[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51718-51719]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20401]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2848-003; ER11-1939-005; ER11-2754-005; ER12-

999-003; ER12-1002-003; ER12-1005-003; ER12-1006-003; ER12-1007-004.
    Applicants: AP Holdings, LLC, AP Gas & Electric (PA), LLC, AP Gas &
Electric (TX), LLC, AP Gas & Electric (MD), LLC, AP Gas & Electric
(NJ), LLC, AP Gas & Electric (IL), LLC, AP Gas & Electric (OH), LLC, AP
Gas & Electric (NY), LLC.
    Description: Notification of Non-Material Change in Status of AP
Holdings Subsidiaries.
    Filed Date: 8/12/13.
    Accession Number: 20130812-5233.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2985-013; ER10-3049-014; ER10-3051-014.
    Applicants: Champion Energy Marketing LLC, Champion Energy
Services, LLC, Champion Energy, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status for Champion Energy
Marketing LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/12/13.
    Accession Number: 20130812-5234.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1566-003.
    Applicants: Copper Mountain Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Copper
Mountain Solar 2, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/12/13.
    Accession Number: 20130812-5238.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/13.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES13-38-000.
    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc.
    Description: MDU Resources Group, Inc.'s Amendment to July 30, 2013
Application to increase its short term borrowings.
    Filed Date: 8/13/13.
    Accession Number: 20130813-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/23/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 13, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20401 Filed 8-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 172 (Thursday, September 5, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54606-54612]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21626]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708, FRL-9900-76-OA]
RIN 2060-AR90

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines; New Source Performance
Standards for Stationary Internal Combustion Engines

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of reconsideration of final rule; request for public
comment.

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

SUMMARY: On January 30, 2013, the EPA finalized amendments to the
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for stationary
reciprocating internal combustion engines and the standards of
performance for stationary internal combustion engines. Subsequently,
the EPA received three petitions for reconsideration of the final rule.
The EPA is announcing reconsideration of and requesting public comment
on three issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration, as
detailed in the Supplementary Information section of this notice of
reconsideration. The EPA plans to issue a final decision on these
issues as expeditiously as possible. The EPA is seeking comment only on
the three issues. The EPA will not respond to any comments addressing
any other issues or any other provisions of the final rule or any other
rule. The EPA is not proposing any changes to its regulations in this
notice of reconsideration.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before November 4,
2013, or 30 days after date of public hearing if later.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting to speak at a
public hearing by September 25, 2013, a public hearing will be held on
October 7, 2013. If you are interested in attending the public hearing,
contact Ms. Pamela Garrett at<PHONE_NUMBER> to verify that a hearing
will be held.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0708, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
The EPA requests a separate copy also be sent to the contact person
identified below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, U.S. EPA, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0708. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
on-line at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use
of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any
defects or viruses.
    Public Hearing: If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the
EPA's campus located at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive in Research Triangle
Park, NC or an alternate site nearby.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. The EPA also relies on documents in Docket
ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0059, EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0029, EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-
0030, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0295, and incorporated those dockets into the
record for this action. Although listed in the index, some information
is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Melanie King, Energy Strategies
Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-01), Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Organization of this Document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in the preamble.

I. General Information
    A. What is the source of authority for the reconsideration
action?
    B. What entities are potentially affected by the reconsideration
action?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
II. Background
III. Discussion of the Issues Under Reconsideration
    A. Timing for Compliance With the ULSD Fuel Requirement for
Emergency Engines
    B. Timing and Required Information for the Reporting Requirement
for Emergency Engines
    C. Criteria for Operation for up to 50 Hours per Year for Non-
Emergency Situations
IV. Solicitation of Public Comment and Participation
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

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

I. General Information

A. What is the source of authority for the reconsideration action?

    The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections 112
and 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended (42 U.S.C. 7412
and 7607(d)(7)(B)).

B. What entities are potentially affected by the reconsideration
action?

    Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action
include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Examples of regulated
            Category                NAICS \1\            entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any industry using a stationary            2211  Electric power
 reciprocating internal                           generation,
 combustion engine.                               transmission, or
                                                  distribution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. To determine whether your engine is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.6585, 40 CFR
60.4200, and 40 CFR 60.4230. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information
identified as CBI to only the following address: Ms. Melanie King,
c[sol]o OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room C404-02), U.S. EPA,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0708.
    Docket. The docket number for this notice of reconsideration is
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708.
    World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of this notice of reconsideration will be posted on
the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network Web site (TTN Web).
Following signature, the EPA will post a copy of this notice of
reconsideration on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly
proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN
provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air
pollution control.

II. Background

    On January 30, 2013, the EPA promulgated amendments to the national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for stationary
reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) and the standards of
performance (``NSPS'') for stationary internal combustion engines (ICE)
(78 FR 6674). Following promulgation of the January 30, 2013, final
rule, the EPA received three petitions for reconsideration pursuant to
section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA. The EPA received a petition dated
March 29, 2013, from Calpine Corporation and PSEG Power LLC. The EPA
received a petition dated April 1, 2013, from the Delaware Department
of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DE DNREC). Finally, the
EPA received a petition dated April 1, 2013, from Clean Air Council,
Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, Conservation Law Foundation,
Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Pace
Energy and Climate Center, Sierra Club and West Harlem Environmental
Action, Inc. (Clean Air Council et al.). The petitions are available
for review in the rulemaking docket, see document numbers EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0708-1505, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-1506 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-
1507. On June 28, 2013, the EPA issued letters to the petitioners
granting reconsideration on three specific issues raised in the
petitions for reconsideration and indicating that the agency would
issue a Federal Register notice regarding the reconsideration process.
This action requests comment on the three issues for which the EPA
granted reconsideration.

