39-14520 (71 FR
14367, March 22, 2006)).
    (2) For any airplane that reaches the applicable compliance time
for the initial Stage 2 inspection (as specified in Table 1,
Compliance Recommendations, under paragraph 1.E., of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005) before reaching
the applicable compliance time for the initial Stage 1 inspection:
Accomplishment of the initial Stage 2 inspection eliminates the need
to do the Stage 1 inspections.

(h) Retained Compliance Time for Initial Stage 1 Inspection

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007). Do
the initial Stage 1 inspection at the earlier of the times specified
in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD.
    (1) At the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005.
    (ii) Before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles, or
within 250 flight cycles after November 28, 2007 (the effective date
of AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23,
2007), whichever occurs later.
    (2) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(2)(i)
and (h)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 12,000 total flight cycles.
    (ii) Within 50 flight cycles or 20 days, whichever occurs first,
after November 28, 2007 (the effective date of AD 2007-23-18,
Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007).

(i) Retained Compliance Times for Repetitive Stage 1 Inspections

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007).
Repeat the Stage 1 inspection specified in paragraph (g) of this AD
at the time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, as
applicable. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 250 flight cycles, until the initial Stage 2 inspection
required by paragraph (j) of this AD has been done.
    (1) For airplanes on which the initial Stage 1 inspection has
not been accomplished as of November 28, 2007 (the effective date of
AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007):
Do the next inspection before the accumulation of 10,000 total
flight cycles, or within 250 flight cycles after the initial Stage 1
inspection done in accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
    (2) For airplanes on which the initial Stage 1 inspection has
been accomplished as of November 28, 2007 (the effective date of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007): Do
the next inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph
(i)(2)(i) or (i)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 12,000 total
flight cycles as of November 28, 2007 (the effective date of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007): Do
the next inspection before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight
cycles, or within 250 flight cycles after November 28, 2007,
whichever occurs later.
    (ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 12,000 total flight
cycles or more as of November 28, 2007 (the effective date of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007): Do
the next inspection at the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(ii)(A) and (i)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Within 250 flight cycles after accomplishment of the initial
Stage 1 inspection.
    (B) Within 50 flight cycles or 20 days, whichever occurs first,
after November 28, 2007 (the effective date of AD 2007-23-18,
Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007).

(j) Retained Repetitive Stage 2 Inspections With Reduced Initial
Compliance Time

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007). For
all airplanes: Do detailed and high frequency eddy current
inspections for cracking or discrepancies of the fasteners in the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body stations 1120 through
1220, and related investigative and corrective actions as
applicable, by doing all actions specified in and in accordance with
``Stage 2 Inspection'' of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005; or Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14,
2010; except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD. Do the initial
inspections at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD. Repeat the Stage 2 inspection
thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005. As of the effective date of this AD only Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14,
2010, may be used. Any applicable related investigative and
corrective actions must be done before further flight.
Accomplishment of the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the repetitive
Stage 1 inspections. Doing the modification required by paragraph
(q) of this AD terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of
this paragraph.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 16,000 total flight cycles, or
within 1,000 flight cycles after November 28, 2007 (the effective
date of AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23,
2007), whichever occurs later.
    (2) Before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles, or
within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.

(k) Retained Exception to Corrective Action Instructions

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007). If
any discrepancy including but not limited to any crack, broken
fastener, loose fastener, or missing fastener is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (g), (h), (i), or (j) of this AD,
and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005;
or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated
January 14, 2010; specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action: Before further flight, repair the discrepancy using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(r) of this AD.

(l) New Stage 2 Inspection: Additional Work at STA 1140

    For all airplanes: Except as provided by paragraph (o) of this
AD; at the time specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January
14, 2010; do an open hole high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection for cracking in the forward and aft tension tie channels
at 12 fastener locations inboard of the aluminum straps at STA 1140,
and before further flight do all applicable repairs. Do all actions
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010.
Repeat the inspections thereafter at the time specified in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010. Doing the modification required
by paragraph (p) of this AD terminates the inspection requirements
in this paragraph.

(m) New One-time Inspection for Mis-located Angles

    For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes as identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14,
2010: Except as provided by paragraph (o) of this AD, at the time
specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, do a
detailed inspection to determine if the angle is installed
correctly, and before further flight re-install all angles that were
installed incorrectly. Do all actions in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010.

