[Federal Register: February 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 38)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9720-9723]
[DOCID:fr27fe06-9]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[WI-118-2; FRL-8037-5]

Notice of Resolution of Notice of Deficiency for Clean Air Act
Operating Permit Program; Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of resolution.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice of deficiency (NOD) on March 4, 2004 (69
FR 10167), in which EPA identified problems with Wisconsin's Clean Air
Act (Act) title V operating permit program and a timeframe for the
State to correct these deficiencies. The Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources (WDNR) submitted corrections to its permit program on
August 18, 2005, and revisions to a related rule on December 8, 2005.
This document announces that based on information provided by the WDNR,
EPA concludes that the State of Wisconsin has resolved all of the
issues identified in the March 4, 2004, NOD. As a result, EPA will not
impose sanctions set forth under the mandatory sanctions provisions of
the Act. In addition, EPA will not promulgate, administer, and enforce
a whole or partial operating permit program pursuant to the title V
regulations of the Act within 2 years after the date of the finding of
deficiency.

DATES: Effective February 16, 2006. Because this notice of resolution
is an adjudication and not a final rule, the Administrative Procedure
Act's 30 day deferral of the effective date of a rule does not apply.

ADDRESSES: The documents relevant to the above action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the following
address: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Susan
Siepkowski, Environmental Engineer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting
the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Siepkowski, Environmental
Engineer, Air Permit Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What Is the Background Information for This Action?
II. What Did Wisconsin Submit and What Did EPA Determine Regarding
Each Deficiency?
    A. Demonstration of Sufficient Fees to Cover Program Costs
    B. Demonstration of Title V Fees Being Used Solely for the Title
V Program
    C. Issuance of Title V Permits
    D. Program Implementation Issues
III. What Action Is EPA Taking and What Does This Mean?

I. What Is the Background Information for This Action?

    On March 4, 2004, EPA published a NOD for the title V Operating
Permit Program in Wisconsin. (69 FR 10167). The NOD was based upon
EPA's findings that the State's title V program did not comply with the
requirements of the Act or with the implementing regulations at 40 CFR
part 70 in the following four respects: (1) Wisconsin had failed to
demonstrate that its title V program required owners or operators of
part 70 sources to pay fees sufficient to cover the costs of the
State's title V program in contravention of the requirements of 40 CFR
part 70 and the Act; (2) Wisconsin was not adequately ensuring that its
title V program funds were used solely for title V permit program costs
and, thus, was not conducting its title V program in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 70.9 and the Act; (3) Wisconsin had not
issued initial title V permits to all of its part 70 sources within the
time allowed by the Act and 40 CFR 70.4; and (4) Wisconsin had other
deficiencies with the implementation of its permit program.
    Wisconsin was required to address these deficiencies within 18
months of the date of the issuance of the March 4, 2004 NOD, or the
state would be subject to the sanctions under 40 CFR 70.10(b)(3) and
section 179(b) of the Act. In addition, 40 CFR 70.10(b)(4) provides
that, if the state has not corrected the deficiency within 18 months of
the date of the finding of deficiency, EPA will promulgate, administer,
and enforce a whole or partial program within 2 years of the date of
the finding.

II. What Did Wisconsin Submit and What Did EPA Determine Regarding Each
Deficiency?

    On August 18, 2005, WDNR submitted to EPA the ``Wisconsin DNR
Response to USEPA Notice of Deficiency Related to the `Title V Program'
dated March 4, 2004'' (NOD Response). The NOD Response is available to
view in the docket, Docket ID No. WI-118-2. In the NOD Response, and
its accompanying attachments, WDNR explained and documented how each of
the deficiencies identified in the NOD had been, or were being,
addressed. The NOD Response contains documented internal operational
changes within WDNR, a copy of the fee structure included in
Wisconsin's 2005-07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as 2005
Wisconsin Act 25 (published July 26, 2005), and numerous attachments
describing WDNR's permit program, program costs, fee structure, and
workload. Additionally, on December 8, 2005, WDNR submitted to EPA for
approval, a SIP revision related to one of the deficiencies, ``Request
to the USEPA to Revise Wisconsin's SIP Pertaining to the Permanency of
Construction Permit Conditions'' (Permanency Revision).
    Based on the information in WDNR's NOD Response, and the Permanency
Revision to Wisconsin's SIP, EPA has determined that Wisconsin has
demonstrated that it has resolved each

of the issues listed in the March 4, 2004, NOD, as discussed below.