III. Discussion of the Issues Under Reconsideration

    The EPA finalized the NESHAP for several subcategories of existing
stationary RICE on March 3, 2010, (75 FR 9648) and August 20, 2010 (75
FR 51570). The EPA received petitions for reconsideration and judicial
review of the 2010 RICE NESHAP rulemakings. The EPA finalized
amendments to the RICE NESHAP on January 30, 2013, (78 FR 6674) to
address certain issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration and
judicial review of the 2010 RICE NESHAP, and also revised the NSPS for
stationary ICE for consistency with the RICE NESHAP.
    The January 30, 2013, amendments established, among other things,
fuel and reporting requirements for certain emergency engines used for
emergency demand response and system reliability. The amendments also
established conditions under which emergency engines could be used for
up to 50 hours per calendar year in situations where the engine is
dispatched by the local transmission and distribution system operator
to mitigate local transmission and/or distribution limitations so as to
avert potential voltage collapse or line overload that could lead to
the interruption of power supply in a local area or region. The EPA
received petitions for reconsideration of certain aspects of these
requirements, and granted reconsideration of the following three issues
to provide an additional opportunity for public comment:
     Timing for compliance with the ultra low sulfur diesel
(ULSD) fuel requirement for emergency compression ignition (CI) engines
that operate or are contractually obligated to be available for more
than 15 hours per calendar year for the purposes specified in 40 CFR
63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) (emergency demand response and deviations
of voltage or frequency of 5 percent or more), or that operate for the
purpose specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system
reliability).

     Timing and required information for the reporting
requirement for emergency engines that operate or are contractually
obligated to be available for more than 15 hours per calendar year for
the purposes specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii), or that
operate for the purpose specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii), and the
timing and required information for the analogous reporting requirement
in the ICE NSPS.
     Conditions in 40 CFR 60.4211(f)(3)(i), 60.4243(d)(3)(i)
and 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) for operation for up to 50 hours per calendar
year in non-emergency situations as part of a financial arrangement
with another entity.

These issues are discussed in more detail in the following sections.

A. Timing for Compliance With the ULSD Fuel Requirement for Emergency
Engines

    The January 30, 2013, final rule included provisions that require
existing stationary emergency CI RICE with a site rating of more than
100 brake horsepower (HP) and a displacement of less than 30 liters per
cylinder that operate or are contractually obligated to be available
for more than 15 hours per year (up to a maximum of 100 hours per year)
for the purposes specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii)
(emergency demand response and deviations of voltage or frequency of 5
percent or more), or that operate for the purpose specified in 40 CFR
63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system reliability), to use diesel fuel
meeting the specifications of 40 CFR 80.510(b) beginning January 1,
2015, except that any existing diesel fuel purchased (or otherwise
obtained) prior to January 1, 2015, may be used until depleted. The
specifications of 40 CFR 80.510(b) require that diesel fuel have a
maximum sulfur content of 15 parts per million and either a minimum
cetane index of 40 or a maximum aromatic content of 35 volume percent;
this fuel is referred to as ULSD fuel. The EPA included the ULSD fuel
requirement in the final rule in response to public comments expressing
concerns about the emissions from emergency engines. As indicated in
the January 30, 2013, final rule, the EPA believes that requiring
cleaner fuel for these stationary emergency CI engines will
significantly limit or reduce the emissions of regulated air pollutants
emitted from these engines, further protecting public health and the
environment. Information provided to the EPA by commenters \1\ showed
that the use of ULSD will significantly reduce emissions of air toxics,
including metallic hazardous air pollutants (HAP) (e.g., nickel, zinc,
lead) and benzene.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See document number EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-1459 in the
rulemaking docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA added this fuel requirement beginning in January 2015,
rather than upon initial implementation of the NESHAP for existing CI
engines in May 2013, to provide sources with appropriate lead time to
institute these new requirements and make any physical adjustments to
engines (including fuel seals) and other facilities like tanks or other
containment structures, as well as any needed adjustments to contracts
and other business activities, that may be necessitated by these new
requirements. If these sources had been required to comply with the
ULSD fuel requirement by their May 3, 2013, initial compliance date,
they would have had only three months of lead time between promulgation
and compliance. Although the EPA does not have information specifying
the percentage of existing stationary emergency CI engines currently
using residual fuel oil or non-ULSD distillate fuel, the most recent
U.S. Energy Information Administration data available for sales of
distillate and residual fuel oil to end users \2\ show that significant
amounts of non-ULSD are still being purchased by end users that
typically operate stationary combustion sources, including stationary
emergency CI engines. For the reasons indicated above, the EPA
determined that additional lead time was warranted for these engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ U.S. Energy Information Administration. Distillate Fuel Oil
and Kerosene Sales by End Use. Available at http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_821use_dcu_nus_a.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitions for reconsideration from the DE DNREC and Clean Air
Council et al. requested that the requirement to use ULSD fuel for
certain emergency engines take effect beginning on the May 3, 2013,
compliance date. The DE DNREC indicated in the petition that ULSD is
already widely available and is likely the only diesel fuel available
in most areas. The petition for reconsideration from Clean Air Council
et al. disagreed with the EPA that significant lead time is needed for
facilities to come into compliance with the ULSD fuel requirement and
indicated that the EPA had offered no evidence that adjustments would
be necessary to operate engines on ULSD.
    The EPA does not agree with the petitioners that there was no
evidence in the record that adjustments may be necessary. According to
the memo in the rulemaking docket titled, ``Summary of Ultra Low Sulfur
Diesel Issues with Stationary Internal Combustion Engines'' (document
number EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-0003), experience with the transition to
ULSD for mobile CI engines showed that differences in the aromatic
content of ULSD may require replacement of gaskets and seals to prevent
fuel system leaks. Also, as discussed previously, information from the
Energy Information Administration indicated that a significant
percentage of diesel fuel being purchased is not ULSD. Thus, the record
does reflect that significant lead time is necessary for facilities to
come into compliance with the ULSD requirement.
    In addition, because the EPA included the requirement to use ULSD
in the final rule in response to comments, the EPA believed it was
appropriate to provide regulated parties sufficient time to conform to
it, and the EPA did not believe that the 3 months advocated by
petitioners was appropriate given the record information described
above. Therefore, the EPA does not at this time agree that delaying the
start of the ULSD fuel requirement until 2015 is inappropriate.
    However, in consideration of the fact that the public lacked the
opportunity to comment on the timing of the ULSD fuel requirement, the
EPA has granted reconsideration to provide an opportunity for public
comment on the timing for compliance with the ULSD fuel requirement for
emergency CI engines that operate or are contractually obligated to be
available for more than 15 hours per calendar year for the purposes
specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) (emergency demand
response and deviations of voltage or frequency of 5 percent or more),
or that operate for the purpose specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii)
(local system reliability). The EPA specifically solicits comment on
whether it would be reasonable to implement the requirement to use ULSD
fuel earlier than January 1, 2015. The EPA requests comment on whether
the use of ULSD is already widespread and whether facilities will need
to make any physical adjustments to engines (including fuel seals) and
other facilities like tanks or other containment structures, as well as
any needed adjustments to contracts and other business activities, to
comply with these new requirements.