(n) New One-time Inspection for Cracks in Frames at Previous Tension
Tie Locations

    For Group 1, Configuration 2, airplanes; and Group 2 and 3
airplanes; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010: Except as provided by
paragraph (o) of this AD, at the time specified in paragraph 1.E,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, do an open hole HFEC inspection
for cracks at the fastener locations (STA 1120, 1160, 1200, and
1220) where the tension tie previously attached to the frame prior
to modification to the Boeing special freighter or Boeing Converted
Freighter configuration, and before further flight do all applicable
repairs. Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision
1, dated January 14, 2010. Doing the modification required by
paragraph (p) of this AD terminates the one-time inspection
requirements in this paragraph.

(o) New Exception to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
Revision 1, Dated January 14, 2010

    Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, specifies
a compliance time relative to ``the Revision 1 date of this service
bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(p) New Modification

    Except as provided by paragraphs (p)(1) and (p)(2) of this AD:
At the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4,
2011, modify the frame-to-tension-tie joints at body stations (STA)
1120 through 1220; do all related investigative and applicable
corrective actions; do the repetitive post-modification detailed
inspections for cracking of the tension tie and frame structure and
all applicable corrective actions; and do the additional
modification. Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1,
dated August 4, 2011. Modifying the frame-to-tension-tie joints at
body stations 1120 through 1220 terminates the repetitive inspection
requirements of paragraphs (g) and (j) of this AD, the inspection
requirements of paragraph (l) of this AD, and the one-time
inspection requirements of paragraph (n) of this AD.
    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011, specifies a
compliance time relative to ``the original issue date of this
service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated
August 4, 2011, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions
or additional modification requirements: Before further flight,
repair the cracking or do the additional actions using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(r) of this AD.

(q) New Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the corresponding actions
required by this AD, if those actions were done before the effective
date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559,
dated January 8, 2009.

(r) 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 the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to<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 reference this AD.
    (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 Organization Designation Authorization
(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.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2007-23-18,
Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding requirements of paragraphs (g), (h),
(i), and (j) of this AD.
    (5) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2007-23-18,
Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), as a
terminating action, are approved as AMOCs for the requirements of
paragraph (p) of this AD.

(s) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nathan Weigand,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this 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>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) 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>.

(t) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the following service
information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated
January 14, 2010.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated
August 4, 2011.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
November 28, 2007 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007):
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21,
2005.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (2) For service information identified in this 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>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) 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>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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 July 23, 2012.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-18627 Filed 8-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST ( in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51  App. V)

SIP Submitted by: Maryland Department of the Environment Date Submitted: October 31, 2005 Subject: Revision # 05 09  Amendments to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>  Control of VOC Emissions from Yeast Manufacturing Completeness Review Completed by: Rose Quinto Date Completed: November 15, 2005 Administrative Materials ACCEPTABLE EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof. 1. Letter dated October 31, 2005, from Kendl P. Philbrick,

Secretary, Maryland Department of the Environment, to Donald S. Welsh, Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. Yes 2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order,

consent agreement in final form. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from the adoption/ issuance date. 2. A copy of the regulation as contained in the Maryland Register on June 10, 2005, Volume 32, Issue 12 ( proposed action) and on September 2, 2005, Volume 32, Issue 18 ( final action). Both the adoption ( August 23, 2005) and effective ( September 12, 2005) dates are included in the Maryland Register Notice of Final Action. Yes 3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. Environmental Article, Title 2, Annotated Code of Maryland. Yes Administrative Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

2 4. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan,

including indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State regulation/ document signed, stamped,

dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation/ document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. 4. A copy of the rule as published in the Maryland Register.

Effective date of September 12, 2005, is part of the Maryland Register Notice. Yes 5. Evidence that the State followed all of the proceduraL requirements of the State's laws and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/ issuance of the plan. 5. Letter dated October 31, 2005 from Kendl P. Philbrick,

Secretary, Maryland Department of the Environment. Yes 6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice. 6. Copy of hearing notices in The Baltimore Sun, Saint Mary's Enterprise, Cumberland Times News, Frederick News Post,

Salisbury Daily Times and Washington Post. Yes 7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 7. Letter dated October 31, 2005, from Kendl P. Philbrick,

Secretary, Maryland Department of the Environment. Copy of hearing transcripts and hearing statement. Yes 8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. 8. No comments were received during the 30 day comment period.. Yes Technical Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