A. Demonstration of Sufficient Fees To Cover Program Costs

    As discussed in the NOD, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b)(3) and 40
CFR 70.9(a), a state program must require that the owners or operators
of part 70 sources pay annual fees, or the equivalent over some other
period, that are sufficient to cover the permit program costs. 42
U.S.C. 7661a(b)(3) and 40 CFR 70.9(b) provide that a state may collect
fees that cover the actual permit program costs, or may use a
presumptive fee schedule, adjusted for inflation.
    In a 2001 title V program revision submittal, WDNR disclosed that
it had removed the inflation adjustment factor from its title V fee
schedule. Instead of providing for inflation adjustments, Wisconsin's
fee schedule now required the state to bill sources for each 1,000 tons
of emissions in excess of the 4,000 ton cap allowed for by the
presumptive fee schedule provided by 40 CFR 70.9(b)(2)(ii)(B).
    In light of this change, and, as provided by 70.9(b)(5), EPA
requested from Wisconsin a detailed fee demonstration to show its
collection of fees is sufficient to cover its permit program costs.
However, the information subsequently provided by Wisconsin did not
adequately demonstrate that the revised fee schedule resulted in the
collection of fees in an amount sufficient to cover its actual program
costs, as required by 40 CFR 70.9(b)(1). Additionally, Section 502(b)
of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b), and 40 CFR 70.4(b) provide that a state
must have adequate personnel to ensure that the permitting authority
can carry out implementation of its title V program. EPA also had
serious questions regarding the adequacy of Wisconsin's ability to
fully implement its title V program.
    To address these issues, WDNR provided in its August 18, 2005, NOD
Response, the required fee demonstration. The fee information includes
a description of the State's title V fee structure, a description of
the title V permit program activities and costs, a demonstration that
its fee schedule results in the collection of revenues sufficient to
cover the title V permit program costs, and a description of the
activities funded by part 70 fees, including personnel.
    In its NOD Response, WDNR elected to demonstrate that it collects
fees that cover the actual permit program costs, rather than use a
presumptive fee schedule, adjusted for inflation, as allowed by 40 CFR
70.9(b)(5). WDNR provided detailed information regarding its program
costs, which included, among other things, a Workload Analysis and a
Fee Analysis for Wisconsin fiscal years 2005-2008. These documents
describe the actual costs of implementing Wisconsin's title V program,
a breakdown of how the costs were calculated, and permit funds WDNR
anticipates will be collected. Additionally, the documents establish
WDNR staffing requirements, including full time employee (FTE) hours
needed, and corresponding funding needs, that WDNR concludes are
necessary to operate a complete stationary source program over its
fiscal years 2005-2008. The analyses do not cover all aspects of
Wisconsin's Air Program, but instead, focus on the activities related
to the permit program. WDNR provided further information regarding its
permit streamlining efforts, which, if implemented as planned, will,
over time, continue to reduce the costs of running its title V program
beyond fiscal year 2008, and will allow staff redeployment.
    Upon review of the information submitted, EPA finds that WDNR has
demonstrated that it has adequate staffing and funding levels to
support a complete title V program through Wisconsin fiscal year 2008.
Accordingly, WDNR has demonstrated that it collects fees that cover the
actual title V program costs. Thus, the State's program complies with
the requirements of the Act and 40 CFR 70.9. Also, based on the
Workload Analysis and the information regarding its permit streamlining
efforts, EPA determines that WDNR is adequately staffing its title V
program. Accordingly, Wisconsin is also complying with the requirements
of the Act and 40 CFR 70.4, and has resolved these issues raised in the
NOD.

B. Demonstration of Title V Fees Being Used Solely for the Title V
Program

    One of the issues identified in the NOD was that the fee revenue
information that WDNR provided to EPA in 2003 showed that the State was
not distinguishing between fees collected from sources under different
operating permit programs. Specifically, the information provided
showed that WDNR did not account separately for or maintain separate
accounts for fees collected under title V and fees collected from non-
title V sources. Section 502(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b), and 40
CFR 70.9(a), which provide that a state's title V program must ensure
that all title V fees are used solely for title V permit program costs.
    Additionally, 40 CFR 70.10(b) provides that states must conduct
approved state title V programs in accordance with the requirements of
40 CRF part 70 and any agreement between the state and EPA concerning
operation of the program. Information provided to EPA by WDNR in 2003
also disclosed internal fee management deficiencies that demonstrated
that WDNR was not conducting its title V program in accordance with the
requirements of the Act and 40 CRF part 70 and, therefore, was not
adequately administering its title V program.
    In its NOD Response, WDNR provided documentation which demonstrates
that it is using its title V fees only for title V permit program
costs. The fee revenue information provided establishes that the State
is now distinguishing between fees collected from sources operating
under different Clean Air Act permit programs. Specifically, the
information shows that WDNR now accounts separately for, and maintains
separate accounts for, fees collected under title V and non-title V
programs. This change is the result of legislative changes adopted as
part of the Wisconsin 2005-07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as
2005 Wisconsin Act 25. (Published July 26, 2005.) In 2005 Wisconsin Act
25, Wisconsin created a new appropriation to separate title V from non-
title V funding and expenditures. The expenditure authority for the
title V program specifies that permit fees be collected from sources
with operation permits required under the Act. The expenditure
authority for the non-title V program is for sources with state
operation permits not required by the Act. Thus, the State now provides
for an accurate description and accounting of its title V fee
collections.
    The NOD Response and its attachments also demonstrate that WDNR is
using title V funds only for title V work. EPA has evaluated the
information WDNR provided regarding its accounting and timekeeping
practices, including FTE Hours, Time Report Activities by Employees,
Activity and Funding Codes, and changes to these activity codes to
better account for tracking and billing employee time, and concludes
that WDNR has demonstrated that it is not using title V funds to
subsidize the work of employees performing non-title V work. Further,
Wisconsin Act 2005 also created a new fee structure for the non-title V
program to ensure that the non-title V program work was self funded.
Accordingly, WDNR is ensuring that all title V fees that it collects
are used solely for permit program costs as required by 42 U.S.C.
7661a(b) and 40

CFR 70.9(a). Thus, WDNR is conducting its title V program in accordance
with the requirements of the Act and 40 CRF part 70 and adequately
administering its title V program.
    Regarding the potential grant matching issue raised in the NOD,
WDNR has demonstrated it is not using title V funds for grant matching.
Specifically, WDNR included in its NOD Response, ``FY05 Air Management
Activity Codes, Funding Source and Air Pollution Control Grant Match
Eligibility,'' which provides for each air program activity the funding
source and whether it is eligible to use for 105 grant match. As
discussed above, by separating the non-title V and title V accounts,
WDNR is able to specifically track where the matching funds came from
to ensure title V funds are not being used. Thus, EPA concludes that
WDNR has ensured that all title V fees that it collects are used solely
for permit program costs, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b) and 40 CFR
70.9(a).