B. Timing and Required Information for the Reporting Requirement for
Emergency Engines

    The January 30, 2013, final rule added a new provision to the RICE
NESHAP that requires stationary emergency RICE

with a site rating of more than 100 brake HP and a displacement of less
than 30 liters per cylinder that operate or are contractually obligated
to be available for more than 15 hours per year (up to a maximum of 100
hours per year) for the purposes specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii)
and (iii) (emergency demand response and deviations of voltage or
frequency of 5 percent or more), or that operate for the purpose
specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system reliability), to
report the following information annually to the EPA, beginning with
operation during the 2015 calendar year:
     Company name and address where the engine is located.
     Date of the report and beginning and ending dates of the
reporting period.
     Engine site rating and model year.
     Latitude and longitude of the engine in decimal degrees
reported to the fifth decimal place.
     Hours operated for emergency demand response and
deviations of voltage or frequency of 5 percent or greater below
standard, including the date, start time, and end time for engine
operation for those purposes.
     Number of hours the engine is contractually obligated to
be available for emergency demand response and deviations of voltage or
frequency of 5 percent or greater below standard.
     Hours spent for operation for local system reliability,
including the date, start time and end time for engine operation for
that purpose, the entity that dispatched the engine and the situation
that necessitated the dispatch of the engine.
     If there were no deviations from the fuel requirements (if
any) that apply to the engine, a statement that there were no
deviations from the fuel requirements during the reporting period.
     If there were deviations from the fuel requirements that
apply to the engine (if any), information on the number, duration, and
cause of deviations, and the corrective action taken.

A similar reporting requirement was also added to the ICE NSPS. This
information is necessary to determine whether these engines are
operating in compliance with the regulations and will assist the EPA
and other interested stakeholders in assessing the impacts of the
emissions from these engines. We included this reporting requirement in
the final rule in response to public comments expressing concerns about
the impacts of emissions from emergency engines. The EPA specified in
the final rule that the first report must cover the calendar year 2015
and must be submitted no later than March 31, 2016. Subsequent annual
reports for each calendar year must be submitted no later than March 31
of the following calendar year. The EPA did not require reporting of
operation prior to 2015 for two reasons: (1) To give the EPA time to
develop the electronic reporting tool that facilities will use to
submit this information and stakeholders will use to view the submitted
information; and (2) to give facilities sufficient lead time to
institute the necessary infrastructure to record and compile the
information so that it can be submitted electronically to the EPA in
the correct format. The petition for reconsideration from Clean Air
Council et al. requested that the reporting requirement begin with the
2013 calendar year, with the first report due in early 2014.
Alternatively, Clean Air Council et al. requested that if the first
report is not submitted until 2016, the report should include
information on operation in 2013 and 2014, in addition to the
information for 2015 that is already required. The petitioners also
requested that the report include the type and amount of diesel fuel
used in the engine. The petitioners indicated that collecting this
information would enhance the EPA's ability to assess the health
impacts of the emissions from the engines.
    The EPA does not believe the petitioners have provided sufficient
justification for the revisions in lead time provided in their request,
and the EPA continues to believe that a lead time until the 2015
calendar year is appropriate, for the reasons stated above. The EPA
also does not agree with the petitioners that the report should include
the type and amount of diesel fuel used in the engine, because of the
burden that would place on affected facilities. The sulfur content of
the fuel in the tanks would be changing over time as the existing
higher sulfur fuel is replaced with ULSD, and a facility would have to
periodically sample its fuel tanks in order to determine the current
sulfur content of the fuel. Facilities may need to install equipment
such as fuel flow meters in order to determine the amount of diesel
fuel used in their engines.
    However, in consideration of the fact that the public lacked the
opportunity to comment on the timing and required information for the
reporting requirement, the EPA has granted reconsideration to provide
an opportunity for public comment on the timing and required
information for the reporting requirement for emergency engines that
operate or are contractually obligated to be available for more than 15
hours per calendar year for the purposes specified in 40 CFR
63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii), or that operate for the purpose specified
in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii). The EPA requests comment on whether owners
and operators of these engines should be required to report operation
for the period between the compliance date and January 2015, and when
it would be reasonable to submit the report. The EPA also solicits
comment on whether the rule should require reporting of the amount and
type of diesel fuel used in the engine. The EPA requests information on
whether such a requirement would place an unreasonable burden on
affected facilities.