3 1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. The plan establishes requirements to control VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities. Yes 2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/ nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected area( s). 2. The two yeast manufacturers in Maryland are located in Baltimore City and Baltimore County. Yes 3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate,

quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision. 3. Not applicable. The plan established requirements to control VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities . Yes 4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. 4. The plan addresses only nonattainment area pollutants for ozone. Therefore, PSD increments and protection ( maintenance) of NAAQS are not applicable. The plan does not concern reasonable further progress. Yes 5. Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used,

ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used,

justification for use of offsite data ( where used), modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. 5. Not applicable. No modeling demonstration was required to support the required revision. No additional modeling beyond UAM attainment modeling is needed. Yes 6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology. 6. Not applicable. The plan established requirements to control VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities. Yes Technical Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

4 7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/ reporting requirements,

where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 7. Section ( F) of COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>. Yes 8. Compliance/ enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 8. Section ( D) of COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>. Yes 9. Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies. ( If a policy is not appropriate,

explain why.) 9. No special justification are required. Yes 10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. 10. Not applicable; this is not a section 107 request. Yes


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 91 (Monday, May 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27736-27737]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10003]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP17-495-003; CP17-494-003]

Jordan Cove Energy Project, L.P., Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline,
LP; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on April 21, 2020, pursuant to section 385.207 of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207 (2019), Jordan Cove Energy
Project, L.P. (Jordan Cove) and Pacific Connector Gas

Pipeline, LP (Pacific Connector) filed a Petition for Declaratory Order
(Petition) finding that the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
waived its authority to issue certification for the Jordan Cove LNG
Terminal and Pacific Connector Pipeline under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1) (2018), as more fully explained in the
petition.
    Any person wishing to comment on Jordan Cove and Pacific
Connector's petition may do so.\1\ The deadline for filing comments is
30 days from the issuance of this notice. The Commission encourages
electronic submission of comments in lieu of paper using the eFiling
link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically
should send comments to the following address: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand
delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be delivered to
Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland
20852. Be sure to reference the docket numbers (CP17-495-003 and CP17-
494-003) with your submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector's request is related to
their NGA section 3 and 7 proceedings in Docket Nos. CP17-494 and
CP17-495. Thus, any person that intervened in those proceedings is
already a party. The filing of the petition in this case does not
trigger a new opportunity to intervene.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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) using
the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission' s Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free, (886) 208-
3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 4, 2020.

    Dated: May 5, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-10003 Filed 5-8-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 245 (Thursday, December 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78513-78515]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27835]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0978; Project Identifier AD-2022-00460-E;
Amendment 39-22276; AD 2022-25-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain General Electric Company (GE) GEnx-1B and GEnx-2B model
turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by a manufacturer investigation
that revealed that certain high-pressure turbine (HPT) stage 2 disks,
forward seals, and stages 6-10 compressor rotor spools were
manufactured from powder metal material suspected to contain iron
inclusion. This AD requires replacement of the affected HPT stage 2
disks, forward seals, and stages 6-10 compressor rotor spools. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 26, 2023.

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0978; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The address for Docket
Operations is 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: Alexei Marqueen, Aviation Safety
Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain GEnx-1B64,
GEnx-1B64/P1, GEnx-1B64/P2, GEnx-1B67, GEnx-1B67/P1, GEnx-1B67/P2,
GEnx-1B70, GEnx-1B70/75/P1, GEnx-1B70/75/P2, GEnx-1B70/P1, GEnx-1B70/
P2, GEnx-1B70C/P1, GEnx-1B70C/P2, GEnx-1B74/75/P1, GEnx-1B74/75/P2,
GEnx-1B76/P2, GEnx-1B76A/P2 (GEnx-1B), GEnx-2B67, GEnx-2B67B, and GEnx-
2B67/P (GEnx-2B) model turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on September 9, 2022 (87 FR 55328). The NPRM was
prompted by a manufacturer investigation that revealed that certain HPT
stage 2 disks, forward seals, and stages 6-10 compressor rotor spools
were manufactured from powder metal material suspected to contain iron
inclusion. Further investigation by the manufacturer determined that
the iron inclusion is attributed to deficiencies in the manufacturing
process. The investigation by the manufacturer also determined that
certain GEnx-1B and GEnx-2B HPT stage 2 disks, forward seals, and
stages 6-10 compressor rotor spools made from billets manufactured
using the same process may have reduced material properties and a lower
fatigue life capability due to iron inclusion, which may cause
premature fracture and uncontained failure. In the NPRM, the FAA
proposed to require replacement of certain HPT stage 2 disks, forward
seals, and stages 6-10 compressor rotor spools with parts eligible for
installation. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from four commenters. The commenters were
Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), American Airlines,
GE Aviation, and The Boeing Company (Boeing). ALPA, American Airlines,
and Boeing supported the proposed AD without change. GE Aviation
requested a change to the proposed AD. The following presents the
comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Add Alternate Part Numbers to AD Applicability