C. Issuance of Title V Permits

    The NOD cited Wisconsin for failure to comply with section 503(c)
of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661b(c), and 40 CFR 70.4, which require that a
permitting authority must act on all initial title V permit
applications within three years of the effective date of the program.
Pursuant to section 503 of the Act, Wisconsin was to have completed
issuance of initial title V operating permits to all of its part 70
sources by April 5, 1998.
    In an October 23, 2003 letter to EPA, ``Schedule for Completing
Review of Title V Operation Permits,'' WDNR provided a schedule for
completing issuance of its initial title V permits by December 31,
2004. WDNR met this commitment and finished issuing its title V permits
on December 30, 2004. WDNR notified EPA of its completion in a January
14, 2005, letter to EPA, ``Update of Wisconsin Response to EPA Notice
of Deficiency.'' Accordingly, EPA concludes that WDNR has resolved the
NOD issue of failure to issue all of its initial title V permits.
    Additionally, WDNR has committed to issuing all remaining initial
Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits (FESOP) prior to March 4,
2006, with the majority of these permits to be issued by December 31,
2005. WDNR provided in its NOD Response, ``FESOP Issuance and Other
2005 Operation Permit Priorities,'' which includes its FESOP issuance
strategy and deadlines. On January 17, 2006, WDNR also indicated to EPA
that it completed issuance of these FESOP permits.

D. Program Implementation Issues

1. Expiration of Construction Permits
    40 CFR 70.1 requires that each title V source has a permit to
operate that assures compliance with all applicable requirements. The
definition of applicable requirement includes any term or condition of
any preconstruction permit issued pursuant to programs approved or
promulgated under title I, including parts C or D of the Act. These
permits must remain in effect because they are the legal mechanism
through which underlying preconstruction requirements become
applicable, and remain applicable, to individual sources. If the
construction permit expired, then the construction permit terms no
longer would be applicable requirements and the permitting authority
would not have the authority to incorporate them into title V permits.
(See EPA's May 20, 1999 letter from John Seitz to Robert Hodanbosi and
Charles Lagges.)
    Wisconsin statutes, Wis. Stat 285.66(1), provided that construction
permits expired after 18 months. (WDNR had also interpreted NR 406.12
to provide that construction permits expired.) Because Wisconsin's
construction permits expired, resulting in terms in its title V permits
that did not have underlying applicable requirements, Wisconsin's title
V program did not meet the minimum requirements of part 70.
    In response to the NOD, Wisconsin has revised Statute 285.66(1) to
make permanent all conditions in construction permits. WDNR submitted a
SIP request, ``Wisconsin SIP Revision Pertaining to the Permanency of
Construction Permit Conditions'' on December 8, 2005. Statute 285.66(1)
was revised to provide that, ``Notwithstanding the fact that
authorization to construct, reconstruct, replace, or modify a source
expires under this subsection, all conditions in a construction permit
are permanent unless the conditions are revised through a revision of
the construction permit or through the issuance of a new construction
permit.'' This statutory revision was adopted as part of the Wisconsin
2005-07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as 2005 Wisconsin Act 25.
(Published July 26, 2005.)
    EPA reviewed Wisconsin's December 8, 2005, SIP revision submittal
and determined it was approvable because it makes Wisconsin's
construction permit program consistent with Federal program
requirements for state permit programs. This revision also resolves the
deficiency identified in the NOD. EPA published its proposed approval
of Wisconsin's Permanency Revision on January 12, 2006 (71 FR 1994),
and no comments were received. EPA signed the final approval for this
revision on February 16, 2006, and has submitted it to the Office of
the Federal Register for publication.
    Unlike Wisconsin's statute, its rule governing the expiration of
construction permits, NR 406.12, provides that ``[a]pproval to
construct or modify a stationary source shall become invalid 18 months
after the date when a construction permit was issued by the Department
unless the permit specifies otherwise.'' Therefore, no revision is
necessary to NR 406.12, since the rule itself does not provide that the
permits expire.
    Based on our final approval of Wisconsin's statutory change to make
all conditions in construction permits permanent, EPA concludes that
WDNR has resolved this deficiency identified in the NOD.
2. Combined Construction and Operating Permits
    The NOD discussed that states have the option of integrating their
pre-construction and title V programs as described at 57 FR 32250,
32279 (July 21, 1992). Part 70 requires that, to implement an
integrated permit program, the state permitting authority must, among
other things, comply with the permit content requirements in 40 CFR
70.6, including the requirement to specify the origin of and authority
for each term or condition in a title V permit, and, ensure that the
construction permit conditions do not expire, whether previously
established in a separate pre-construction permit, or in the combined
title V/pre-construction permit.
    Wisconsin has been issuing a version of a combined construction and
title V permit for several years. However, Wisconsin was not complying
with the requirements above in that it was not identifying the
construction permit conditions or specifying the origin and authority
of these conditions in the title V or combined permit. Furthermore,
Wisconsin did not have any provisions to ensure that the construction
permit conditions were permanent.
    In its NOD Resolution, WDNR included an internal guidance
memorandum, ``Interface Between Construction and Operation Permits,''
dated June 3, 2004. This memorandum directs permit writers to identify
conditions from the construction permit and specify the origin and
authority of these conditions in the title V permit. In addition, the
SIP revision discussed in the previous section ensures that all

