[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 14, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33928-33930]
[FR Doc No: E9-16575]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0636; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-031-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, -200B, -300,
-400, and -400D Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to certain Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, -
200B, -300, -400, and -400D series airplanes. The existing AD currently
requires repetitive inspections for cracking in fuselage stringers 8L,
8R, 10L, and 10R at body stations 460, 480, and 500 frame locations;
and repair if necessary. This proposed AD would revise the
applicability to include an additional airplane, and reduce compliance
times for the initial inspection and repetitive intervals for Model
747-400 series airplanes that have been converted to the large cargo
freighter configuration. This proposed AD results from findings of
cracking in fuselage stringers 8L, 8R, 10L, and 10R at body stations
460, 480, and 500 frame locations. We are proposing this AD to detect
and correct fatigue cracking in certain fuselage stringers, which, if
left undetected, could result in fuselage skin cracking that reduces
the structural integrity of the skin panel, and consequent rapid
depressurization of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 28, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
425-227-1152.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0636;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-031-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On July 13, 2005, we issued AD 2005-15-08, amendment 39-14197 (70
FR 43020, July 26, 2005), for certain Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, -200B,
-300, -400, and -400D series airplanes. That

AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking in fuselage stringers
8L, 8R, 10L, and 10R at body stations 460, 480, and 500 frame
locations; and repair if necessary. That AD resulted from findings of
cracking in fuselage stringers 8L, 8R, 10L, and 10R at body stations
460, 480, and 500 frame locations. We issued that AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking in certain fuselage stringers, which, if left
undetected, could result in fuselage skin cracking that reduces the
structural integrity of the skin panel, and consequent rapid
depressurization of the airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2005-15-08, Boeing has revised the service
information cited in that AD. AD 2005-15-08 cited Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2484, dated June 26, 2003, as the source of service
information for the required and optional actions. Revision 1, dated
February 12, 2009, adds airplane variable number RS699 to the airplane
effectivity; that variable number was inadvertently omitted from Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, dated June 26, 2003. Also, Model
747-400 series airplanes that have been converted to the large cargo
freighter (LCF) configuration (i.e., variable numbers RT631 and RT632)
have been moved from Group 3 to a new Group 4 with reduced compliance
times for the initial and repetitive inspections, and have revised
access instructions due to a different interior configuration.
Procedures are otherwise unchanged.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the
same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which
would supersede AD 2005-15-08 and would continue to require repetitive
inspections for fatigue cracking in fuselage stringers 8L, 8R, 10L, and
10R at body station 460, 480, and 500 frame locations; and repair if
necessary. This proposed AD would also revise the applicability to
include an additional airplane, and reduce compliance times for initial
inspection and repetitive interval for Model 747-400 series airplanes
that have been converted to the large cargo freighter configuration.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2005-15-
08. Since AD 2005-15-08 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and
certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding
paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in
the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Corresponding  requirement
       Requirement in AD 2005-15-08             in this  proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (d).............................  paragraph (e).
paragraph (e).............................  paragraph (f).
paragraph (f).............................  paragraph (g).
paragraph (g).............................  paragraph (k).
paragraph (h).............................  paragraph (l).
paragraph (i).............................  paragraph (m).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 246 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
              Action                  Work hours     Average labor    Cost per airplane      registered                      Fleet cost
                                                     rate per hour                            airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection (required by AD 2005-15-              3             $80  $240 per inspection                69  $16,560 per inspection cycle.
 08).                                                                cycle.
Inspection (proposed).............               3              80  $240 per inspection                70  $16,800 per inspection cycle.
                                                                     cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing amendment 39-14197 (70 FR

43020, July 26, 2005) and adding the following new AD:

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2009-0636; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-
031-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by August
28, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005-15-08.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, -200B, -300, -
400, and -400D series airplanes, certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated
February 12, 2009.

Subject

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

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from findings of cracking in fuselage
stringers 8L, 8R, 10L, and 10R at body station 460, 480, and 500
frame locations. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
fatigue cracking in the specified fuselage stringers, which, if left
undetected, could result in fuselage skin cracking that reduces the
structural integrity of the skin panel, and consequent rapid
depressurization of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Requirements of AD 2005-15-08

Inspection for Certain Airplanes Subject to AD 2005-15-08 With New
Service Bulletin