    GE Aviation requested that the FAA add alternate part numbers (P/
Ns) to Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD. GE Aviation explained that
the forward seal and stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool may have
reworked P/Ns that occur after entry into service. While the P/Ns
provided in the NPRM are the best information available as to current
P/Ns, GE requested that the FAA add certain alternate P/Ns to Table 1
to paragraph (c), Applicability, of this final rule to ensure
compliance.
    The FAA agrees for the reasons provided and has revised Table 1 to
paragraph (c), Applicability, of this AD as requested by GE Aviation.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered any comments
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, and
any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed
in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on
any operator.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed GE GEnx-1B Service Bulletin 72-0505, Revision 02,
dated April 5, 2022. The FAA also reviewed GE GEnx-2B Service Bulletin
72-0444, Revision 02, dated April 5, 2022. This service information
describes procedures for removing the HPT stage 2 disk, forward seal,
and stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool. These documents are distinct
since they apply to different engine models.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 3 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates that 0 engines installed
on airplanes of U.S. registry require replacement of the forward seal
or HPT stage 2 disk.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost              Parts cost          product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace stages 6-10 compressor     8 work-hours x $85 per    $846,519 (pro-             $847,199      $2,541,597
 rotor spool.                       hour = $680.              rated).
Replace forward seal.............  8 work-hours x $85 per    364,558 (pro-rated)         365,238               0
                                    hour = $680.
Replace HPT stage 2 disk.........  8 work-hours x $85 per    363,424 (pro-rated)         364,104               0
                                    hour = $680.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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:

2022-25-20 General Electric Company: Amendment 39-22276; Docket No.
FAA-2022-0978; Project Identifier AD-2022-00460-E.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective January 26, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to General Electric Company GEnx-1B64, GEnx-
1B64/P1, GEnx-1B64/P2, GEnx-1B67, GEnx-1B67/P1, GEnx-1B67/P2, GEnx-
1B70, GEnx-1B70/75/P1, GEnx-1B70/75/P2, GEnx-1B70/P1, GEnx-1B70/P2,
GEnx-1B70C/P1, GEnx-1B70C/P2, GEnx-1B74/75/P1, GEnx-1B74/75/P2,
GEnx-1B76/P2, GEnx-1B76A/P2, GEnx-2B67, GEnx-2B67B, and GEnx-2B67/P
model turbofan engines with an installed high-pressure turbine (HPT)
stage 2 disk, forward seal, or stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool
with a part number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) identified in Table
1 to paragraph (c) of this AD.

Table 1 to Paragraph (c)--Affected HPT Stage 2 Disks, Forward Seals, and
                   Stages 6-10 Compressor Rotor Spools
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Part name                       P/N                 S/N
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HPT stage 2 disk................  2300M84P02                    TMT4AF08
                                                                TMT4AF10
                                                                TMT4AF11
                                                                TMT4AF12
Forward seal....................  2417M60P02                    VOLF1931
                                  or                            VOLF1933
                                  2759M04P01                    VOLF1942
                                  ......................        VOLF1977
                                  ......................        VOLF1993
                                  ......................        VOLF2014
Stages 6-10 compressor rotor      2357M30G02                    GWN0R86N
 spool.                           or
                                  2340M36G01
Stages 6-10 compressor rotor      2439M35G01                    GWN0RCKT
 spool.                           or                            GWN0R62G
                                  2610M90G01                    GWN0R86J
                                  ......................        GWN0R5EK
                                  ......................        GWN0R6EH
                                  ......................        GWN0R7K1
                                  ......................        GWN0R89A
Stages 6-10 compressor rotor      2439M35G02                    GWN0RA89
 spool.                                                         GWN0R6K9
                                  ......................        GWN0R7G9
                                  ......................        GWN0R7K4
                                  ......................        GWN0R752
                                  ......................        GWN0R98P
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine
Compressor Section; 7250, Turbine Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a manufacturer investigation that
revealed that certain HPT stage 2 disks, forward seals, and stages
6-10 compressor rotor spools were manufactured from powder metal
material suspected to contain iron inclusion. The FAA is issuing
this AD to prevent fracture and potential uncontained failure of
certain HPT stage 2 disks, forward seals, and stages 6-10 compressor
rotor spools. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result
in uncontained debris release, damage to the engine, and damage to
the aircraft.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Before exceeding 600 flight cycles after the effective date
of this AD, remove the affected HPT stage 2 disk, forward seal, and
stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool from service and replace with a
part eligible for installation.
    (2) For affected engines not in service, before further flight,
remove the affected HPT stage 2 disk, forward seal, and stages 6-10
compressor rotor spool and replace with a part eligible for
installation.

