[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 90 (Friday, May 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27418-27419]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09864]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-D-1711]

Cytomegalovirus in Transplantation: Developing Drugs To Treat or
Prevent Disease; Final Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled
``Cytomegalovirus in Transplantation: Developing Drugs to Treat or
Prevent Disease.'' The purpose of this guidance is to assist sponsors
in all phases of the clinical development of drugs and biological
products to treat or prevent cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in patients
who have undergone solid organ transplantation (SOT) or hematopoietic
stem cell transplantation (HSCT). This guidance finalizes the draft
guidance of the same name issued on May 21, 2018.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on May 8, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments on
Agency guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2018-D-1711 for ``Cytomegalovirus in Transplantation: Developing
Drugs to Treat or Prevent Disease.'' Received comments will be placed
in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-
addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Murray, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6370, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-1500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a final guidance for industry
entitled

``Cytomegalovirus in Transplantation: Developing Drugs to Treat or
Prevent Disease.'' The purpose of this final guidance is to assist
sponsors in the clinical development of drugs to treat or prevent CMV
disease in patients who have undergone SOT or HSCT. Specifically, this
guidance addresses FDA's current thinking regarding the overall
development program and clinical trial designs for the development of
drugs and biological products to support an indication for treating or
preventing CMV disease in post-transplant populations. This guidance
does not address drug development for treating or preventing congenital
CMV infection or CMV infection in patients other than those undergoing
SOT or HSCT. This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same
name issued on May 21, 2018 (83 FR 23463). Changes in this final
guidance compared with the previous draft guidance include:

 Clarification of the use of CMV DNAemia as a validated
surrogate endpoint for use in certain clinical trials of CMV treatment
or prevention
 Clarification that nonclinical combination studies for drugs
to be used in combination are generally not needed
 Inclusion of updated background information to reflect the
current literature on preventing CMV in transplant recipients

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA on ``Cytomegalovirus in Transplantation:
Developing Drugs to Treat or Prevent Disease.'' It does not establish
any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You
can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR parts 312, 314, and 601 have been
approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0014, 0910-0001, and 0910-0038,
respectively.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at
either https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: May 1, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-09864 Filed 5-7-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: July 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 43147]
[DOCID:fr31jy06-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

July 25, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Number: EC06-129-000.
    Applicants: Capital Research and Management Company.
    Description: Capital Research and Management Co submits additional
materials to their 6/1/06 application for authorization to acquire
securities.
    Filed Date: 07/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060725-0108.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 11, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Number: ER05-406-001; EL02-15-000.
    Applicants: Williams Power Company, Inc.
    Description: Williams Power Company, Inc. submits an Electric
Refund Report in compliance with Offer of Settlement issued 3/21/06.
    Filed Date: 07/20/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060720-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 10, 2006.

    Docket Number: ER05-1129-001.
    Applicants: Rockingham Power, LLC.
    Description: Rockingham Power LLC submits its response in
compliance with the Commission's Order issued 6/21/06.
    Filed Date: 07/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060725-0061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 11, 2006.

    Docket Number: ER05-1396-002.
    Applicants: Covanta Essex Company.
    Description: Covanta Essex Co submits its triennial market power
update report.
    Filed Date: 04/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060426-0248.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 04, 2006.

    Docket Number: ER06-1205-001.
    Applicants: 330 Fund I, L.P.
    Description: 330 Fund I, LP submits supplemental information to its
initial rate application filed 6/30/06.
    Filed Date: 07/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060721-5065.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 04, 2006.

    Docket Number: ER06-1232-001.
    Applicants: EPIC NJ/PA, L.P.
    Description: EPIC NJ/PA, LP submits an amendment to its application
for market based rate authority filed 7/6/06.
    Filed Date: 07/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060725-0065.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 11, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1264-000; EL06-74-000.
    Applicants: Generation Power, Inc.
    Description: Generation Power, Inc. submits a Motion to Terminate
Market-Based Rate Authority and To Terminate Proceedings.
    Filed Date: 07/10/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060709-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 31, 2006.

    Docket Number: ER06-1271-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits a report of the
recommended allocations of cost responsibility for transmission
upgrades and revised tariffs sheets to Schedule 12-appendix of the
Tariff.
    Filed Date: 07/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060725-0066.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 11, 2006.

    Docket Number: ER06-1272-000.
    Applicants: Reliant Energy Power Supply, LLC.
    Description: Reliant Energy Power Supply, LLC submits its
application for an order accepting rates, Electric Tariff, Original
Volume 1, for filing and for certain waivers and blanket approvals.
    Filed Date: 07/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060725-0106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, August 11, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-12260 Filed 7-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 72)]
[Notices]
[Page 20041-20042]
[DOCID:fr14ap08-48]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2007-0034; FRL-8554-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Pulp and Paper
Production (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1657.06, OMB Control Number 2060-
0387

