[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74155-74156]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29365]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2013-0950]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval of a
revision to the following collection of information: 1625-0019,
Alternative Compliance for International and Inland Navigation Rules--
33 CFR Parts 81 through 89. Our ICR describes the information we seek
to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the
Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before February 10,
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2013-0950] to the Docket Management Facility (DMF) at the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). To avoid duplicate
submissions, please use only one of the following means:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: DMF (M-30), DOT, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, to attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    The DMF maintains the public docket for this Notice. Comments and
material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in
this Notice as being available in the docket, will become part of the
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room W12-140
on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. You may also find the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Copies of the ICR(s) are available through the docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are
available from: Commandant (CG-612), Attn Paperwork Reduction Act
Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop
7710, Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents. Contact Ms. Barbara Hairston, Program
Manager, Docket Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions on the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be
granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collections; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the
Collections; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
information subject to the Collections; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the Collections on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. In response to your comments, we may revise these ICRs or
decide not to seek approval of revisions of the Collections. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2013-0950], and
must be received by February 10, 2014. We will post all comments
received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov. They will
include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with
DOT to use their DMF. Please see the ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-
2013-0950], indicate the specific section of the document to which each
comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit
your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov), by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If
you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit
the

comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is
received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing
address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    You may submit your comments and material by electronic means,
mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES; but
please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, and type ``USCG-2013-0950'' in the
``Keyword'' box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and will address them accordingly.
    Viewing comments and documents: To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ``read comments'' box,
which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box
insert ``USCG-2013-0950'' and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may also visit the DMF in Room
W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in
dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement
regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of
the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Information Collection Request

    1. Title: Alternative Compliance for International and Inland
Navigation Rules--33 CFR Parts 81 through 89.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0019.
    Summary: The information collected provides an opportunity for an
owner, operator, builder, or agent of a unique vessel to present their
reasons why the vessel cannot comply with existing International/Inland
Navigation Rules and how alternative compliance can be achieved. If
appropriate, a Certificate of Alternative Compliance is issued.
    Need: Certain vessels cannot comply with the International
Navigation Rules (see 33 U.S.C. 1601 through 1608; 28 U.S.T. 3459, and
T.I.A.S. 8587) and Inland Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C. 2001 through
2073). The Coast Guard thus provides an opportunity for alternative
compliance. However, it is not possible to determine whether
alternative compliance is appropriate, or what kind of alternative
procedures might be necessary, without this collection.
    Forms: N/A.
    Respondents: Vessel owners, operators, builders and agents.
    Frequency: One-time application.
    Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from 50 hours
to 230 hours a year due to an increase in the estimated annual number
of responses.

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: November 25, 2013.
R.E. Day,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Assistant Commandant for Command,
Control, Communications, Computers and Information Technology.
[FR Doc. 2013-29365 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: June 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 105)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 30747-30750]
[DOCID:fr02jn10-19]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0265]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Curtis Creek, Baltimore, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern
the operation of the Pennington Avenue Bridge across Curtis Creek, at
mile 0.9, in Baltimore, MD. The proposed rule would eliminate the need
for a bridge tender by allowing the bridge to be operated from a remote
location at the City of Baltimore Transportation Management Center.
This proposed change would maintain the bridge's current level of
operational capabilities and continue providing for the reasonable
needs of vehicular transportation and vessel navigation. This proposed
rule will also correct the statute mile marker of the I695 Bridge which
is also across Curtis Creek in Baltimore, MD.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before August 2, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-0265 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2010-0265), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online
via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the
Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax,
hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having
been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body