(h) Definitions

    (1) For the purpose of this AD, a ``part eligible for
installation'' is any HPT stage 2 disk, forward seal, or stages 6-10
compressor rotor spool with a P/N and S/N not identified in Table 1
to paragraph (c) of this AD.
    (2) For the purpose of this AD, ``engines not in service'' are
engines that are in long-term or short-term storage as of the
effective date of this AD.

(i) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install an HPT stage
2 disk, forward seal, or stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool with a
P/N and S/N identified in Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD onto
any engine.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO Branch, 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
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (k) of this AD and email to: [email protected].
    (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.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Alexei Marqueen,
Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on December 2, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-27835 Filed 12-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37492-37494]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13250]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-2134; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-012-AD;
Amendment 39-18547; AD 2016-11-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; B/E Aerospace Protective Breathing
Equipment Part Number 119003-11

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
B/E Aerospace protective breathing equipment (PBE) that is installed on
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of a PBE catching fire upon
activation by a crewmember. This AD requires replacing the PBE. We are
issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 15, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 15,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact B/E Aerospace, Inc., Commercial Aircraft Products Group, 10800
Pflumm Road, Lenexa, Kansas 66215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (913)
338-8419; Internet: www.beaerospace.com. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 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-2015-2134.

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-2015-
2134; 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 Document 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: David Enns, Aerospace Engineer,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1801 S. Airport Road, Room
100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain B/E
Aerospace protective breathing equipment (PBE) that is installed on
airplanes. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on January 15,
2016 (81 FR 2131). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on June 16,
2015 (80 FR 34330). The NPRM proposed to require inspecting the PBE to
determine if the pouch has the proper vacuum seal and replacing if
necessary. The NPRM was prompted by a report of a PBE catching fire
upon activation by a crewmember. The SNPRM proposed to require
replacement of the PBE following newly issued service information,
regardless of inspection results. We are issuing this AD to correct the
unsafe condition on these products.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comments received. We received one
anonymous comment in support of the SNPRM (81 FR 2131, January 15,
2016).

Request To Change Compliance Time

    Penney Baudin of United Airlines requested a change to the PBE
replacement compliance time.
    The commenter requested a 12-month repetitive inspection with a 36-
month terminating replacement action. The commenter stated that the
change would alleviate restrictive shipping means and complex
distribution of the PBEs since the units contain oxygen generators.
    We do not agree with the commenter. We believe that the replacement
compliance time of 18 months after the effective date of this AD is
sufficient time since we are allowing even more time than specified in
the related service information. Also, the public has been aware of
this safety issue since we first published the first NPRM on June 16,
2015 (80 FR 34330). We have not changed the final rule AD action based
on this comment.

Request To Correct Service Information

    John Barker of B/E Aerospace stated that Service Bulletin 119003-
35-009, dated November 9, 2015, is incorrectly referenced as Rev. 009
instead of Rev. 000 in the preamble of the SNPRM (81 FR 2131, January
15, 2016). The commenter requested the reference to the revision number
be corrected.
    We agree with the commenter. However, on April 12, 2016, Rev. 001
of B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 119003-35-009 was released. We are
incorporating the Revision 001, dated April 12, 2016, into the final
rule AD action because the procedures for doing the inspection and
replacement of the PBE have not changed.
    We have changed the final rule AD action to include the newly
revised service bulletin and to give credit to owners/operators who may
have already done the required replacement following B/E Aerospace
Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-009, Rev. 000, dated November 9, 2015,
which was correctly referenced in paragraph (h) of the regulatory text
in the SNPRM (81 FR 2131, January 15, 2016).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM (81 FR 2131, January 15, 2016) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM (81 FR 2131, January 15, 2016).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-011, Rev.
000, dated February 4, 2015, and B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 119003-
35-009, Rev. 001, dated April 12, 2016. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin
No. 119003-35-011, Rev. 000, dated