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 14, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2007-0034, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard Lazarus, Compliance Assessment
and Media Programs Division (CAMPD), Office of Compliance, (2223A),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On March 9, 2007 (72 FR 10735), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2007-0034, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to http://
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Pulp and Paper Production (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1657.06, OMB Control Number 2060-0387.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on April 30, 2008.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from pulp mills
cause or contribute to air pollution that may

reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.
Therefore, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) were promulgated for this source category.
    This NESHAP covering emissions from the pulping process relies on
the capture and destruction of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) by either
burning them in a boiler or kiln or by introducing them into the
wastewater treatment system. The HAPs captured from bleaching systems
are controlled with a chlorine gas scrubber.
    Pulp mill owners or operators (respondents) are required to submit
initial notifications, maintain records of the occurrence and duration
of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an
affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative. Respondents are required to monitor and keep records of
specific operating parameters for each control device and to perform
and document periodic inspections of the closed vent and wastewater
conveyance systems. As much as possible, in order to reduce the burden,
the compliance monitoring and recordkeeping requirements are designed
to cover parameters that are already being monitored as part of the
manufacturing process. All respondents must submit semiannual summary
reports of monitored parameters, and they must submit an additional
monitoring report during each quarter in which monitored parameters
were outside the ranges established in the standard or during initial
performance tests. A source identified to be out of compliance with the
NESHAP will be required to submit quarterly reports until the
Administrator is satisfied that the source has corrected its compliance
problem.
    In order to ensure compliance with these standards, adequate
reporting and recordkeeping is necessary. In the absence of such
information, enforcement personnel would be unable to determine whether
the standards are being met on a continuous basis, as required by the
Clean Air Act.
    All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In
the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are
sent directly to the EPA regional office. Notifications are used to
inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject
to the standard. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to
check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and
operated. Performance test reports are needed as these are the Agency's
record of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission
standard and note the operating conditions under which compliance was
achieved. The quarterly reports are used for problem identification, as
a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance
determinations. The standard also requires semiannual reporting of
deviations from monitored opacity, as this is a good indicator of the
source's compliance status. Responses to this information collection
are mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart S). Any information submitted to
the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be
safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40,
Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B--Confidentiality of Business Information
(CBI) (see 40 CFR part 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43
FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR
17674, March 23, 1979).
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 104
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of pulp mills.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 137.
    Frequency of Response: Initial, On occasion, Quarterly,
Semiannually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 42,444 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $3,085,125, including $2,708,129 in
labor costs and $377,000 in annual O&M testing costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours or
cost in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two
considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the past
three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years; and (2) the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative
or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall
burden.
    Since there are no changes in the regulatory requirements and there
is no significant industry growth, the labor hours and cost figures in
the previous ICR are used in this ICR and there is no change in burden
to industry.

    Dated: April 3, 2008.
Sara Hisel-McCoy,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E8-7874 Filed 4-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 54 (Friday, March 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15053-15057]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06542]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Notice of Funding Availability and Solicitation of Applications
for Magnetic Levitation Projects

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of funding availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice of funding availability (NOFA or Notice) details
the grant application requirements and submission procedures for
obtaining up to $27.8 million in Federal funding, as authorized by
sections 1101(a)(18) and 1307 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU,
Public Law 109-59 (August 10, 2005)), as amended by section 102 of the
SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act of 2008, Public Law 110-244 (June
6, 2008), for existing magnetic levitation (maglev) projects located
east of the Mississippi River. Pursuant to the Joint Committee
statement accompanying the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act, three
projects are eligible for funding under this Notice: The ``Pittsburgh
project'', the ``Baltimore-Washington project'', and the ``Atlanta-
Chattanooga project''. FRA previously announced the availability of
funds for maglev projects located east of the Mississippi River
pursuant to a NOFA issued on October 16, 2008, but one of the selected
applicants has decided not to pursue the project for which the funds
were allocated resulting in the availability of the funds for this
Notice. Funds awarded under this Notice can be used for preconstruction
planning activities and capital costs of a viable maglev project.

DATES: Applications for funding under this NOFA are due no later than
5:00 p.m. EST, April 20, 2015. Applications for funding received after
5:00 p.m. EST on April 20, 2015, will not be considered. See Section 4
of this Notice for additional information regarding the application
process.

ADDRESSES: Applications must be submitted via Grants.gov. For any
required or supporting application materials that an applicant is
unable to submit via Grants.gov (such as oversized engineering
drawings), an applicant may submit an original and two (2) copies to
Renee Cooper, Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 20, Washington,
DC 20590. However, due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail
delivered via the U.S. Postal Service, applicants are advised to use
other means of conveyance (such as courier service) to assure timely
receipt of materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding this
Notice, please contact Renee Cooper, Office of Program Delivery,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop
20, Washington, DC 20590; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Phone: (202) 493-
0491; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FRA strongly suggests that applicants read
this Notice in its entirety prior to preparing application materials.
There are programmatic prerequisites and administrative requirements
described herein that applicants must comply with in order to submit an
application and be considered for funding.

Table of Contents

1. Funding Opportunity Description
2. Award Information
3. Eligibility and Review Criteria
4. Application and Submission Information
5. Application Review Information
6. Award Administration Information
7. Agency Contact

Section 1: Funding Opportunity Description

    Section 102 of the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act (Public Law
110-244, June 6, 2008) (the 2008 Act), amended sections 1101(a)(18) and
1307 of SAFETEA-LU and provided $45 million in contract authority for
maglev projects located east of the Mississippi River. Of the funding
available for projects east of the Mississippi River ($45 million),
approximately $27.8 million in funding is available for award under
this NOFA.
    In the Joint Explanatory Statement of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee and the Senate Environmental and Public Works,
Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, and Commerce, Science and
Transportation Committees accompanying the 2008 Act (the Joint
Explanatory Statement), Congress explained that in amending SAFETEA-LU
to allow FRA discretion to award funds to ``projects'' located east of
the Mississippi River, ``the intent is to limit the eligible projects
to three existing

projects east of the Mississippi River: Pittsburgh, Baltimore-
Washington, and Atlanta-Chattanooga.'' Based upon that clear
Congressional direction, the solicitation for applications under this
NOFA is limited to those three projects.
    Through this NOFA, FRA will determine whether any of the three
eligible projects east of the Mississippi River will receive all or a
portion of available funds for maglev projects (based upon a review of
submitted applications) and has the discretion to award funds to one or
more of those three projects.