construction permit conditions are permanent. Thus, WDNR has resolved
this deficiency identified in the NOD.
3. Federal Enforceability
    The NOD cited Wisconsin for failure to comply with 40 CFR 70.6(b),
which provides that all terms and conditions in a title V permit are
federally enforceable, that is, enforceable by EPA or citizens.
However, the permitting authority can designate as not federally
enforceable any terms and conditions included in the permit that are
not required under the Act or under any of its applicable requirements.
40 CFR 70.6(b)(2). In contrast, EPA has determined that all conditions
of a permit issued pursuant to a program approved into a state's SIP
are federally enforceable. 40 CFR 52.23. (See the May 20, 1999 letter
from John Seitz to Robert Hodanbosi and Charles Lagges.)
    Wisconsin had identified all permit requirements in title V permits
originating from Wisconsin's air toxics program (Wis. Admin. Code NR
445) as enforceable by the State only, even when the requirements were
established in a permit issued pursuant to a SIP-approved program, such
as a construction permit. Wisconsin's failure to include the terms
established in a permit issued pursuant to a SIP-approved program into
the federally enforceable side of its title V permits was contrary to
40 CFR 70.6.
    In its NOD Resolution, WDNR included the internal guidance
memorandum, ``Interface Between Construction and Operation Permits'',
cited above. This memorandum directs the permit writers to make
federally enforceable any requirement in the title V permit that was
included in the source's construction permit issued pursuant to a SIP-
approved program. EPA has determined that WDNR has addressed this
program implementation issue identified in the NOD.
4. Insignificant Emission Unit Requirements
    40 CFR 70.5(c) authorizes EPA to approve as part of a state program
a list of insignificant activities and emission levels (IEUs) which
need not be included in the permit application, provided that the
application may not omit information needed to determine the
applicability of, or to impose, any applicable requirement. Nothing in
part 70, however, authorizes a state to exempt IEUs from the permit
content requirements of 40 CFR 70.6.
    Wisconsin's regulations, at NR 407, contain criteria for sources to
identify IEUs in their applications, and require that permit
applications contain information necessary to determine the
applicability of, or to impose, any applicable requirement. However,
WDNR did not include in its title V permits federally enforceable
applicable requirements to which IEUs are subject. Therefore,
Wisconsin's interpretation and implementation of its regulations was
inconsistent with part 70.
    WDNR included in its NOD Resolution an example of a revised title V
permit template establishing the changes it has implemented in order to
address this issue. WDNR has revised its title V permits to include the
source's IEU's under the federally enforceable portion of the permit.
WDNR has also included the requirements applicable to the IEU's as part
of the general terms and conditions for each permit. Thus, EPA has
determined that WDNR has adequately addressed this program
implementation issue identified in the NOD.

III. What Action Is EPA Taking and What Does This Mean?

    EPA is notifying the public that based on the information provided
by WDNR; internal operational changes within WDNR; and EPA's approval
of statutory changes requested by Wisconsin, that EPA has determined
that Wisconsin has resolved each of deficiencies identified by EPA in
the NOD for Wisconsin's Operating Permit Program, 69 FR 10167 (March 4,
2004). Therefore, based on the rationale set forth above, EPA is not
invoking sanctions pursuant to section 179(b) of the Act, nor
administering any portion of the State's operation permit program,
pursuant to 40 CFR 70.10(b)(4).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: February 16, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 06-1797 Filed 2-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 214)]
[Notices]
[Page 65683-65685]
[DOCID:fr04no08-79]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2008-0048]

The Asbestos in Shipyards Standard; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)
Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comment concerning its proposal to extend
OMB approval of the information collection requirements specified in
the Asbestos in Shipyards Standard (29 CFR 1915.1001).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
January 5, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments
and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2008-0048,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier
service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket
Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number for the Information Collection Request (ICR) (OSHA-2008-
0048). All comments, including any personal information you provide,
are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information
on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov

or the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. All documents in the
docket (including this Federal Register notice) are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g.,
copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download
through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You
may also contact Todd Owen at the address below to obtain a copy of the
ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Owen, Directorate of Standards
and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The information collection requirements specified in the Asbestos
in Shipyards Standard protect employees from the adverse health effects
that may result from occupational exposure to asbestos. The major
information collection requirements in the Standard include:
     Implementing an exposure monitoring program that informs
employees of their exposure-monitoring results;
     At multi-employer worksites, notification of other on-site
employers by employers establishing regulated areas for the type of
work performed with asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and/or
presumed asbestos-containing materials (PACMs), the requirements that
pertain to regulated areas and the measures the employers can use to
protect their employees from asbestos overexposure;
     Developing specific information and training programs for
employees;
     Providing medical surveillance for employees potentially
exposed to ACMs and/or PACMs, including administering an employee
medical questionnaire, providing information to the examining
physician, and providing the physician's written opinion to the
employee; and
     Maintaining records of objective data used for exposure
determinations, employee exposure monitoring and medical surveillance
records, training records, the record (i.e., information, data, and
analyses) used to demonstrate that PACM does not contain asbestos, and
notifications made and received by building/facility owners regarding
the content of ACMs and PACMs.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is proposing to extend the information collection requirements
contained in the Asbestos in Shipyards Standard (29 CFR 1915.1001). The
Agency is requesting an increase in its current burden hour total from
1,426 hours to 1,621 for a total increase of 195 hours. The adjustment
is primarily the result of an increase in the number of shipyards that
may have employees exposed to asbestos. The Agency will summarize the
comments submitted in response to this notice and will include this
summary in the request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Asbestos in Shipyards Standard (29 CFR 1915.1001).
    OMB Number: 1218-0195.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits; Federal Government;
State, Local or Tribal Government.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Average Time Per Response: Varies from 5 minutes (.08 hour) to
provide information to the examining physician to 1.83 hours to develop
alternative control methods.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,621.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $37,798.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on this Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (FAX); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2008-0048). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled
``ADDRESSES''). The additional materials must clearly identify your
electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number so the
Agency can attach them to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.

    Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to
submit comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's
``User Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information
about materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance
in using the Internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR
31159).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on October 29, 2008.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
 [FR Doc. E8-26210 Filed 11-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44983-44987]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15929]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3983; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-009-AD;
Amendment 39-18582; AD 2016-14-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes; Model A330-200 and
A330-300 series airplanes; Model A340-200 and A340-300 series
airplanes; Model A340-500 series airplanes; and Model A340-600 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report indicating that, during an
operational test of a ram air turbine (RAT), the RAT did not deploy in
automatic mode. This AD requires identification of the manufacturer,
part number, and serial number of the RAT, and re-identification and
modification of the RAT if necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent
non-deployment of the RAT, which, if preceded by a total engine flame-
out, or during a total loss of normal electrical power generation,
could result in reduced control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective August 16, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 16,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For Airbus service information identified in this final
rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point
Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36
96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    For Hamilton Sundstrand service information identified in this
final rule, contact Hamilton Sundstrand, Technical Publications, Mail
Stop 302-9, 4747 Harrison Avenue, P.O. Box 7002, Rockford, IL 61125-
7002; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.hamiltonsundstrand.com.
    You may view this referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-
227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3983.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3983; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus Model A330-
200 Freighter series airplanes; Model A330-200 and A330-300 series
airplanes; Model A340-200 and A340-300 series airplanes; Model A340-500
series airplanes; and Model A340-600 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on March 1, 2016 (81 FR 10545) (``the
NPRM'').
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2015-0008, dated January 15, 2015 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model
A330-200 Freighter series airplanes; Model A330-200, and A330-