February 4, 2015, describes procedures for inspecting PBE, part number
(P/N) 119003-11, to determine if the vacuum seal of the pouch
containing the PBE is compromised. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin
119003-35-009, Rev. 001, dated April 12, 2016, describes procedures for
replacing PBE P/N 119003-11 with P/N 119003-21. 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.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-011, Rev. 000, dated
February 4, 2015, applies to all PBE with P/N 119003-11 and P/N 119003-
21. We have determined that this AD will apply only to a PBE P/N
119003-11 with regard to the inspection requirement of paragraph (g) of
this AD. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 119003-35-009, Rev. 001, dated
April 12, 2016, includes instructions for disposal. In this AD, we are
requiring only the replacement action.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 9,000 products installed on
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspecting the pouch containing    .5 work-hour x $85    Not applicable.........          $42.50        $382,500
 the PBE for proper vacuum seal.    per hour = $42.50.
Replace the PBE P/N 119003-11      .5 work-hour x $85    1,510..................        1,552.50      13,972,500
 with a PBE P/N 119003-21.          per hour = $42.50.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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):

2016-11-20 B/E Aerospace: Amendment 39-18547; FAA-2015-2134;
Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-012-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective July 15, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to B/E Aerospace Protective Breathing Equipment
(PBE), part number (P/N) 119003-11, that is installed on airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 35; Oxygen.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a PBE, P/N 119003-11,
catching fire upon activation by a crewmember. We are issuing this
AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection

    Within 3 months after July 15, 2016 (the effective date of this
AD), while still in the stowage box, physically inspect the PBE
pouch to determine if it has an intact vacuum seal. Do this
inspection following paragraph III.A.1. of the Accomplishment
Instructions in B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-011,
Rev. 000, dated February 4, 2015.

(h) Replacement

    (1) If a PBE pouch is found that does not have an intact vacuum
seal during the inspection required in paragraph (g) of this AD:
Before further flight or following existing minimum equipment list
(MEL) procedures, replace the PBE with a PBE, P/N 119003-21,
following paragraphs III.C., III.D.(4), III.D.(6), and III.D.(7) of
the Accomplishment Instructions in B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin
No. 119003-35-009, Rev. 001, dated April 12, 2016, or replace it
with another FAA-approved serviceable PBE.
    (2) If a PBE pouch is found during the inspection required in
paragraph (g) of this AD where the vacuum seal is intact: Within 18
months after July 15, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), remove
PBE, P/N 119003-11, and replace the PBE with PBE, P/N 119003-21,
following paragraphs III.C., III.D.(4), III.D.(6), and III.D.(7) of
the Accomplishment Instructions in B/E

Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-009, Rev. 001, dated April
12, 2016, or replace it with another FAA-approved serviceable PBE.

(i) Credit for Actions Done Following Previous Service Information

    If you performed the replacement action required in paragraphs
(h)(1) and (2) of this AD before July 15, 2016 (the effective date
of this AD) using B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-009,
Rev. 000, dated November 9, 2015, you met the requirements of those
paragraphs of this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita 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.
    (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.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact David Enns,
Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO, FAA, 1801 S. Airport Road, Room
100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (316) 946-
4107; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(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) B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-009, Rev. 001,
dated April 12, 2016.
    (ii) B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin No. 119003-35-011, Rev. 000,
dated February 4, 2015.
    (3) For B/E Aerospace, Inc. service information identified in
this AD, contact B/E Aerospace, Inc., 10800 Pflumm Road, Commercial
Aircraft Products Group, Lenexa, Kansas 66215; phone: (913) 338-
9800; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: www.beaerospace.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2015-2134.
    (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 Kansas City, Missouri, on May 25, 2016.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-13250 Filed 6-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 165)]
[Notices]
[Page 52523-52524]
[DOCID:fr26au10-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13526-002-KS]

Bowersock Mills and Power Company; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

August 19, 2010.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) regulations,
18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy
Projects has reviewed the application for an original license for the
Bowersock Mills and Power Company's Expanded Kansas River Hydropower
Project, to be located on the Kansas River, Douglas County, Lawrence,
Kansas, and prepared an environmental assessment (EA). In the EA,
Commission staff analyzed the potential environmental effects of
licensing the project and concluded that issuing a license, with
appropriate environmental measures, would not constitute a major
federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.

    A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the issuance date
of this notice, and should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A,
Washington, DC 20426. Please affix ``Expanded Kansas River Hydropower
Project No. 13526-002'' to all comments. Comments may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission
strongly encourages electronic filings which may be filed at http://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)
and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``eFiling''
link.
    For further information, contact Monte TerHaar at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-21168 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P