Section 2: Award Information

    FRA will make available up to $27.8 million in funding available
under this NOFA. Should additional funds become available after the
release of this Notice, FRA may elect to select an additional project
for award or contribute additional funding to a selected project
submitted under this NOFA (matching fund requirements would still
apply). FRA may select one or more of the eligible projects for funding
and may award less than the amount of project funding requested by the
applicant based on considerations such as individual project scope and
total available funding. FRA reserves the right to apportion the
available funding at its discretion.
    Fund recipients under this NOFA must comply with the requirements
outlined in Title 2, CFR (particularly 2 CFR part 200, Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards), as required by the grant award conditions, and all
other applicable Federal and DOT/FRA guidance. The funding provided
under this NOFA will be made available in the form of a Cooperative
Agreement between FRA and the selected applicant(s). Cooperative
agreements allow for greater Federal involvement in carrying out the
agreed upon investment, including technical assistance, review of
interim work products, and increased program oversight. Funds will be
transmitted to selected applicants on a reimbursable basis.

Section 3: Eligibility and Review Criteria

3.1 Applicant Eligibility

    In accordance with the Joint Explanatory Statement, eligible
projects are limited to three existing projects east of the Mississippi
River: Pittsburgh, PA; Baltimore, MD-Washington, DC; and Atlanta, GA-
Chattanooga, TN. Applicants must be a State, States, or an authority
designated by one or more States.
    If the project proponents propose service in more than one State, a
single State or designated State authority should apply on behalf of
all participating States. FRA encourages States to submit applications
through their respective Departments of Transportation.

3.2 Project Eligibility

    Congress established three project eligibility requirements for
financial assistance under this program. The project must: (1) Involve
a segment or segments of a high-speed ground transportation corridor;
(2) result in an operating transportation facility that provides a
revenue producing service; and (3) be approved by the Secretary based
on an application submitted to the Secretary by a State or authority
designated by one or more States. With respect to the second criterion,
Congress titled section 1307 ``Deployment of Magnetic Levitation
Transportation Projects'' and the funding provided through section
1101(a)(18) of SAFETEA-LU, as amended by the 2008 Act, is made
available for the ``deployment of magnetic levitation projects.'' FRA
interprets the statute as a whole as evidencing a Congressional intent
that the Federal funds be used to directly advance and result in the
construction of a maglev project. Thus, in order to be eligible for
funding under this program, an application must include evidence that
an operating transportation facility that provides a revenue producing
service will be constructed.
    Congress also defined other key terms and program requirements.
Maglev is defined to mean ``transportation systems employing magnetic
levitation that would be capable of safe use by the public at a speed
in excess of 240 miles per hour.''
    Eligible project costs can include costs for preconstruction
planning work and/or capital costs for fixed guideway infrastructure
for a maglev project (see SAFETEA-LU section 1307(a)(1) for the
complete definition).
    These criteria and definitions are prerequisites to FRA evaluating
an application and the application materials must include data to
support these eligibility requirements. If the criteria are not met to
FRA's satisfaction, the project is not eligible for funding.

3.3 Cost Sharing and Matching Fund Requirements

    The Federal share of a selected project or projects shall not
exceed 80 percent of the total project cost (based on the final project
scope selected for funding by FRA). The grantee(s) is (are) responsible
for providing a minimum of 20 percent of the total project cost from
non-federal sources.

Section 4: Application and Submission Information

4.1 Submission Dates and Times

    Complete applications must be submitted to Grants.gov no later than
5:00 p.m. EST on April 20, 2015. Applicants are strongly encouraged to
apply early to ensure that all materials are received before this
deadline.

4.2 Application Procedures

    This NOFA will be available to the public beginning March 19, 2015.
To apply for funding through Grants.gov, applicants must be properly
registered. Complete instructions on how to register and submit an
application can be found at Grants.gov. Registering with Grants.gov is
a one-time process; however, it can take up to several weeks for first-
time registrants to receive confirmation and a user password. FRA
recommends that applicants start the registration process as early as
possible to prevent delays that may preclude submitting an application
package by the application deadline. Under no circumstances will
applications be accepted after the due date. Delayed registration is
not an acceptable justification for extending the application deadline.
    In order to apply for funding under this announcement and to apply
for funding through Grants.gov, all applicants are required to complete
the following:
    1. Acquire a DUNS Number. A Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS)
number is required for Grants.gov registration. The Office of
Management and Budget requires that all businesses and nonprofit
applicants for Federal funds include a DUNS number in their
applications for a new award or renewal of an existing award. A DUNS
number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the universal
standard for identifying and keeping track of entities receiving
Federal funds. The identifier is used for tracking purposes and to
validate address and point of contact information for Federal
assistance applicants, recipients, and sub recipients. The DUNS number
will be used throughout the grant life cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number
is a free, one-time activity. Applicants may obtain a DUNS number by
calling 1-866-705-5711 or by applying online at http://www.dnb.com/us.