300 series airplanes; Model A340-200, and A340-300 series airplanes;
Model A340-500 series airplanes; and Model A340-600 series airplanes.
The MCAI states:

    During a scheduled Ram Air Turbine (RAT) operational test on an
A330 aeroplane, the RAT did not deploy in automatic mode. The
subsequent investigation conducted by the RAT manufacturer Hamilton
Sundstrand (HS) and Arkwin Industries, revealed that this failure to
deploy was due to an inadequate stroke margin in the manufacturing
shimming procedure of the actuator deployment solenoids.
    This condition, if not corrected, could possibly result in
reduced control of the aeroplane, particularly if occurring
following a total engine flame out, or during a total loss of normal
electrical power generation.
    Prompted by this unsafe condition, Airbus issued Service
Bulletin (SB) A330-29-3126, SB A340-29-4097 and SB A340-29-5025,
providing instructions to identify the manufacturer, part number (P/
N) and serial number (s/n) of the RAT actuator, and to modify the
shimming procedure for the affected RAT actuator.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
identification of the affected RAT actuators and, depending on its
configuration (modified or not), the accomplishment of applicable
corrective actions [modifying the RAT actuator. Additional actions
include re-identifying the RAT actuator part number and RAT part
number, as applicable].

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3983.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Change Requirement From Modify To Replace

    Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that the requirement to modify the
RAT actuator in paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of the proposed AD be
changed from ``modify the RAT actuator'' to ``replace the RAT
actuator.'' DAL stated that operators cannot ensure that the removed
RAT actuator would be modified by the RAT manufacturer by the
compliance time specified in the proposed AD.
    We agree to provide clarification regarding the requirement to
modify the RAT actuator, but we do not agree with the commenter's
request to change ``modify'' to ``replace.'' The modification
procedures described in the Accomplishment Instructions of the Airbus
service information specified in paragraphs (g)(2), (g)(3), (h)(2), and
(h)(3) of this AD include more than just a modification. The
modification procedures in the Airbus service information state to (1)
remove the actuator from the RAT, (2) send the removed actuator to
Hamilton Sundstrand, and (3) install the modified actuator on the RAT
and re-identify the part number.
    We also agree that operators do not have control over how long it
would take Hamilton Sundstrand to modify the actuator, or if the
modification could be completed prior to the applicable compliance
times in this AD. Therefore, we have revised paragraphs (g)(2), (g)(3),
(h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD by removing the word ``modify'' and
replacing it with ``remove the actuator from the RAT, install a
modified actuator, and re-identify the RAT . . . .''

Request To Include Review of Maintenance Records

    DAL requested that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD be revised to
include a statement that a review of airplane maintenance records is
acceptable to determine the supplier, part number, and serial number of
the installed RAT actuators if the supplier, part number, and serial
number can be conclusively determined from that review. DAL stated that
it has already modified airplanes in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12,
2014, and it tracks the on-wing identification of these RAT components.
DAL indicated that allowing operators to review airplane maintenance
records to determine the supplier, part number, and serial number of
the installed RAT actuators would prevent unnecessary work.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. One of the actions
included in the requirement to determine the supplier, part number, and
serial number of an installed RAT actuator is looking at the actuator's
identification plate. An inspection of the RAT actuator is necessary to
determine if the identification plate is present. Paragraphs (g)(3) and
(h)(3) of this AD require certain actions if the identification plate
of a RAT actuator is missing. We have not changed this AD regarding
this issue.

Request To Refer To Revised Service Information

    DAL requested that the references to Hamilton Sundstrand Service
Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, dated May 27, 2014, be changed to ERPS06M-29-
21, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2015. DAL noted that the revised
service information updates the identification procedures for the RAT
actuators, among other changes.
    We agree with the commenter that all references to Hamilton
Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, dated May 27, 2014, should
be changed to ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2015, in this
final rule. We have made this change in the ``Related Service
Information under 1 CFR part 51'' section in the preamble and
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), and (j) of this AD. We have also
included a new paragraph (k) in this AD to provide credit for actions
done prior to the effective date of this AD using Hamilton Sundstrand
Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, dated May 27, 2014. The subsequent
paragraphs have been redesignated accordingly.

Request To Change References to a Certain Related AD

    DAL noted that the ``Related ADs'' section of the NPRM preamble,
and paragraphs (b) and (i) of the proposed AD, referred to AD 2015-26-
02, Amendment 39-18350 (80 FR 81174, December 29, 2015) (``AD 2015-26-
02''), which was superseded by AD 2016-04-01, Amendment 39-18395 (81 FR
8134, February 18, 2016) (``AD 2016-04-01''). DAL suggested that the
references to AD 2015-26-02 be removed and replaced with references to
AD 2016-04-01.
    We agree with the commenter's suggestion. The ``Related ADs''
section of the NPRM is not restated in this final rule, but we have
revised paragraphs (b) and (i) of this AD to refer to AD 2016-04-01.