C. Criteria for Operation for Up to 50 Hours per Year for Non-Emergency
Situations

    The proposed amendments to the RICE NESHAP and ICE NSPS (June 7,
2012; 77 FR 33812) specified two situations under which emergency
engines could be used for up to 100 hours per calendar year in non-
emergency situations as part of a financial arrangement with another
entity. The EPA proposed that owners and operators of stationary
emergency engines could operate the engines when the Reliability
Coordinator has declared an Energy Emergency Alert (EEA) Level 2 as
defined in the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)
Reliability Standard EOP-002-3, Capacity and Energy Emergencies, or
during periods where there is a deviation of voltage or frequency of 5
percent or more below standard voltage or frequency. Public commenters
indicated that the proposed EEA Level 2 and 5 percent voltage or
frequency deviation triggers did not account for situations when the
local balancing authority or transmission operator for the local
electric system has determined that electric reliability is in
jeopardy, and recommended that the EPA include additional situations
where the local transmission and distribution system operator has
determined that there are conditions that could lead to a blackout for
the local area. The comments indicated that rural distribution lines
are not configured in a typical grid pattern, but instead have
distribution lines that can run well over 50 miles from a substation
and regularly extend 15 miles or longer. During periods of
exceptionally heavy stress within the region or sub-region, electricity
from regional power generators may not be available because of
transmission constraints, according to the

commenter. The comments indicated that in many cases, there may be only
one transmission line that feeds the rural distribution system, and no
alternative means to transmit power into the local system. In response
to those comments and in recognition of the unique challenges faced by
the local transmission and distribution system operators in rural
areas, the revisions to the RICE NESHAP and ICE NSPS finalized on
January 30, 2013, specified limited circumstances under which
stationary emergency engines located at area sources of HAP could
operate for up to 50 hours per year in non-emergency situations as part
of a financial arrangement with another entity. The final amendments
specified that up to 50 hours per calendar year can be used for non-
emergency situations to supply power as part of a financial arrangement
with another entity if all of the following conditions are met:
     The engine is located at an area source of HAP;
     the engine is dispatched by the local balancing authority
or local transmission and distribution system operator;
     the dispatch is intended to mitigate local transmission
and/or distribution limitations so as to avert potential voltage
collapse or line overloads that could lead to the interruption of power
supply in a local area or region;
     the dispatch follows reliability, emergency operation or
similar protocols that follow specific NERC, regional, state, public
utility commission or local standards or guidelines;
     the power is provided only to the facility itself or to
support the local transmission and distribution system; and
     the owner or operator identifies and records the entity
that dispatches the engine and the specific NERC, regional, state,
public utility commission or local standards or guidelines that are
being followed for dispatching the engine.

The EPA added these provisions to the final RICE NESHAP and ICE NSPS in
response to public comments on situations where the local transmission
and distribution system operator has determined that there are
conditions that could lead to a blackout for the local area where the
ready availability of emergency engines is critical to system
reliability.
    The petitions for reconsideration from Clean Air Council et al. and
from Calpine and PSEG expressed concern that the conditions specified
in the final rule for operation in non-emergency situations to supply
power as part of a financial arrangement with another entity were too
indistinct and expansive and would be difficult to enforce, which could
lead to engines operating when there is no discernible threat to the
grid. The petition from Calpine and PSEG expressed concern that the
final rule did not provide any guidance for determining whether the
dispatch of an engine is intended to mitigate local transmission and/or
distribution limitations so as to avert potential voltage collapse or
line overloads that could lead to the interruption of power supply in a
local area or region. The petition from Clean Air Council et al.
recommended that the EPA more clearly delineate the situations under
which the engines could run to ensure that the engines are only
dispatched during genuine grid emergencies, while still allowing local
grid operators to address legitimate reliability concerns. The
petitions did not provide suggestions as to what criteria the
petitioners believe would be appropriate.
    Due to the public's inability to comment on this issue, the EPA has
granted reconsideration of the conditions in 40 CFR 60.4211(f)(3)(i),
60.4243(d)(3)(i) and 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) for operation for up to 50 hours
per calendar year in non-emergency situations as part of a financial
arrangement with another entity, as well as the corresponding
provisions in the ICE NSPS. The EPA welcomes comments on these
provisions, including whether the provisions are necessary or
appropriate and also whether the specific provisions delineating the
situations where such use is permitted are appropriate as finalized or
should be revised. If a commenter suggests revisions to the provisions,
the commenter should provide detailed information supporting any such
revision.