    2. Acquire or Renew Registration with the System for Award
Management (SAM) Database. All applicants for Federal financial
assistance must maintain current registrations in the System for Award
Management (SAM) database. An applicant must be registered in SAM to
successfully register in Grants.gov. The SAM database is the repository
for standard information about Federal financial assistance applicants,
recipients, and sub recipients. Organizations that have previously
submitted applications via Grants.gov are already registered with SAM,
as it is a requirement for Grants.gov registration. Please note,
however, that applicants must update or renew their SAM registration at
least once per year to maintain an active status, so it is critical to
check registration status well in advance of the application deadline.
Information about SAM registration procedures can be accessed at
www.sam.gov.
    3. Acquire an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) and a
Grants.gov Username and Password. Applicants must complete an AOR
profile on Grants.gov and create a username and password. Applicants
must use the organization's DUNS number to complete this step.
Additional information about the registration process is available at
www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp.
    4. Acquire Authorization for your AOR from the E-Business Point of
Contact (E-Biz POC). The Applicant's E-Biz POC must log in to
Grants.gov to confirm a representative as an AOR. Please note that
there can be more than one AOR at an organization.
    5. Search for the Funding Opportunity on Grants.gov. The Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for this opportunity is
20.318, titled ``Railroad Development.''
    6. Submit an Application Addressing All of the Requirements
Outlined in this Funding Availability Announcement. After submitting
the application through Grants.gov, a confirmation screen will appear
on the applicant's computer screen. This screen will confirm that the
applicant has submitted an application and provide a tracking number to
track the status of the submission. Within 24 to 48 hours after
submitting an electronic application, an applicant should receive an
email validation message from Grants.gov. The validation message will
explain whether the application has been received and validated or
rejected, with an explanation. Applicants are urged to submit an
application at least 72 hours prior to the due date of the application
to allow time to receive the validation message and to correct any
problems that may have caused a rejection notification.
    If an applicant experiences difficulties at any point during this
process, please call the Grants.gov Customer Center Hotline at 1-800-
518-4726, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (closed on Federal holidays).
    Note: Please use generally accepted formats such as .pdf, .doc,
.docx, .xls, .xlsx and .ppt, when uploading attachments. While
applicants may imbed picture files, such as .jpg, .gif, and .bmp, in
document files, please do not submit attachments in these formats.
Additionally, the following formats will not be accepted: .com, .bat,
.exe, .vbs, .cfg, .dat, .db, .dbf, .dll, .ini, .log, .ora, .sys, and
.zip.

4.3 Content of Application

    Required documents for the application package are outlined in the
checklist below. Applicants are encouraged to visit the FRA Web site
(www.fra.dot.gov) to download the required templates and forms.
FRA Documents and Forms
 Project Narrative
 Statement of Work
 FRA's Additional Assurances and Certifications
OMB Standard Forms
 SF 424: Application for Federal Assistance
 SF 424A: Budget Information--Non Construction (for projects
with planning costs only)
 SF 424B: Assurances--Non Construction
 SF 424C: Budget Information--Construction
 SF 424D: Assurances--Construction
 SF LLL: Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

    Applicants must complete and submit all components of the
application package. FRA welcomes the submission of other relevant
supporting documentation that may have been developed by the applicant
(planning, environmental documentation, engineering and design
documentation, letters of support, etc.).
    Applicants should submit all application materials through
Grants.gov. For any required or supporting application materials that
an applicant is unable to submit via Grants.gov (such as oversized
engineering drawings), an applicant may submit an original and two (2)
copies to Renee Cooper, Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 20, Washington,
DC 20590. However, due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail
delivered via the U.S. Postal Service, applicants are advised to use
other means of conveyance (such as courier service) to assure timely
receipt of materials.
4.3.1 Project Narrative
    The following points describe the minimum content which will be
required in the Project Narrative component of grant applications
(additionally, FRA recommends that the Project Narrative generally
adhere to the following outline sequence). These requirements must be
satisfied through a narrative statement submitted by the applicant, and
may be supported by spreadsheet documents, tables, maps, drawings, and
other materials, as appropriate. The Project Narrative may not exceed
25 pages in length (including any appendices).
    The FRA recommends that applicants read this section carefully and
submit all required information:
    1. Include a title page that lists the following elements in either
a table or formatted list: project title, location (city, State,
district), the applicant organization name, the name of any co-
applicants, and the amount of Federal funding requested and the
proposed non-Federal match.
    2. Designate a point of contact for the application and provide his
or her name and contact information, including phone number, mailing
address, and email address. The point of contact must be an employee of
an eligible applicant.
    3. Indicate the amount of Federal funding requested, the proposed
non-Federal match, and total project cost, including the methodology or
practices deployed for accurately estimating costs (such as the best
practices cited in the Government Accountability Office's Cost Estimate
and Assessment Guide). Additionally, identify any other sources of
Federal funds committed to the project, as well as any pending Federal
funding requests. Make sure to also note if the requested Federal
funding must be obligated or expended by a certain date due to
dependencies or relationships with other Federal or non-Federal funding
sources, related projects, or other factors. Finally, specify whether
Federal funding has ever previously been sought for the project and not
secured, and name the Federal program and fiscal year from which the
funding was requested.
    4. Explain how the applicant meets the respective applicant and
project