    (g) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2484, dated June 26, 2003, except airplanes identified in
paragraph (j) of this AD, do a detailed inspection for cracking in
fuselage stringers 8L, 8R, 10L, and 10R at body station 460, 480,
and 500 frame locations, in accordance with Part 1 of the
Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2484, dated June 26, 2003; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2484, Revision 1, dated February 12, 2009. Do the inspections at
the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this
AD. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed
3,000 flight cycles until the requirements of paragraph (l) of this
AD are accomplished. After the effective date of this AD, use only
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated February 12,
2009.
    (1) For airplanes with 19,000 total flight cycles or less as of
August 30, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005-15-08): Prior to the
accumulation of 8,000 total flight cycles, or within 2,000 flight
cycles after August 30, 2005, whichever is later, not to exceed
20,000 total flight cycles.
    (2) For airplanes with more than 19,000 total flight cycles as
of August 30, 2005: Within 1,000 flight cycles after August 30,
2005.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''

New Requirements of This Ad

Inspection: Variable Number RS699

    (h) For Model 747 airplane variable number RS699, do a detailed
inspection for cracking in fuselage stringers 8L, 8R, 10L, and 10R
at body station 460, 480, and 500 frame locations, in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated February
12, 2009, at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1)
and (h)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 8,000 total flight cycles.
    (2) Within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.
    (i) For Model 747 airplane variable number RS699, repeat the
inspection specified in paragraph (h) of this AD thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles until the actions
specified in paragraph (k) or (l) of this AD are accomplished.

Inspection: Group 4 Airplanes

    (j) For Group 4 airplanes as identified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated February 12, 2009, do a
detailed inspection for cracking in fuselage stringers 8L, 8R, 10L,
and 10R at body station 460, 480, and 500 frame locations, within
1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. Do the
actions in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2484,
Revision 1, dated February 12, 2009. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles until the
actions specified in paragraph (k) or (l) of this AD are
accomplished.

Repair

    (k) If cracking is found during any inspection required by this
AD: Before further flight, repair the affected stringer in
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, dated June 26, 2003; or Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated February 12, 2009.
After the effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated February 12, 2009.
Accomplishment of the repair terminates the repetitive inspections
required by this AD for that repaired stringer/frame location only.

Optional Terminating Action

    (l) Installing new frame clips and new doublers, and repairing
as applicable, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, dated
June 26, 2003; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1,
dated February 12, 2009; terminates the repetitive inspections
required by this AD. After the effective date of this AD, use only
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2484, Revision 1, dated February 12,
2009.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (m)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Ivan Li, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or e-mail
information to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2005-15-08,
amendment 39-14197, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 2, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E9-16575 Filed 7-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19471-19472]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09091]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0754; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASO-16]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace, Memphis, TN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Memphis International
Airport, Memphis, TN. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the
decommissioning of the Elvis non-directional radio beacon (NDB), and
for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR)
operations at this airport. Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS,
would be removed from the airspace description to be reestablished in a
separate rulemaking.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to: U. S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Bldg., Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1
(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the Docket No.
FAA-2017-0754; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASO-16, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public
docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final
disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1700
Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class E airspace at Memphis International Airport,
Memphis, TN to support IFR operations at the airport.

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted
in triplicate to the address listed above. You may also submit comments
through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2017-0754; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASO-16.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays at the office
of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room
350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective
September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet or more above the surface within an 8-mile radius of
Memphis International Airport, Memphis, TN. The segment extending from
the 8-mile radius of the airport to 16 miles west of the Elvis NDB
would be removed due to the decommissioning of the Elvis NDB and
cancellation of the NDB approach, and for continued safety and
management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Also, this action would remove the language that excludes the
Millington, TN, airspace area to comply with FAA Order 7400.2L,
Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.
    Additionally, the airspace listed in the legal description for
Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS, would be removed and
redesignated in a separate rulemaking.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (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) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO TN E5 Memphis, TN [Amended]

Memphis International Airport, TN
    (Lat. 35[deg]02'33'' N, long. 89[deg]58'36'' W)
General DeWitt Spain Airport
    (Lat. 35[deg]12'03'' N, long. 90[deg]03'14'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 8-mile radius of Memphis International Airport, and within
a 6.4-mile radius of General DeWitt Spain Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 24, 2018.
Geoff Lelliott,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2018-09091 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 188 (Thursday, September 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59012-59015]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20874]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0798; FRL-10218-01-R9]

Finding of Failure To Submit Contingency Measures for the 2008 8-
Hour Ozone NAAQS; Coachella Valley, California, and West Mojave Desert,
California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final action.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to find that the State of California has failed to submit State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions to satisfy the contingency measures
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') for
both the Riverside County (Coachella Valley), California (``Coachella
Valley'') and Los Angeles-San Bernardino Counties (West Mojave Desert),
California (``West Mojave

Desert'') nonattainment areas. Under the CAA and the EPA's implementing
regulations, by July 20, 2016, California was required to submit, among
other SIP revisions, contingency measures for the Coachella Valley and
West Mojave Desert nonattainment areas to be triggered if the areas
fail to attain or fail to meet reasonable further progress (RFP). The
State submitted the required SIP revisions, but subsequently withdrew
the contingency measures portion. This finding establishes a 2-year
deadline for the EPA to promulgate Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs)
to address the contingency measure requirements for these areas,
unless, prior to the EPA promulgating FIPs, California submits, and the
EPA approves, SIP revisions that meet these requirements. The CAA also
provides for the imposition of sanctions if California does not submit
the required SIP revisions within timeframes specified by the CAA.