Conclusion

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information, which
describes procedures for identifying the supplier, part number, and
serial number of the

installed RAT actuator; modifying the RAT; and re-identifying the RAT
actuator and RAT.
     Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12, 2014.
     Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014.
     Service Bulletin A340-29-5025, dated June 16, 2014.
    Hamilton Sundstrand has issued Service Bulletins ERPS06M-29-21,
Revision 1, dated April 14, 2015; and ERPS33T-29-7, dated June 6, 2014.
This service information describes procedures for identifying the
affected RAT actuator and RAT part numbers and serial numbers,
modifying affected actuators, and re-identifying affected RAT actuators
and RATs.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 84 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost              Parts cost            product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identification..................  1 work-hour x $85 per  None...................             $85          $7,140
                                   hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that will be required based on the results of the required inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need
these replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Removal/installation/ re-identification.......  14 work-hours x $85 per hour =          $427,301        $428,491
                                                 $1,190.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2016-14-01 Airbus: Amendment 39-18582. Docket No. FAA-2016-3983;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-009-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 16, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects the ADs specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),
and (b)(3) of this AD.
    (1) AD 2012-21-19, Amendment 39-17235 (77 FR 65812, October 31,
2012) (``AD 2012-21-19'').
    (2) AD 2012-21-20, Amendment 39-17236 (77 FR 65799, October 31,
2012) (``AD 2012-21-20'').
    (3) AD 2016-04-01, Amendment 39-18395 (81 FR 8134, February 18,
2016) (``AD 2016-04-01'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(7) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes, all manufacturer
serial numbers; except those on which Airbus Modification 204067 has
been embodied in production.
    (2) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes,
all manufacturer serial numbers; except those on which Airbus
Modification 204067 has been embodied in production.
    (3) Airbus Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323,- 341, -
342, and -343 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers; except
those on which Airbus Modification 204067 has been embodied in
production.
    (4) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, and -213, airplanes, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (5) Airbus Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (6) Airbus Model A340-541 airplanes, all manufacturer serial
numbers.

    (7) Airbus Model A340-642 airplanes, all manufacturer serial
numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 29, Hydraulic
Power.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that, during an
operational test of a ram air turbine (RAT), the RAT did not deploy
in automatic mode. We are issuing this AD to prevent non-deployment
of the RAT, which, if preceded by a total engine flame-out, or
during a total loss of normal electrical power generation, could
result in reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Identification and Replacement for Certain Airbus Model A330, and
A340-200 and -300 Airplanes

    For Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes, Model
A330-200 and -300 series airplanes, and Model A340-200 and -300
series airplanes: Within 30 months after the effective date of this
AD, identify the supplier, part number, and serial number of the
installed RAT actuator, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12,
2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014;
as applicable.
    (1) If the supplier identified is Arkwin Industries, and the
identified RAT actuator part number and serial number are listed in
Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1,
dated April 14, 2015, and the serial number is included in table 2
of Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1,
dated April 14, 2015, with a description of ``correctly shimmed'':
Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD, re-identify
the actuator and the RAT, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12,
2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014;
as applicable.
    (2) If the supplier identified is Arkwin Industries, and the
identified actuator RAT part number and serial number are listed in
Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1,
dated April 14, 2015, and the serial number is included in table 2
of Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1,
dated April 14, 2015, with a description of ``incorrectly shimmed'':
Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD, remove the
actuator from the RAT, install a modified actuator, and re-identify
the RAT, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12, 2014; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014; as applicable.
    (3) If the supplier identified is Arkwin Industries, and the
identification plate for the RAT actuator is missing, or the part
number and serial number are not listed in Hamilton Sundstrand
Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2015:
Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD, remove the
actuator from the RAT, install a modified actuator, and re-identify
the RAT, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12, 2014; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014; as applicable.

(h) Identification and Replacement for Certain Airbus Model A340-500
and -600 Airplanes

    For Airbus Model A340-500 and -600 airplanes: Within 30 months
after the effective date of this AD, identify the part number and
serial number of the installed RAT actuator, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-5025,
dated June 16, 2014.
    (1) If the identified RAT actuator part number and serial number
are listed in Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7,
dated June 6, 2014, and the serial number is included in table 2 of
Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7, dated June 6,
2014, with a description of ``correctly shimmed'': Within 30 months
after the effective date of this AD, re-identify the actuator and
the RAT, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-5025, dated June 16, 2014.
    (2) If the identified RAT actuator part number and serial number
are listed in Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7,
dated June 6, 2014, and the serial number is included in table 2 of
Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7, dated June 6,
2014, with a description of ``incorrectly shimmed'': Within 30
months after the effective date of this AD, remove the actuator from
the RAT, install a modified actuator, and re-identify the RAT, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-29-5025, dated June 16, 2014.
    (3) If the identification plate for the RAT actuator is missing,
or the part number and serial number are not listed in Hamilton
Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7, dated June 6, 2014: Within
30 months after the effective date of this AD, remove the actuator
from the RAT, install a modified actuator, and re-identify the RAT,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-29-5025, dated June 16, 2014.

(i) Terminating Action for Certain Requirements of Other ADs

    (1) For Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter, A330-200, and A330-300
series airplanes; and Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes:
Accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2),
or (g)(3) of this AD constitutes compliance with the requirements of
paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2012-21-19, paragraph (g) of AD 2012-21-20,
and paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of AD 2016-04-01, for that airplane
only.
    (2) For Airbus Model A340-500 and -600 series airplanes:
Accomplishment of the actions required by paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2),
and (h)(3) of this AD constitutes compliance with the requirements
of paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of AD 2012-21-20, and paragraph (j)
of 2016-04-01, for that airplane only.

(j) Parts Installation Limitations

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any
RAT actuator or any RAT having a part number identified in table 1
to paragraph (j) of this AD on any airplane, unless it meets the
conditions specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, as
applicable.