of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2010-0265'' in the ``Keyword''
box. Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the
``Actions'' column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them
by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-0265'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine
that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and
place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    The City of Baltimore has requested a change to the operating
procedures for the Pennington Avenue Bridge across Curtis Creek, mile
0.9 in Baltimore, MD. The change in the operating procedure would allow
the bridge to be operated from a remote location at the City of
Baltimore Transportation Management Center. This proposed rule follows
the general regulations set out at 33 CFR 117.5 that states:
Drawbridges shall open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels
when a request to open is given.
    The Pennington Avenue Bridge, a lift-type drawbridge, has a
vertical clearance in the closed position to vessels of 38 feet, above
mean high water.
    The City of Baltimore is installing six video cameras on the bridge
to enhance the remote operator's ability to monitor and control the
equipment. The remote office and the bridge site will be equipped with
audio devices to enable the remote operator to hear boat horns that may
signal for an opening as well as two-way communication. There will be
posted signs placed on both sides of the navigational channel providing
a phone number for vessels to call to request an opening. Warning
lights will be installed on the bridge to signal when the bridge is in
operation. All aspects of the current drawbridge operating regulations
will remain the same.
    The City of Baltimore has requested this change to utilize new
technology to maintain the bridge's current level of operating
capabilities and continue providing for the reasonable needs of
vehicular transportation and vessel navigation.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 CFR 117.557. The current
paragraph would be divided into paragraphs (a) and (b).
    Paragraph (a) would contain the proposed rule for the Pennington
Avenue Bridge at mile 0.9 in Baltimore, MD. The rule would allow the
draw of the bridge to be operated by the controller at the
Transportation Management Center.
    In the event of failure or obstruction of the video cameras, audio
system, or phone communications, the Pennington Avenue Bridge would not
be operated from the remote office. In these situations, a bridge
tender must be called and be on-site within 30 minutes to operate the
bridge.
    When vehicular and pedestrian traffic has cleared, a horn will
sound one prolonged blast followed by one short blast to warn of bridge
movement. The channel traffic lights will flash red continually to
indicate that the bridge is moving to the full open position for
vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully open position, the bridge
channel traffic lights will turn and remain green. The draw of the
bridge must begin opening within 5 minutes of vehicular and pedestrian
traffic clearing the bridge except as provided in 33 CFR 117.31(b).
    Before the span begins to close, the horn will sound five short
blasts and an audio voice-warning device will announce bridge movement.
The channel traffic lights will then continually flash red until the
bridge is seated and locked down to vessels.
    Paragraph (b) would contain the existing regulations for the I695
Bridge; however, the statute mile marker of 0.9 is incorrect and will
be changed to mile 1.0 which is the accurate mile mark.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. We reached this conclusion based
on the fact that the proposed changes have only a minimal impact on
maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Although the Pennington Avenue
Bridge will be operated from a remote office, mariners can continue
their transits because all aspects of the current operating regulations
remain essentially the same.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    The proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The
rule allows the Pennington Avenue Bridge to operate remotely and
mariners will continue to plan their transits in accordance with the
existing bridge operating regulations.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Lindsey Middleton, Bridge
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or complain about this proposed
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment because it simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. We
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Revise Sec.  117.557 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.557  Curtis Creek.

    (a) The Pennington Avenue Bridge, mile 0.9 at Baltimore.
    (1) The draw of the bridge to be operated by the controller at the
City of

Baltimore Transportation Management Center shall open on signal for the
passage of vessels when a request to open is given.
    (2) The draw of the bridge shall not be operated by the controller
at the Transportation Management Center office in the event of failure
or obstruction of the video cameras, audio system, or phone lines. In
these situations, a bridge tender must be called and be on-site within
30 minutes to operate the bridge on-site.
    (3) The draw of the bridge must begin opening within 5 minutes of
the vehicular and pedestrian traffic clearing the bridge, except as
provided in 33 CFR 117.31(b).
    (4) When vehicular and pedestrian traffic has cleared, a horn will
sound one prolonged blast followed by one short blast to warn of bridge
movement. The channel traffic lights will flash red continually to
indicate that the Bridge is moving to the full open position for
vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully open position, the bridge
channel traffic lights will turn and remain green.
    (5) Before the span begins to close, the horn will sound five short
blasts and an audio voice-warning device will announce bridge movement.
The channel traffic lights will then continually flash red until the
bridge is seated and locked down to vessels.
    (6) The owners of the bridge shall provide and keep in good legible
condition two board gauges painted white with black figures not less
than six inches high to indicate the vertical clearance under the
closed draw at all stages of the tide. The gauges shall be placed on
the bridge so that they are plainly visible to the operator of any
vessel approaching the bridge from either upstream or downstream.
    (b) The draw of the I695 Bridge, mile 1.0 at Baltimore, shall open
on signal if at least a one-hour notice is given to the Maryland
Transportation Authority in Baltimore.