IV. Solicitation of Public Comment and Participation

    The EPA seeks full public participation in arriving at its final
decisions. At this time, the EPA is not proposing any specific
revisions to the final RICE NESHAP or the ICE NSPS. However, the EPA
requests public comment on the three issues under reconsideration. The
EPA is seeking comment only on the three issues. The EPA will not
respond to any comments addressing any other issues or any other
provisions of the final rule or any other rule.
    Specifically, the EPA requests comment on the timing for compliance
with the ULSD fuel requirement for existing emergency CI engines that
operate or are contractually obligated to be available for more than 15
hours per calendar year for the purposes specified in 40 CFR
63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) (emergency demand response and deviations
of voltage or frequency of 5 percent or more, or that operate for the
purpose specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system
reliability). The EPA requests comment on whether affected engines
should be required to comply with the ULSD fuel requirement earlier
than January 1, 2015. In particular, the EPA invites comment on whether
the lead time for a January 15, 2015, implementation date is
unreasonably long, or conversely, if the lead time for an
implementation date prior to January 1, 2015, would be unreasonably
short.
    The EPA requests comment on the timing and required information for
the reporting requirement for emergency engines that operate or are
contractually obligated to be available for more than 15 hours per
calendar year for the purposes specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii)
and (iii), or that operate for the purpose specified in 40 CFR
63.6640(f)(4)(ii), and the timing and required information for the
analogous reporting requirement in the ICE NSPS. The EPA requests
comment on whether the reporting should begin with operation in the
2015 calendar year, and whether the rule should require reporting of
the amount and type of diesel fuel used in the engine.
    Finally, the EPA requests comment on the conditions in 40 CFR
60.4211(f)(3)(i), 60.4243(d)(3)(i) and 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) for operation
for up to 50 hours per calendar year in non-emergency situations as
part of a financial arrangement with another entity. The EPA is
particularly seeking comment on whether the criteria could be more
clearly defined to eliminate any ambiguity regarding the situations
under which engines can operate and to further limit the operation to
situations where the reliability of the local system is threatened.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The EPA is not proposing any new information collection activities
(e.g., monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping) as part of this action.
With this action, the EPA is seeking additional comments on three
aspects of the final NESHAP and NSPS for stationary RICE (78 FR 6674,
January 30, 2013). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
previously approved the information collection requirements contained
in the existing regulations under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control
number 2060-0548. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in
40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this action on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city,
county, town, school district or special district with a population of
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this action on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action
will not impose any new requirements. This action seeks comment on
three aspects of the final NESHAP and NSPS for stationary RICE without
proposing any changes to the rules. We continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of this action on small entities and welcome comments
on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action
requests comment on three aspects of the final NESHAP and NSPS for
stationary RICE without proposing any changes to the rules.

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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action seeks comment on three
aspects of the final NESHAP and NSPS for stationary RICE without
proposing any changes to the rule. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this action.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
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 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based solely on
technology performance and not on health or safety risks.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, Section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities, unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. The VCS are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures and business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS
bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the agency does not use available and applicable VCS.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, the
EPA did not consider the use of any VCS.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 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 or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action seeks comment on three aspects of the final
NESHAP and NSPS for stationary RICE without proposing any changes to
the rule.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 60

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 63

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 29, 2013.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-21626 Filed 9-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


METHYL PARATHION (053501)

Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)

Date: October  6, 2008

What is a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)?

Available estimates of pesticide usage data for a particular active
ingredient that is used on agricultural crops in the United States.

Pesticide usage data obtained from various sources.  The data are then
merged, averaged, and rounded so that the presented information is not
proprietary, business confidential, or trade secret.

What does it contain?

Pesticide usage data for a single active ingredient only.

Agricultural use sites (crops) that the pesticide is reported to be used
on.

Available pesticide usage information from U.S. states that produce 80%
or more of a crop, in most cases, or less than 80%, in rare cases,
depending on the scope of the survey and available resources.

Annual percent of crop treated (average & maximum) for each agricultural
crop.

Average annual pounds of the pesticide applied for each agricultural
crop (i.e., for the states surveyed, not for the entire United States).

What assumptions can I make about the reported data?

Average pounds of active ingredient applied - Values are calculated by
merging pesticide usage data sources together; averaging across all
observations, then rounding.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than
500, then that value is labeled <500.  Estimated values between 500 &
<1,000,000 are rounded to 1 significant digit.  Estimated values of
1,000,000 or greater are rounded to 2 significant digits.)

Average percent of crop treated - Values are calculated by merging data
sources together; averaging by year, averaging across all years, &
rounding to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is
less than 1, then the value is labeled <1.

Maximum percent of crop treated - Value is the single maximum value
reported across all data sources, across all years, & rounded up to the
nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 2.5,
then the value is labeled <2.5.