DATES: This final action is effective on October 31, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Dorantes, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
II. Background and Overview
    A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations, and SIP Development
    B. State Submissions and Withdrawals
III. Final Action and Consequences of a Finding of Failure To Submit
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)

    Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when
an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, the
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for
making this final agency action without prior proposal and opportunity
for comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making
findings of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by
the CAA, where states and territories have made no submissions, or
incomplete submissions, to meet the requirement. Thus, notice and
public procedures are unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes
good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

II. Background and Overview

A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations, and SIP Development

    Under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA promulgates NAAQS for
pervasive air pollutants, such as ozone. In 2008, the EPA promulgated
new 8-hour primary and secondary ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm (``2008 ozone
NAAQS'') to replace the 1997 ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm.\1\ Although the
EPA further strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm in 2015,
this action relates to the requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\2\
Following promulgation of new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by
the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as either attaining or
not attaining the standards. Effective July 20, 2012, the EPA
designated both Coachella Valley and West Mojave Desert as
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and classified the areas as
``Severe-15.'' \3\ Areas designated nonattainment for ozone NAAQS are
subject to the general nonattainment area planning requirements of CAA
section 172 and to the ozone-specific planning requirements of CAA
section 182.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
    \2\ Information on the 2015 ozone NAAQS is available at 80 FR
65292 (October 26, 2015).
    \3\ 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 6, 2015, the EPA published a final implementation rule for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS, detailing the requirements applicable to ozone
nonattainment areas and providing specific deadlines for SIP
submittals.\4\ For areas classified Serious and above, the SIP
revisions providing for an attainment demonstration, RFP demonstration,
and attainment and RFP contingency measures were due 4 years after the
effective date of area designations (i.e., by July 20, 2016).\5\
Contingency measures are additional controls or measures to be
implemented in the event an area fails to make RFP or to attain the
NAAQS by the attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
    \5\ 40 CFR 51.1108(b) and 40 CFR 51.1110.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In California, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the
agency responsible for the adoption and submission to the EPA of SIPs
and SIP revisions. Working jointly with CARB, local and regional air
pollution control districts in California are responsible for the
development of regional air quality plans. The South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) develops and adopts plans to address CAA
planning requirements applicable to the Coachella Valley. The Antelope
Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) and Mojave Desert Air
Quality Management District (MDAQMD) share responsibility for air
quality planning in the West Mojave Desert. These agencies adopt and
submit their plans to CARB for state adoption and submission to the EPA
as revisions to the California SIP.

B. State Submissions and Withdrawals

    CARB submitted contingency measures for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for
the Coachella Valley in the Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan
(March 2017) (``2016 AQMP''), submitted on April 27, 2017,\6\ the
Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Contingency (``Coachella
Attainment Contingency'') submitted on May 5, 2017,\7\ and the 2018
Updates to the California State Implementation Plan (``2018 SIP
Update'') submitted on December 5, 2018. On September 16, 2020, the EPA
approved the relevant portions of these SIP revisions as meeting all
applicable ozone nonattainment area requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Coachella Valley, except for the contingency measure
requirements, for which the EPA deferred action.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
    \7\ Letter dated May 5, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
    \8\ 85 FR 57714 (September 16, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB submitted contingency measures for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for
the West Mojave Desert in a SIP revision submitted on June 2, 2017.\9\
This submittal includes attainment plans prepared by the AVAQMD
(``AVAQMD Attainment Plan'') \10\ and the MDAQMD (``MDAQMD Attainment
Plan''),\11\ an accompanying staff report prepared by CARB (``CARB
Staff Report''),\12\ and other supporting documents. We refer to all
the documents collectively submitted to the EPA on June 2, 2017 as the
``2016 WMD Attainment Plan.'' Some elements of the 2016 WMD Attainment
Plan were updated for the