    Dated: May 14, 2010.
Wayne E. Justice,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2010-13119 Filed 6-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: August 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 159)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 50945-50947]
[DOCID:fr18au10-34]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0594; Directorate Identifier 98-ANE-43-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney JT8D-209, -217, -217A,
-217C, and -219 Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) for Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-209, -217, -217A, -217C, and -219
turbofan engines. That AD currently requires revisions to the engine
manufacturer's time limits section (TLS) to include enhanced inspection
of selected critical life-limited parts at each piece-part opportunity.
This AD requires modifying the TLS of the manufacturer's engine manual
and an air carrier's approved continuous airworthiness maintenance
program to incorporate additional inspection requirements. Pratt &
Whitney has developed and the FAA has approved improved inspection
procedures for the critical life-limited parts. The mandatory
inspections are needed to identify those critical rotating parts with
conditions, which if allowed to continue in service, could result in
uncontained failures. We are issuing this AD to prevent critical life-
limited rotating engine part failure, which could result in an
uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by October 18,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0594; Directorate
Identifier 98-ANE-43-AD'' in the subject line of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider
all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD
in light 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
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search
function of the Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any
of our dockets, including, if provided, the name of the individual who
sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65
FR 19477-78).

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
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 Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

Discussion

    On August 24, 2005, the FAA issued airworthiness directive (AD)
2005-18-02, Amendment 39-14242 (70 FR 52004, September 1, 2005), to
require revisions to the TLS of the manufacturer's engine manual for
these engines to include required enhanced inspection of selected
critical life-limited parts at each piece-part opportunity.

New Inspection Procedures

    Since the issuance of that AD, Pratt & Whitney has developed and
the FAA has approved improved inspection procedures for the critical
life-limited parts. The mandatory inspections are needed to identify
those critical rotating parts with conditions, which if allowed to
continue in service, could result in uncontained failures. This
proposal would add new inspection methods to the TLS of the
manufacturer's engine manual and an air carrier's approved continuous
airworthiness maintenance program to incorporate additional inspection
requirements for 1st stage compressor hubs, 3rd stage turbine disks,
and 4th stage turbine disks.

FAA's Determination of an Unsafe Condition and Proposed Actions

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other PW JT8D-209, -217, -217A, -217C, and -219
turbofan engines of the same type design, the proposed AD would
supersede AD 2005-18-02 to add new inspection methods for 1st stage
compressor hubs, 3rd stage turbine disks, and 4th stage turbine disks.
For reference, this proposed AD carries forward the requirements from
AD 2005-18-02. Also for reference, parts that have an Engine Manual
Inspection Task and/or Sub Task Number reference updated in the table
in the compliance section of this AD, are identified by an asterisk (*)
that precedes the part nomenclature.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 1,143 JT8D-209, -
217, -217A, -217C, and -219 turbofan engines installed on airplanes of
U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 10 work-hours
per engine to perform the proposed actions, and that the average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Since this is an added inspection
requirement, included as part of the normal maintenance cycle, no
additional part costs are involved. Based on these figures, we estimate
the total cost of the proposed AD to U.S. operators to be $971,550.

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 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); and
    3. Would 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. 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, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the
Federal Aviation Administration 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 39-14242 (70 FR
52004, September 1, 2005) and by adding a new airworthiness directive
to read as follows:

Pratt & Whitney: Docket No. FAA-2010-0594; Directorate Identifier
98-ANE-43-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by October 18,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005-18-02, Amendment 39-14242.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-209, -217, -
217A, -217C, and -219 turbofan engines. These engines are installed
on, but not limited to Boeing 727 and McDonnell Douglas MD-80 series
airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from the need to require enhanced inspection
of selected critical life-limited parts of JT8D-209, -217, -217A, -
217C, and -219 turbofan engines. We are issuing this AD to prevent
critical life-limited rotating engine part failure, which could
result in an uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the
actions have already been done.
    (f) Within the next 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
(1) revise the Time Limits section (TLS) of the manufacturer's
engine manual, part number 773128, as appropriate for PW JT8D-209, -
217, -217A, -217C, and -219 turbofan engines, and (2) for air
carriers, revise the approved mandatory inspections section of the
continuous airworthiness maintenance program, by adding the
following:
    ``Critical Life Limited Part Inspection
    A. Inspection Requirements:
    (1) This section contains the definitions for individual engine
piece-parts and the inspection procedures, which are necessary, when
these parts are removed from the engine.
    (2) It is necessary to do the inspection procedures of the
piece-parts in Paragraph B when:
    (a) The part is removed from the engine and disassembled to the
level specified in paragraph B and
    (b) The part has accumulated more than 100 cycles since the last
piece part inspection, provided that the part is not damaged or
related to the cause of its removal from the engine.
    (3) The inspections specified in this section do not replace or
make unnecessary other recommended inspections for these parts or
other parts.
    B. Parts Requiring Inspection.

    Note: Piece part is defined as any of the listed parts with all
the blades removed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Description               Section         Inspection No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hub (Disk), 1st Stage Compressor:
    * Hub Detail--All P/Ns.......     72-33-31  -03, -04, -05
    * Hub Assembly--All P/Ns.....     72-33-31  -03, -04, -05
Disk, 13th Stage Compressor--All      72-36-47  -02
 P/Ns.
HP Turbine, First Stage:
    Rotor Assembly--All P/Ns.....     72-52-02  -04
    Disk--All P/Ns...............     72-52-02  -03
Disk, 2nd Stage Turbine--All P/Ns     72-53-16  -02
* Disk, 3rd Stage Turbine--All P/     72-53-17  -02, -03
 Ns.
* Disk, 4th Stage Turbine--All P/     72-53-18  -02, -03''
 Ns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (g) The parts that have an Engine Manual Inspection Task and or
Sub Task Number reference updated in the table of this AD, are
identified by an asterisk (*) that precedes the part nomenclature.
    (h) Except as provided in paragraph (i) of this AD, and
notwithstanding contrary provisions in section 43.16 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.16), these mandatory inspections
shall be performed only in accordance with the TLS of the
manufacturer's engine manual.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (i) You must perform these mandatory inspections using the TLS
of the manufacturer's engine manual unless you receive approval to
use an AMOC under paragraph (j) of this AD. Section 43.16 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.16) may not be used to
approve alternative methods of compliance or adjustments to the
times in which these inspections must be performed.
    (j) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Maintaining Records of the Mandatory Inspections

    (k) You have met the requirements of this AD when you revise the
TLS of the manufacturer's engine manual as specified in paragraph
(f) of this AD. For air carriers operating under part 121 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 121), you have met the
requirements of this AD when you modify your continuous
airworthiness maintenance plan to reflect those changes. You do not
need to record each piece-part inspection as compliance to this AD,
but you must maintain records of those inspections according to the
regulations governing your operation. For air carriers operating
under part 121, you may use either the system established to comply
with Sec.  121.369 or an alternative accepted by your principal
maintenance inspector if that alternative:
    (1) Includes a method for preserving and retrieving the records
of the inspections resulting from this AD; and
    (2) Meets the requirements of Sec.  121.369(c); and
    (3) Maintains the records either indefinitely or until the work
is repeated.
    (l) These recordkeeping requirements apply only to the records
used to document the mandatory inspections required as a result of
revising the TLS of the manufacturer's engine manual as specified in
paragraph (f) of this AD. These record keeping requirements do not
alter or amend the record keeping requirements for any other AD or
regulatory requirement.

Related Information

    (m) Contact Ian Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information
about this AD.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 10, 2010.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-20350 Filed 8-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 229 (Thursday, December 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68488-68489]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26188]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-481-000]

Red Barn Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Red Barn Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is December 16, 2021.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 26, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-26188 Filed 12-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P