What are the data sources used?

USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture’s National
Agricultural Statistics Service) – pesticide usage data from 2001 to
2006.

Private pesticide market research – pesticide usage data from 2001 to
2007.

NPUD 2002 (National Pesticide Use Database) pesticide usage data from
NPUD 02 of the CropLife Foundation are used only if data are not
available from the other sources.

California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Pesticide Use
Reporting (PUR) data for 2000 to 2005 when 95% or more of a crop is
grown California.

What are the limitations to the data?

Additional registered uses may exist but are not included because the
available surveys do not report usage (e.g., small acreage crops).

Lack of reported usage data for the pesticide on a crop does not imply
zero usage.

Usage data on a particular site may be noted in data sources, but not
quantified.  In these instances, the site would not be reported in the
SLUA.

Non-agricultural use sites (e.g., turf, post-harvest, mosquito control,
etc.) are not reported in the SLUA.  A separate request must be made to
receive these estimates.

Some sites show some use, even though they are not on the label.  This
usage could be due to various factors, including, but not limited to
Section 18 requests, existing stocks of the chemical, data collection
errors, and experimental use permits (EUPs).

October 6, 2008

Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of METHYL PARATHION
(053501)

Sorted Alphabetically

	  	          Crop				Lbs. A.I.			    Percent Crop Ttd.
    Avg.     	Max.

	1 	Alfalfa	10,000	<1           <2.5

	2 	Almonds * +	<500	N/C	N/C

	3 	Apples +	<500	<1           <2.5

	4 	Barley	9,000	<1           <2.5

	5 	Beans, Green	<500	<1           <2.5

	6 	Canola/Rapeseed	1,000	<1           <2.5

	7 	Cherries +	<500	<1           <2.5

	8 	Corn	200,000	<1           <2.5

	9 	Cotton	200,000	<2.5              5

	10	Dry Beans/Peas	2,000	<1           <2.5

	11	Grapes +	<500	<1           <2.5

	12	Hay, Other ( NPUD '02 ) +	3,000	N/C	<1

	13	Nectarines * +	<500	N/C	N/C

	14	Onions	20,000	10              20

	15	Peaches +	3,000	<2.5          <2.5

	16	Peas, Green	1,000	<1           <2.5

	17	Pecans +	5,000	<1           <2.5

	18	Potatoes	10,000	<2.5               5

	19	Prunes +	<500	<1           <2.5

	20	Rice	200,000	5              15

	21	Sorghum +	3,000	<1           <2.5

	22	Soybeans	90,000	<1           <2.5

	23	Strawberries +	<500	<2.5          <2.5

	24	Sunflowers	60,000	5              10

	25	Sweet Corn	10,000	<2.5               5

	26	Sweet Potatoes ( NPUD '02 )	20,000	N/C	80

	27	Walnuts	90,000	15              25

	28	Wheat	90,000	<1           <2.5

All numbers rounded.

'<500' indicates less than 500 pounds of active ingredient.

'<2.5' indicates less than 2.5 percent of crop is treated.

'<1' indicates less than 1 percent of crop is treated.

* CA data only, but 95% or more of U.S. acres are in California

SLUA data sources include: USDA-NASS (United States Department of
Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service); 2001-2006

	Private Pesticide Market Research, 2001-2007

	NPUD 2002 (National Pesticide Use Database) of the CropLife America
Foundation and

           California DPR data.

	These results reflect amalgamated data developed by the Agency and are
releasable to the

            public.

N/C = Not Calculated

+ = These crops were not known to be listed on active end use product
registrations when this report was run.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 58 (Thursday, March 26, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15947-15951]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06745]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0249; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-174-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-18-
05, which applies to The Boeing Company Model DC-9-10, DC-9-20, DC-9-
30, DC-9-40, and DC-9-50 series airplanes; and Model DC-9-81 (MD-81),
DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), MD-88, and MD-90-30
airplanes; equipped with a center wing fuel tank and Boeing original
equipment manufacturer-installed auxiliary fuel tanks. AD 2012-18-05
currently requires adding design features to detect electrical faults
and to detect a pump running in an empty fuel tank. Since we issued AD
2012-18-05, we have determined that it is necessary to clarify the
actions for airplanes on which the auxiliary fuel tanks are removed.
This proposed AD would allow certain actions as optional methods of
compliance. We are proposing this AD to reduce the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with
flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 11, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855

Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0249.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0249; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: S[eacute]rj Harutunian, Aerospace
Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA
90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2015-0249;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-174-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 August 6, 2012, we issued AD 2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77
FR 54793, September 6, 2012), for The Boeing Company Model DC-9-10, DC-
9-20, DC-9-30, DC-9-40, and DC-9-50 series airplanes; and Model DC-9-81
(MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), MD-88, and
MD-90-30 airplanes; equipped with a center wing fuel tank and Boeing
original equipment manufacturer-installed auxiliary fuel tanks. AD
2012-18-05 requires adding design features to detect electrical faults
and to detect a pump running in an empty fuel tank. AD 2012-18-05
resulted from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We
issued AD 2012-18-05 to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside
fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could
result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR 54793, September
6, 2012) Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR 54793,
September 6, 2012), we have determined that it is necessary to clarify
the actions for airplanes on which the auxiliary fuel tanks are
removed. In addition, The Boeing Company has issued new service
information for Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-
83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and Model MD-88 airplanes; and Model MD-90-30
airplanes, which provides a method of compliance for the actions
required by AD 2012-18-05. Boeing has not yet issued corresponding
service information for Boeing Model DC-9-10, DC-9-20, DC-9-30, DC-9-
40, and DC-9-50 series airplanes. The applicability of AD 2012-18-05
has not changed in this proposed AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-28-228, dated September
27, 2013; and Boeing Service Bulletin MD90-28-013, dated September 27,
2013. The service information describes procedures for installing GFI
relays that change fuel pump system wiring, installing a low fuel
pressure indication system, and revising the inspection or maintenance
program to include new limitations.
    We have also reviewed Appendixes B, C, and D of Boeing Special
Compliance Item Report MDC-92K9145, Revision M, dated February 5, 2013,
which includes Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations
(CDCCLs), Airworthiness Limitations Instructions (ALIs), and short-term
extensions.
    Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-28-228, dated September 27, 2013,
specifies prior or concurrent accomplishment of the following
concurrent service information.
     Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin 28-53, Revision 1, dated
April 16, 1992, which describes procedures for installing a low fuel
pressure indication system.
     Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin 28-63, Revision 2, dated
April 8, 1992, which describes procedures for installing a low fuel
pressure indication inhibit system.
    This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for
ways to access this service information.

Clarification of the Requirements for the Design Features

    In paragraph (c) of this proposed AD, we have added the text ``for
airplanes on which auxiliary fuel tanks are removed, the AD action
specified for the auxiliary fuel tanks are not required'' to clarify
that the actions specified in this AD for the auxiliary fuel tanks are
not required when the auxiliary fuel tanks are removed, but the AD
actions for the center fuel tanks still apply.

Revised Compliance Time

    We have determined that it is appropriate to allow additional time
to accomplish the design features and requirements specified in this
proposed AD. Therefore, we have added a compliance time of ``within 42
months after the effective date of this AD'' to paragraph (g) of this
proposed AD. We have determined that this extension of the compliance
time will provide an acceptable level of safety.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 2012-18-05,
Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR 54793, September 6, 2012). This proposed AD
would clarify the actions for airplanes on which the auxiliary fuel
tanks are removed, that the actions specified for the auxiliary fuel
tanks are not required. This proposed AD would also provide certain
methods of compliance for the actions restated from AD 2012-18-05 (one
option is accomplishing the actions

specified in the service information described previously, including
revising the inspection or maintenance program, as applicable, to
include new limitations; the other option is installing a supplemental
type certificate (STC)).
    This proposed AD specifies to revise certain operator maintenance
documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and CDCCLs.
Compliance with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR
91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered,
or repaired in the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator
may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions.
In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to
paragraph (l) of this proposed AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required actions and CDCCLs that will
ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 809 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installing design features for          50 work-hours x $85 per          $35,000         $39,250     $10,322,750
 airplanes with center wing and          hour = $4,250.
 auxiliary tanks (263 airplanes),
 using a method approved by the FAA
 [retained actions from AD
 2012[dash]18[dash]05, Amendment
 39[dash]17181 (77 FR 54793, September
 6, 2012)].
Installing design features for          35 work-hours x $85 per           17,000          19,975      10,906,350
 airplanes with center wing tank (546    hour = $2,975.
 airplanes), using a method approved
 by the FAA [retained actions from AD
 2012-18-05, Amendment 39[dash]17181
 (77 FR 54793, September 6, 2012)].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Estimated Costs: New Optional Actions for Installing Design Features
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For airplanes with center wing and auxiliary    250 work-hours x $85 per hour =          $69,000         $90,250
 tanks, using service information specified in   $21,250.
 paragraph (h) of this proposed AD (including
 revising the maintenance/inspection program).
For airplanes with center wing tank, using      110 work-hours x $85 = 9,350....          30,000          39,350
 service information specified in paragraph
 (h) of this proposed AD (including revising
 the maintenance/inspection program).
Installing STC specified in paragraph (i) of    35 work-hours x $85 per hour =            17,000          19,975
 this proposed AD.                               $2,975.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR 54793, September 6, 2012), and
adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2015-0249; Directorate Identifier
2014 NM-174-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 11, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR 54793,
September 6, 2012).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(8) of this AD, certificated in any
category, and equipped with center wing fuel tanks and Boeing
original equipment manufacturer-installed auxiliary fuel tanks. For
airplanes on which the auxiliary fuel tanks have been removed, the
actions specified for the auxiliary fuel tanks are not required.
    (1) Model DC-9-11, DC-9-12, DC-9-13, DC-9-14, DC-9-15, and DC-9-
15F airplanes.
    (2) Model DC-9-21 airplanes.
    (3) Model DC-9-31, DC-9-32, DC-9-32 (VC-9C), DC-9-32F, DC-9-33F,
DC-9-34, DC-9-34F, and DC-9-32F (C-9A, C 9B) airplanes.
    (4) Model DC-9-41 airplanes.
    (5) Model DC-9-51 airplanes.
    (6) Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and
DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes.
    (7) Model MD-88 airplanes.
    (8) Model MD-90-30 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to reduce the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with
flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Criteria for Operation