West Mojave Desert nonattainment area in the 2018 SIP Update. On
September 27, 2021, the EPA took final action to approve the relevant
portions of the 2016 WMD Attainment Plan and 2018 SIP Update as meeting
all the applicable ozone nonattainment area requirements, except for
the contingency measure requirements, for which the EPA deferred
action.\13\ CARB subsequently submitted additional contingency measures
provisions in the Amendment to the 75 ppb 2008 8hr O3 Contingency
Measure for MDAQMD portion of the Western Mojave Desert Nonattainment
Area (``MDAQMD Contingency Amendment'') on February 1, 2022.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Letter dated June 2, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
    \10\ AVAQMD, ``AVAQMD Federal 75 ppb Ozone Attainment Plan
(Western Mojave Desert Nonattainment Area),'' adopted on March 21,
2017.
    \11\ MDAQMD, ``MDAQMD Federal 75 ppb Ozone Attainment Plan
(Western Mojave Desert Nonattainment Area),'' adopted on February
27, 2017.
    \12\ CARB, Staff Report, ``CARB Review of the Mojave Desert AQMD
and Antelope Valley AQMD Federal 75 ppb Ozone Attainment Plans for
the Western Mojave Desert Nonattainment Area,'' released April 21,
2017.
    \13\ 86 FR 53223 (September 27, 2021).
    \14\ Letter dated January 31, 2022, from Richard W. Corey, CARB,
to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 26, 2021, following CARB's submittals for the Coachella
Valley and West Mojave Desert, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit remanded the EPA's conditional approval of contingency measures
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area,
finding that the EPA had not provided a reasoned explanation for
considering emission reductions from already-implemented measures.\15\
CARB subsequently withdrew the contingency measures elements of the
2016 AQMP, the Coachella Attainment Contingency, and the relevant
portions of the 2018 SIP Update (for the Coachella Valley), and the
contingency measures elements of the 2016 WMD Attainment Plan, the
relevant portions of the 2018 SIP Update, and the MDAQMD Contingency
Amendment (for the West Mojave Desert),\16\ following requests from the
local air districts.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA, 10 F.4th 937
(9th Cir. 2021).
    \16\ See two letters dated August 8, 2022, from Edie Chang,
Deputy Executive Officer to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator,
USEPA Region IX, addressing Coachella Valley and West Mojave Desert.
    \17\ See letter dated June 24, 2022, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB
and letters dated June 30, 2022, from Bret Banks, Executive
Director/APCO, AVAQMD, and Brad Poiriez, Executive Director/APCO,
MDAQMD, to Sylvia Vanderspek, Air Quality Planning Branch Chief,
CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action and Consequences of a Finding of Failure To Submit

    Based upon the withdrawal of the contingency measures described in
Section II of this rulemaking, the EPA is finding that California has
failed to make required submittals for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the
Coachella Valley and West Mojave Desert nonattainment areas. With this
finding, section 179 of the CAA starts sanctions clocks and a FIP
clock. Section 179(a) of the CAA specifies the consequences if the EPA
finds that a state has failed to make a required SIP submission, if the
EPA has determined that a submitted SIP is incomplete, or if the EPA
has disapproved a SIP submission. If the EPA has not affirmatively
determined that California has made complete submissions to address the
contingency measures requirements for the Coachella Valley or West
Mojave Desert nonattainment areas within 18 months of the effective
date of this action, the offset sanction identified in section
179(b)(2) will apply within that area, pursuant to section 179(a) and
(b) and 40 CFR 52.31. If the EPA has not affirmatively determined that
California has made a complete SIP submission for either area within
six months after imposition of the offset sanction, the highway funding
sanction will be imposed, as required under section 179(b)(1) of the
CAA and 40 CFR 52.31.
    California may avoid these sanctions by taking timely action to
remedy this finding. The 18-month clock governing the CAA's imposition
of sanctions for these areas will stop and sanctions will not take
effect if the EPA finds that the State has made a complete SIP
submission addressing the contingency measures requirements for these
areas area within 18 months of the date of this finding. Similarly, the
EPA is not required to promulgate a FIP if California makes the
required SIP submissions, and the EPA takes final action to approve the
submissions within two years of this finding of failure to submit a
required SIP. In sum, the CAA does not require sanctions or a FIP if
the State and the EPA take timely action to remedy this finding.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and therefore
was not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because this action does not apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States. There is no information in the record inconsistent with
the stated goals of Executive Order 12898 of achieving environmental
justice for people of color, low-income populations, and indigenous
peoples.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 28, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: September 21, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2022-20874 Filed 9-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30364]
[DOCID:fr31my07-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-457-000]

Questar Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

May 23, 2007.
    Take notice that on May 21, 2007, Questar Pipeline Company (Questar
Pipeline) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First
Revised Volume No. 1-A, to be effective January 1, 2008.

Fifth Revised Sheet No. 41
Seventh Revised Sheet No. 42
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 43
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 44
Eleventh Revised Sheet No. 45
Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 46
Third Revised Sheet No. 82A
Second Revised Sheet No. 83
Original Sheet No. 83A
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 84
Original Sheet No. 205

    Questar Pipeline states that copies of the filing have been served
upon Questar Pipeline's customers and the public service commissions of
Utah and Wyoming.
    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 and 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 in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-10431 Filed 5-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P