eligibility criteria described earlier in Section 3 of this NOFA.
    5. Provide a brief 4-6 sentence summary of the proposed project,
capturing the transportation challenges the proposed project aims to
address, the market to be served by the new service, as well as the
intended outcomes and anticipated benefits that will result from the
proposed project.
    6. Include a detailed project description that expands upon the
brief summary required above. This detailed description should provide,
at a minimum, additional background on the transportation challenges
the project aims to address, the expected users, beneficiaries, and
outcomes of the project, and any other information the applicant deems
necessary to justify the proposed project. Be specific regarding the
relevance or relationship of the proposed project to other investments
in the region along the corridor, as well as the operating changes that
are anticipated to result from the introduction and integration of
maglev services within existing transportation corridors and assess the
major risks (including safety risks) or obstacles to maglev's
successful deployment and operation. Provide a detailed summary of all
work done to date, including any preliminary engineering work, the
project's previous accomplishments and funding history, and a
chronology of key documents produced and funding events (e.g., grants
and contracts).
    7. Include a thorough discussion of how the project meets all of
the selection criteria for the respective project type, as outlined in
Section 5 of this notice. In responding to the criteria, applicants are
reminded to clearly identify, quantify, and compare expected benefits
and costs of proposed projects.
    8. Describe proposed project implementation and project management
arrangements for the full maglev corridor project, including the
activities proposed in this application. Include descriptions of the
expected arrangements for project contracting, contract oversight,
change-order management, risk management, and conformance to Federal
requirements for project progress reporting.
    9. Describe the plan to finance any planning, land acquisition,
buildout, testing, and implementation of the project, and specify long
term financial plans to own, operate and maintain maglev services.
    10. Describe anticipated environmental or historic preservation
impacts associated with the proposed project, any environmental or
historic preservation analyses that have been prepared, and any ongoing
progress toward completing environmental documentation or clearance
required for the proposed project under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA),
section 4(f) of the DOT Act, the Clean Water Act, or other applicable
Federal or State laws, and provide, as available, timeline associated
with the process to complete these actions. Applicants and grantees
under FRA's financial assistance programs are encouraged to contact FRA
and obtain preliminary direction regarding the appropriate NEPA class
of action and required environmental documentation. Generally, projects
will be ineligible to receive funding if they have begun construction
activities prior to the applicant/grantee receiving written approval
from FRA that all environmental and historical analyses have been
completed.
4.3.2 Statement of Work
    Applicants are required to submit a Statement of Work (SOW) that
addresses the scope, schedule, and budget for the proposed project if
it were to be selected for award. The SOW should contain sufficient
detail so that both FRA and the applicant can understand the individual
tasks that comprise the project and the expected outcomes of the
proposed work to be performed, and monitor progress toward completing
project tasks and deliverables during a prospective grant's period of
performance.

Section 5: Application Review Information

5.1 Application Review and Selection Process

    Across all funding programs, FRA awards funds to projects that
achieve the maximum public benefit possible given the amount of funding
available for that project. Analysis provided by applicants that
quantifies the monetary value (whenever possible) of the anticipated or
potential public benefits of the project is relevant to FRA when
assessing and evaluating applications for funding.

5.2 Selection Criteria

    FRA will review applications and assess them against the following
selection criteria:
    1. The extent to which the project will address at least one or
more serious challenges to the feasibility of integrating maglev
systems with conventional rail systems.
    2. The extent to which funds awarded under this section will result
in investments that are beneficial not only to the maglev project, but
also to other current or near-term transportation projects. Applicants
should keep in mind, however, that--while project eligibility requires
three areas of satisfaction, including the project resulting in an
operating transportation facility that provides a revenue producing
source--Federal funds may not be used for station construction costs or
solely for land acquisition pursuant to securing operation right-of-
way.
    3. The degree to which the project demonstrates the potential for a
public-private partnership for the corridor in which the maglev project
is involved, and/or for the project independently. Any corridor
exhibiting partnership potential must meet at least the following
conditions: (a) Once built and paid for, the corridor will stand alone
as a complete, self-sustaining operation; (b) the total, fully
allocated operating expenses of the maglev service are projected to be
offset by revenues attributable to the service; and (c) the total
public benefits of a maglev corridor must equal or exceed its total
societal costs.
    4. The extent of the demonstrated financial commitment to the
construction of the proposed project from both non-Federal public
sources and private sources, including any financial contributions or
commitment the applicant has secured from non-Federal entities that are
expected to benefit from the project. If applicable, also include the
extent to which the State or private entities exceed the required 20
percent match.
    5. The extent to which the project demonstrates the ability to meet
all applicable Federal and State statutes, regulations, and
environmental requirements--to include coordination and consistency
with any ongoing or completed environmental and planning studies for
passenger rail on or connecting to the geographic route segment being
proposed for maglev investment (e.g., NEC FUTURE Tier 1 EIS and Service
Development Plan and Atlanta-Chattanooga High Speed Ground
Transportation Tier 1 EIS).
    6. The degree to which the project will demonstrate the variety of
maglev operating conditions which are to be expected in the United
States. For example, these conditions might include a variety of at-
grade, elevated and depressed guideway structures, extreme
temperatures, and intermodal connections at terminals.
    7. The feasibility of the project meeting a top speed of at least
240 miles per hour (MPH). FRA will also consider

favorably the ability to meet higher speeds as well as the duration
that speeds of at least 240 MPH can be attained.

Section 6: Award Administration Information

6.1 Award Notices

    Applications selected for funding will be announced after the
application review period. FRA will contact applicants with successful
applications after announcement with information and instructions about
the award process. Notification of a selected application is not an
authorization to begin proposed project activities.

6.2 Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    Applicants selected for funding (and any subrecipient(s)) must
comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing the grant
agreement. A non-exclusive list of administrative and national policy
requirements that grantees must follow includes: Procurement standards,
compliance with Federal civil rights laws and regulations,
disadvantaged business enterprises (DBE), debarment and suspension,
drug-free workplace, FRA's and OMB's Assurances and Certifications,
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), labor standards, safety
oversight, environmental protection, National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), and environmental justice. In addition, FRA expects applicants
to comply with the Buy America standards in 49 U.S.C. 24405(a). FRA
expects this to apply to any capital costs funded under this NOFA for
steel, iron, or manufactured goods used in construction of the Maglev
project.