       Table 1 to Paragraph (j) of This AD--Affected Part Numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Affected Airbus airplane
            models               RAT part No.     RAT actuator part No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model A330-200 and -300        1720934C,        5912958, 5915768
 series airplanes.              1720934D,
                                766351A,
                                768084A,
                                770379A,
                                770952C,
                                770952D,
                                770952E.
Model A330-200 Freighter       1720934C,        5912958, 5915768
 series airplanes.              1720934D,
                                766351A,
                                768084A,
                                770379A,
                                770952C,
                                770952D,
                                770952E.
Model A340-200 and -300        1720934C,        5912958, 5915768
 series airplanes.              1720934D,
                                766351A,
                                768084A,
                                770379A,
                                770952C,
                                770952D,
                                770952E.
Model A340-500 and -600        772722H,         5912536, 5915769
 series airplanes.              772722J,
                                772722L.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) For Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes; Model
A330-200, and A330-300 series airplanes; and Model A340-200 and -300
series airplanes: The RAT actuator or RAT has a serial number listed
as affected and modified in Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin
ERPS06M-29-21, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2015, and the RAT has
been re-identified in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12,
2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014.
    (2) For Airbus Model A340-500 and -600 series airplanes: The RAT
actuator or the RAT has a serial number listed as affected and
modified in Hamilton Sundstrand

Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7, dated June 6, 2014, and the RAT has
been re-identified in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-5025, dated June 16,
2014.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the RAT and RAT actuator
identification specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of
this AD if that identification was performed before the effective
date of this AD using Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-
29-21, dated May 27, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in
this AD.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the RAT or RAT actuator
identification and modification specified in paragraph (j)(1) of
this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date
of this AD using Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21,
dated May 27, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this
AD.

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any Airbus service
information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC,
those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(m) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0008, dated January 15,
2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3983.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (n)(4) and (n)(5) of this AD.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-29-3126, dated June 12, 2014.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-4097, dated June 12, 2014.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-29-5025, dated June 16, 2014.
    (iv) Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS06M-29-21,
Revision 1, dated April 14, 2015.
    (v) Hamilton Sundstrand Service Bulletin ERPS33T-29-7, dated
June 6, 2014.
    (3) For Airbus service information identified in this AD,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) For Hamilton Sundstrand service information identified in
this AD, contact Hamilton Sundstrand, Technical Publications, Mail
Stop 302-9, 4747 Harrison Avenue, P.O. Box 7002, Rockford, IL 61125-
7002; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.hamiltonsundstrand.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15929 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on August 26, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN – DOCKET OST 1998-3770

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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).

Applicant:  AEROPOSTAL ALAS de VENEZUELA, C.A.
                    Date Filed:  July 1, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct scheduled foreign air transportation of
persons, property and mail, between Caracas, Venezuela, and Ft.
Lauderdale, Florida, using aircraft wet leased from a duly authorized
and properly supervised carrier.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  July 5, 2002, in this
Docket.

Applicant representative:  Pierre Murphy,<PHONE_NUMBER>              DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.
                                           Action date:  August 26, 2003

Effective dates of authority granted:  August 26, 2003, through August
26, 2004

Basis for approval:  Reciprocity with Venezuela.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  Standard exemption
conditions and the wet-lease condition detailed below.

Special Condition:  In the conduct of these operations, the carrier
shall only use aircraft wet-leased from a duly authorized and properly
supervised U.S. or foreign air carrier that receives requisite authority
under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 212.  (Venezuela currently is a
Category 2 country under the FAA’s International Aviation Assessment
Program.)

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) 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/deferred/dismissed, 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:

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


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 15, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 71263]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27068]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2997-032]

South Sutter Water District; Notice of Application for Approval
of Contract for the Sale of Power Under Section 22 of the Federal Power
Act

    Take notice that on December 3, 2021, South Sutter Water District
(SSWD), filed with the Commission an application for approval of a
contract for the sale of power from its licensed Camp Far West
Hydroelectric Project No. 2997 (the ``Camp Far West Project'') for a
period beyond the expiration of its existing license for the project.
The project is located on the Bear River in Nevada, Yuba and Placer
counties, California.
    Section 22 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 815, provides that
contracts for the sale and delivery of power for periods extending
beyond the termination date of a license may be entered into upon the
joint approval of the Commission and the appropriate state public
service commission or other similar authority in the state in which the
sale or delivery of power is made.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.
Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via
any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include docket
number P-2997-032.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-2997) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.
    Comment/Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 7,
2022.

    Dated: December 8, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-27068 Filed 12-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From: Louise Ngo [ LNGO@ tnrcc. state. tx. us] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4: 30 PM To: Steve Hagle; Vincent Leopold Cc: tcholloway@ rti. org; Harry Pruett; JoAnn Wiersema Subject: Re: Request for Info.

I checked our permits database and no records were shown for Tandy Magnetics and Magnetic Ticket and Label companies.

However, there is a magnetic tape manufacturing company in Graham, TX. The comp any name is eMag Solutions LLC ( formerly Graham Magnetics Inc.) The permit file shows that this permit was last amended on May 20, 2002 in which the company pr oposed to change status from major to minor source by curtailing production ( rem oval of some equipment and HAP compounds from the coating materials). This resu lted in a decrease of 383 tons per year ( tpy) of VOC. Full dipersion modeling w as performed by company's consultant and audited by our modeling staff. The imp acts ( ground level concentrations) were shown to be acceptable.

The current permit maximum allowable emission rates are as follows: 78.4 tpy of VOC and 5.9 tpy of products of combustion. I've attached a copy of the current permit conditions and maximum allowable emission rates table for your informati on.

Should you have further questions, I can be contaced at ( 512) 239 1267 or by e m ail at lngo@ tnrcc. state. tx. us.

Sincerely, Louise A. Ngo Chemical and Coatings Section Air Permits Division Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission >>> Vincent Leopold 07/ 26/ 02 10: 50AM >>> Steve, Can someone in your division assist with this request?

Mr. Tom Holloway ( with RTI, officed at Research Triangle Park, contracted by EPA Headquarters) is seeking information about magnetic tape manufacturing faciliti es in Texas. He specifically named 1. Emax Solution, LLC, Graham, TX 2. Tandy Magnetics, Fort Worth, TX ( may be out of business) 3. Magnetic Ticket and Label, Dallas TX ( may be out of business)

Do you have any permit information ( e. g., emissions, modeling, other?) about the se facilites?