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (g) of
AD 2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR 54793, September 6, 2012),
with a new compliance time. Except as provided by paragraphs (h) and
(i) of this AD: As of 42 months after the effective date of this AD,
no person may operate any airplane affected by this AD unless an
amended type certificate or supplemental type certificate that
incorporates the design features and requirements described in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD has been approved by the
Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, and
those design features are installed on the airplane.
    (1) Each electrically powered fuel pump installed in the center
wing tank or auxiliary fuel tank must have a protective device
installed to detect electrical faults that can cause arcing and burn
through the fuel pump housing. The same device must shut off the
pump by automatically removing electrical power from the pump when
such faults are detected. When a fuel pump is shut off as the result
of detection of an electrical fault, the device must stay latched
off until the fault is cleared through maintenance action and
verified that the pump and the electrical power feed are safe for
operation.
    (2) Additional design features must be installed to detect when
any center wing tank or auxiliary fuel tank pump is running in an
empty fuel tank. The prospective pump shutoff system must shut off
each pump no later than 60 seconds after the fuel tank is emptied.
The pump shutoff system design must preclude undetected running of a
fuel pump in an empty tank, after the pump was commanded off
manually or automatically.

(h) New: Optional Methods of Compliance

    For Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-
9-87 (MD-87), and Model MD-88 airplanes; and Model MD-90-30
airplanes: In lieu of doing the requirements of paragraph (g) of
this AD, do the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1),
(h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83),
DC-9-87 (MD-87), and Model MD-88 airplanes: Do the applicable
actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i), (h)(1)(ii), and
(h)(1)(iii) of this AD.
    (i) For all airplanes identified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD:
Within the compliance time specified in paragraph (g) of this AD,
install ground fault interrupter (GFI) relays, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-28-
228, dated September 27, 2013.
    (ii) For airplanes identified in Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin
28-53, Revision 1, dated April 16, 1992: Prior to or concurrently
with accomplishing the action specified in paragraph (h)(1)(i) of
this AD, install a low fuel pressure indication system, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing MD-80
Service Bulletin 28-53, Revision 1, dated April 16, 1992.
    (iii) For airplanes identified in Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin
28-63, Revision 2, dated April 8, 1992: Prior to or concurrently
with accomplishing the action specified in paragraph (h)(1)(i) of
this AD, install a low fuel pressure indication inhibition system,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing MD-80
Service Bulletin 28-63, Revision 2, dated April 8, 1992.
    (2) For Model MD-90-30 airplanes: Within the compliance time
specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, install brackets and mod
block rails, and install GFI relays, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD90-28-013,
dated September 27, 2013.
    (3) For all airplanes: Within 30 days after accomplishing the
actions required by paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD or within
30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later,
revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate the Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations
(CDCCLs), Airworthiness Limitations Instructions (ALIs), and short-
term extensions specified in Appendixes B, C, and D of Boeing
Special Compliance Item Report MDC-92K9145, Revision M, dated
February 5, 2013. The initial compliance time for accomplishing the
actions specified in the ALIs is at the later of the times in
paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and (h)(3)(ii) of this AD. Doing the revision
of the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, required by
this paragraph terminates the requirements in paragraphs (g) and (h)
of AD 2008-11-15, Amendment 39-15538 (73 FR 30746, May 29, 2008).
    (i) At the applicable time specified in in Appendix C of Boeing
Special Compliance Item Report MDC-92K9145, Revision M, dated
February 5, 2013, except as provided by Appendix D, of Boeing
Special Compliance Item Report MDC-92K9145, Revision M, dated
February 5, 2013.
    (ii) Within 30 days after accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, or within 30 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(i) New: Optional Universal Fault Interrupter (UFI) Installation

    In lieu of doing the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD,
within the compliance time specified in paragraph (g) of this AD
install a TDG Aerospace Inc. UFI using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this
AD.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD: TDG Aerospace STC ST02502LA
([http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/
4d132827a425d7de86257cd3004dfc02/$FILE/ST02502LA.pdf)] provides
additional guidance for installing the TDG UFI.

(j) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and CDCCLs

    After the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, has
been revised as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD, no
alternative actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, or CDCCLs may be
used unless the actions, intervals, or CDCCLs are approved as an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraphs (h)(1)(ii) and (h)(1)(iii) of this AD, if those actions
were performed before the effective date of this AD using any of the
service information specified in paragraph (k)(1), (k)(2), or (k)(3)
of this AD.
    (1) Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin 28-53, dated April 8, 1991.
    (2) Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin 28-63, dated, June 14, 1991.
    (3) Boeing MD-80 Service Bulletin 28-63, Revision 1, dated July
19, 1991.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the

attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2012-18-05, Amendment 39-17181 (77 FR
54793, September 6, 2012), are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of this AD.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact S[eacute]rj
Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA,
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-
627-5210; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 11, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-06745 Filed 3-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 83 (Tuesday, April 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18336-18337]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08738]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2019-24]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Zee Aero

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before May 20, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0132
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200

New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nia Daniels,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 22, 2019.
Brandon Roberts,
Deputy Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2018-0132.
    Petitioner: Zee Aero.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 45.29(f) and 45.29(b)(3).
    Description of Relief Sought: Zee Aero requests an exemption to
allow an alternate marking placement and size for their Mule SPA model
registration marks using 5-inch letters affixed to the outboard tail
booms permanent structure just aft of the motor controller cover.

[FR Doc. 2019-08738 Filed 4-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P