6.3 General Requirements

    The grantee must comply with all post-award implementing,
reporting, auditing, monitoring, and close-out requirements, as
described in Title 2, CFR (particularly 2 CFR part 200, Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards), as required by the grant award conditions, and all
other applicable Federal and DOT/FRA guidance.

Section 7: Agency Contact

    For further information regarding this notice and the grants
program, please contact Renee Cooper, Office of Program Delivery,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop
20, Washington, DC 20590; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Phone: (202) 493-
0491; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Authority: The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Pub. L. 109-59,
August 10, 2005), and the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act (Pub.
L. 110-244, June 6, 2008.)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 18, 2015.
Corey Hill,
Director, Office of Program Delivery.
[FR Doc. 2015-06542 Filed 3-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on October 25, 2005

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-22838

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   Frontier Airlines, Inc. (Frontier) filed  10/25/05 for:

XX  Emergency exemption for temporary authority under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to
provide the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point Denver, Colorado, and the terminal point
Merida, Mexico.  Frontier states that it will use this temporary
authority to evacuate persons stranded in Mexico due to Hurricane Wilma
by operating flights two times per day through October 31, 2005, and may
also bring some passengers to Merida.

Applicant rep: Edward P. Faberman<PHONE_NUMBER>   DOT Analyst: Linda
Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to remarks and conditions, see below)

The above was effective when taken: October 25, 2005, through October
31, 2005.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

XX Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

XX Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Remarks:  Emergency exemption authority is granted under the provisions
of 14 CFR § 302.311.  This Notice affirms the Department’s grant this
date of Frontier’s oral request for emergency exemption authority.

________________________________________________________________________
__

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the exemption services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 196 (Thursday, October 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 57165]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22429]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4617-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

North Carolina; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of North Carolina (FEMA-4617-DR), dated
September 8, 2021, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued September 8, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated September 8, 2021, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of North Carolina resulting from the remnants of Tropical Storm Fred
during the period of August 16 to August 18, 2021, is of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,
42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists in the State of North Carolina.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public
Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout
the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance
be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act
for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other Needs Assistance
under section 408 will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, John F. Boyle, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of North Carolina have been
designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Buncombe, Haywood, and Transylvania Counties for Individual
Assistance.
    Avery, Buncombe, Haywood, Madison, Transylvania, Watauga, and
Yancey Counties for Public Assistance.
    All areas within the State of North Carolina are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-22429 Filed 10-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50407-50411]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20470]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0855; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-136-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C,
-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The existing AD currently
requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the lower corners
of the door frame and cross beam of the forward cargo door, and
corrective actions if necessary. The existing AD also requires eventual
modification of the outboard radius of the lower corners of the door
frame and reinforcement of the cross beam of the forward cargo door,
which would constitute terminating action for the existing repetitive
inspections. Since we issued that AD, we have received additional
reports of fatigue cracking in the radius of the lower frames and in
the lower number 5 cross beam of the forward cargo door. This proposed
AD would revise the compliance times for the preventive modification;
add certain inspections for cracks in the number 5 cross beam of the
forward cargo door; and add inspections of the number 4 cross beam if
cracks are found in the number 5 cross beam, and corrective actions if
necessary. For certain airplanes, this proposed AD would also add a
one-time inspection for airplanes previously modified or repaired, and
a one-time inspection of the reinforcement angle for excessive shimming
or fastener pull-up, and corrective actions if necessary. We are
proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the lower corners of
the door frame and number 5 cross beam of the forward cargo door, which
could result in rapid depressurization of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 5, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    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<PHONE_NUMBER>,
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 proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: (425) 917-
6450; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-0855;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-136-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On March 31, 2000, we issued AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65
FR 19302, April 11, 2000), for Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400,
and -500 series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections to
detect cracking of the lower corners of the door frame and cross beam
of the forward cargo door, and corrective actions, if necessary. That
AD also requires eventual modification of the outboard radius of the
lower corners of the door frame and reinforcement of the cross beam of
the forward cargo door, which would constitute terminating action for
the repetitive inspections. That AD resulted from reports indicating
that fatigue cracks were detected in the lower corners of the door
frame and cross beam of the forward cargo door. We issued that AD to
prevent fatigue cracking of the lower corners of the door frame and
cross beam of the forward cargo door, which could result in rapid
depressurization of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11,
2000) Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302,
April 11, 2000), we have received additional reports of fatigue
cracking in the radius of the lower frames and in the Web of the number
5 lower cross beam of the forward cargo door. One report was of a rapid
loss of cabin pressure during descent, as a result of a door crack.
Other reports indicated improper nesting when installing the aft
reinforcement angle during accomplishment of the modification specified
in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2, dated March 31,
1994; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 3, dated
July 20, 2000.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5,
dated February 14, 2011; and Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
737-52-1149, dated December 11, 2003. For information on the procedures
and compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain all of the requirements of AD 2000-
07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000). This proposed
AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information.''
Related investigative actions include inspecting the number 4 cross
beam on the forward cargo door for cracking if cracking is found on the
number 5 cross beam, a one-time high frequency eddy current inspection
for cracking of the lower corner frame, and a one-time inspection of
the reinforcement angle. Corrective actions include the following:
Installing a preventive modification, replacing the frame and repairing
any cracking, repairing or replacing the number 5 cross beam, and
replacing the reinforcement angle.