Mr. Holloway can be contacted at 919 316 3733, tcholloway@ rti. org Thanks, Vincent


[Federal Register: July 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 133)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 39795-39798]
[DOCID:fr13jy10-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0684; Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-031-AD;
Amendment 39-16360; AD 2010-14-15]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Aircraft Industries a.s. (Type
Certificate G60EU Previously Held by LETECK[Eacute] Z[Aacute]VODY a.s.
and LET Aeronautical Works) Model L-13 Blanik Gliders

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    A fatal accident occurred to a L-13 BLAN[Iacute]K sailplane, in
which the main spar of the right wing failed near the root due to
positive load. The right wing detached from the aircraft and the
pilots lost control of the sailplane.
    The preliminary investigation has revealed that the fracture may
have been due to fatigue.

This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 19, 2010.
    On July 19, 2010, the Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD.
    We must receive comments on this AD by August 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued
Emergency AD No.: 2010-0122-E, dated June 23, 2010 (referred to after
this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    A fatal accident occurred to a L-13 BLAN[Iacute]K sailplane, in
which the main spar of the right wing failed near the root due to
positive load. The right wing detached from the aircraft and the
pilots lost control of the sailplane.
    The preliminary investigation has revealed that the fracture may
have been due to fatigue.
    The Emergency AD 2010-0119-E required immediate inspection of
the main spar at the root of the wing to detect fatigue cracking and
the accomplishment of the relevant corrective actions as necessary.
In addition, this AD 2010-0119-E imposed operational limitations.
This AD retains the requirements of AD 2010-0119-E, which is
superseded, and extends the applicability to L-13 A BLAN[Iacute]K
sailplanes.
    The requirements of this AD are considered as interim action to
immediately address this unsafe condition. If, as a result of the
on-going investigation, a terminating action is later identified,
further mandatory actions might be considered.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Aircraft Industries a.s. has issued Mandatory Bulletin MB No.: L13/
109a, dated June 18, 2010. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all information provided by the State of Design Authority and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might have also required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
described in a separate paragraph of the AD. These requirements take
precedence over those copied from the MCAI.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because a
fatal accident occurred in an L-13 Blanik glider. The main spar of the
right wing of the accident glider failed near the root due to positive
load. The right wing detached from the aircraft and the pilots lost
control. The preliminary investigation has revealed that the fracture
may have been due to fatigue. Therefore, we determined that notice and
opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable
and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer
than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0684; Directorate
Identifier 2010-CE-031-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this 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 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 determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2010-14-15 Aircraft Industries a.s. (Type Certificate G60EU
Previously Held by LETECK[Eacute] Z[Aacute]VODY a.s. and LET
Aeronautical Works): Amendment 39-16360; Docket No. FAA-2010-0684;
Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-031-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective July 19,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Models L-13 Blanik gliders, all serial
numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 57: Wings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    A fatal accident occurred to a L-13 BLAN[Iacute]K sailplane, in
which the main spar of the right wing failed near the root due to
positive load. The right wing detached from the aircraft and the
pilots lost control of the sailplane.
    The preliminary investigation has revealed that the fracture may
have been due to fatigue.
    The Emergency AD 2010-0119-E required immediate inspection of
the main spar at the root of the wing to detect fatigue cracking and
the accomplishment of the relevant corrective actions as necessary.
In addition, this AD 2010-0119-E imposed operational limitations.
This AD retains the requirements of AD 2010-0119-E, which is
superseded, and extends the applicability to L-13 A BLAN[Iacute]K
sailplanes.
    The requirements of this AD are considered as interim action to
immediately address this unsafe condition. If, as a result of the
on-going investigation, a terminating action is later identified,
further mandatory actions might be considered.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) As of July 19, 2010, aerobatics maneuvers (i.e., roll, loop,
stalled turn, immelmann turn, half roll, and inverted flight) are
prohibited. Before further flight after July 19, 2010, insert a copy
of this AD into the flight manual to comply with the requirements of
this paragraph. The chapter ``Aerobatics'' in ``Pilot's Notes for
the L-13 sailplane'' (flight manual) is not valid.
    (2) Before further flight after July 19, 2010, inspect the wing
critical areas following Aircraft Industries a.s. Mandatory Bulletin
MB No.: L13/109a, dated June 18, 2010, except use a 10X magnifier.
    (3) If any cracks are found during the inspection required by
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, no further flights are permitted.
    (4) Within 10 days after the inspection required by paragraph
(f)(2) of this AD, submit the following information requested by
Aircraft Industries a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB No.: L13/109a, dated
June 18, 2010, for further assessment. Send information to the
address listed in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD.
    (i) Appendix No. 1, Summary of L-13 glider Log book record; and
    (ii) Paragraph H. RECORD IN GLIDER LOGBOOK AFTER BULLETIN
EXECUTION.

    Note 1: The above limitation is an interim solution until a
final action is identified, at which time the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) and the FAA may consider further AD action.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows. The service information requires a visual
inspection with a 6X magnifier. We are requiring a 10X magnifier to
detect cracks that could go undetected using only a 6X magnifier.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using
any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et.seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI EASA Emergency AD No.: 2010-0122-E, dated June
23, 2010; and Aircraft Industries a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB No.:
L13/109a, dated June 18, 2010, for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Aircraft Industries a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB
No.: L13/109a, dated June 18, 2010, to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Aircraft Industries, a.s., Na Z[aacute]honech 1177, 686 04 Kunovice,
Czech Republic; phone: +420 572 817 660; fax: +420 572 816 112;
Internet: http://www.let.cz/; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) You may review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD at the FAA, Central Region,
Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
Central Region, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 28, 2010.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-16382 Filed 7-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P