Explanation of Changes Made to Existing Requirements

    The compliance times required by AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660
(65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000), are specified in flight cycles on the
airplane. However, the compliance times in the new actions specified in
the revised service information are specified in door flight cycles,
which are flight cycles accumulated on the forward cargo doors. These
doors are interchangeable between airplanes and they are often
interchanged. Since the unsafe condition stems from the total flight
cycles accumulated on the door and not on the airplane itself, this
proposed AD will specify door flight cycles for the new compliance
times.
    We have changed all references to a ``detailed visual inspection''
in the retained requirements of the existing AD to a ``detailed
inspection'' in this proposed AD.
    Boeing Commercial Airplanes has received an ODA. We have revised
the retained requirements of the existing AD to delegate the authority
to approve an alternative method of compliance for any repair required
by this proposed AD to the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA rather than
a Designated Engineering Representative (DER).
    We have included Note 2 of the restated requirements of AD 2000-07-
06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000), in paragraph (h)
of this proposed AD. Note 3 of the restated requirements of AD 2000-07-
06 is no longer applicable and has been removed from this proposed AD.
These changes do not add any additional burden on the public with
regard to the restated requirements of the existing AD.
    We have added Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision
5, dated February 14, 2011, to paragraph (i)(2) of this AD as the
source of service information for accomplishing the preventive
modification and the reinforcement modification.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated
February 14, 2011, specifies to contact the manufacturer for
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:

     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.

Changes to Existing AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302,
April 11, 2000) Format

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 2000-07-06,
Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000). Since AD 2000-07-06
was issued, the AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have
been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers
have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement in AD 2000-07-06, Amendment
 39[dash]11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11,     Corresponding requirement in
                 2000)                           this proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (a)                            paragraph (g)
paragraph (b)                            paragraph (h)
paragraph (c)                            paragraph (i)
paragraph (d)                            paragraph (j)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

    Since issuance of AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302,
April 11, 2000), we have increased the labor rate used in the Costs of
Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour. The Costs of
Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in the specified
labor rate.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 581 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                        Labor cost          Parts cost      Cost per product                   Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections retained from AD 2000-07-  1 work-hour x $85 per              $0  $85 per inspection cycle  $49,385 per inspection cycle.
 06, Amendment 39[dash]11660 (65 FR     hour = $85 per
 19302, April 11, 2000).                inspection cycle.
Modification retained from AD 2000-07- 18 work-hours x $85 per        $1,865  $3,395..................  $1,972,495.
 06.                                    hour = $1,530.
Inspections, new proposed action.....  9 work-hours x $85 per             $0  $765....................  $444,465.
                                        hour = $765.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary modifications
that would be required based on the results of the proposed
inspections. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these modifications:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                  Action                                Labor cost                 Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification..............................  84 work-hours x $85 per hour =             $12,395          $19,535
                                             $7,140.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (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.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive
(AD)

2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000), and
adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2012-0855; Directorate Identifier
2011-NM-136-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October 5,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR
19302, April 11, 2000).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by additional reports of fatigue cracking
in the radius of the lower frames and in the lower number 5 cross
beam of the forward cargo door. We are issuing this AD to prevent
fatigue cracking of the lower corners of the door frame and number 5
cross beam of the forward cargo door, which could result in rapid
depressurization of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Initial/Repetitive
Inspections

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD
2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000), with
revised service information. Within 1 year or 4,500 flight cycles
after May 16, 2000 (the effective date of AD 2000-07-06), whichever
occurs later, perform an HFEC inspection to detect cracking of the
lower corners (forward and aft) of the door frame of the forward
cargo door, in accordance with Boeing 737 Nondestructive Test (NDT)
Manual, D6-37239, Part 6, Section 51-00-00, Figure 4, dated August
5, 1997, or April 5, 2007, or Figure 23, dated August 5, 1997 or
April 5, 2004, as applicable.
    (1) If no cracking is detected, repeat the HFEC inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,500 flight cycles, until the
requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD have been accomplished.
    (2) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, prior to further flight, accomplish the
requirements of paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD,
which constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
    (i) Accomplish the requirements of paragraph (g)(2)(i)(A) or
(g)(2)(i)(B) of this AD, and install a cross beam repair and
reinforcement modification of the cross beam, in accordance with
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2, dated March 31,
1994.
    (A) Repair the door frame of the forward cargo door in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or
in accordance with data meeting the type certification basis of the
airplane approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such findings. For a repair or
modification method to be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as
required by this paragraph, and paragraphs (g)(2)(ii), (h)(2),
(h)(3)(ii), and (i)(2) of this AD, the Manager's approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
    (B) Replace the door frame of the forward cargo door with a new
door frame, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100,
Revision 2, dated March 31, 1994.
    (ii) Modify the repaired or replaced door frame of the forward
cargo door, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, or in accordance with data meeting the type
certification basis of the airplane approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make those findings.

    Note 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) of this AD:
Accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994, does not supersede the requirements of AD 90-
06-02, Amendment 39-6489 (55 FR 8372, March 7, 1990).

(h) Retained Initial Detailed Inspection and Repetitive Inspections

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (b) of AD
2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000). Within
1 year or 4,500 flight cycles after May 16, 2000 (the effective date
of AD 2000-07-06), whichever occurs later, perform a detailed
inspection to detect cracking of the cross beam (i.e., upper and
lower chord and Web sections) of the forward cargo door, in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994. For the purposes of this AD, a detailed
inspection is: ``An intensive examination of a specific item,
installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or
irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a
direct source of good lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate.
Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be
necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate procedures may be
required.''
    (1) If no cracking is detected, repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 4,500 flight cycles until the
requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD have been accomplished.
    (2) If any cracking is detected on the lower chord section of
the cross beam during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of
this AD, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method
approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, or in accordance with data
meeting the type certification basis of the airplane approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings.
    (3) If any cracking is detected on any area excluding the lower
chord section of the cross beam (i.e., upper chord and Web section)
during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, prior to
further flight, accomplish the requirements of paragraph (h)(3)(i)
or (h)(3)(ii) of this AD, as applicable, which constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes with line numbers 1 through 1231: Install a
cross beam repair and preventative modification of the outboard
radius of the lower corners (forward and aft) of the door frame, in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994.
    (ii) For airplanes with line numbers 1232 and subsequent:
Install a cross beam repair and preventative modification of the
outboard radius of the lower corners (forward and aft) of the door
frame, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, or in accordance with data meeting the type certification basis
of the airplane approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that
has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those
findings.

(i) Retained Terminating Action

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD
2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000), with
revised service information. Within 4 years or 12,000 flight cycles
after May 16, 2000 (the effective date of AD 2000-07-06), whichever
occurs later: Install the preventative modification of the outboard
radius of the lower corners (forward and aft) of the door frame and
the reinforcement modification of the cross beam of the forward
cargo door, in accordance with paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this
AD, as applicable. Accomplishment of paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of
this AD, as applicable, constitutes terminating action for the
repetitive inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (h)(1) of
this AD.
    (1) For airplanes with line numbers 1 through 1231: Accomplish
the preventative modification and the reinforcement modification, in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994.
    (2) For airplanes with line numbers 1232 and subsequent:
Accomplish the preventative modification and the reinforcement
modification, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, or in accordance with data meeting the type
certification basis of the airplane approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make those findings; or in accordance with Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated February 14,
2011. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated

February 14, 2011, to accomplish the modifications required by this
paragraph.

(j) Retained Action for Airplanes on Which Modifications Were
Accomplished Previously

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (d) of AD
2000-07-06, Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000). For
all airplanes on which modifications of the forward lower corner of
the door frame and the cross beam of the forward cargo door were
accomplished in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100,
dated August 25, 1988, or Revision 1, dated July 20, 1989; or in
accordance with the requirements of AD 90-06-02, Amendment 39-6489
(55 FR 8372, March 7, 1990): Within 4 years or 12,000 flight cycles
after May 16, 2000 (the effective date of AD 2000-07-06), whichever
occurs later, install the reinforcement modification of the aft
corner of the door frame of the forward cargo door, in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2, dated March
31, 1994. Accomplishment of such modification constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1) and (h)(1) of this AD.

(k) New Inspections and Corrective Actions

    Except as provided by paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of this AD:
At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated
February 14, 2011, do the inspections required by paragraphs (k)(1)
and (k)(2) of this AD, as applicable. Do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions before further flight, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011;
except as required by paragraph (m)(3) of this AD. Accomplishment of
the inspections required by paragraph (k) of this AD terminates the
requirements of the repetitive inspections required by paragraphs
(g)(1) and (h)(1) of this AD. If any cracking is found in the number
4 cross beam, before further flight, repair in accordance with
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-52-1149, dated
December 11, 2003.

    Note 2 to paragraph (k) of this AD: Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011, refers to
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-52-1149, dated
December 11, 2003, as an additional source of guidance for the
inspection for cracks of the number 4 cross beam.

    (1) For airplanes identified in Tables 1 and 2 of paragraph 1.E,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100,
Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011: Do a one-time HFEC inspection
of the applicable location for cracks, in accordance with the Work
Instructions, Part I, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100,
Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011.
    (2) For airplanes identified in Table 3 of paragraph 1.E,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100,
Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011: Do a one-time general visual
inspection of the reinforcement angle for excessive shimming or
fastener pull-up, in accordance with the Work Instructions, Part
III, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated
February 14, 2011.

(l) No Supplemental Structural Inspections Required by This AD

    (1) The supplemental structural inspections specified in Table 4
of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' and Part 5 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision
5, dated February 14, 2011, are not required by this AD.
    (2) The supplemental structural inspections specified in Table 4
of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011, may be used in
support of compliance with section 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2)
of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR
129.109(c)(2)). The corresponding actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
52A1100, Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011, are not required by
this AD.

(m) Exceptions to Certain Service Information

    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011,
specifies a compliance time relative to the Revision 5 issue date of
the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where Table 1, ``Condition'' column of Paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100,
Revision 5, dated February 14, 2011, specifies ``airplanes without
either the repair or modification accomplished in accordance with
previous releases of this service bulletin,'' the corresponding
condition in this AD is for ``airplanes on which either a repair or
modification was not accomplished before the effective date of this
AD.''
    (3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-52A1100, Revision 5,
dated February 14, 2011, specifies to contact Boeing for certain
actions: Before further flight, do the repair using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(n)(1) of this AD.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, 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) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO to make those findings. For a repair method to
be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2000-07-06,
Amendment 39-11660 (65 FR 19302, April 11, 2000), are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding requirements of this AD.

(o) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Alan Pohl,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone (425)
917-6450; 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. 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>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 13, 2012.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-20470 Filed 8-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P