[Federal Register: October 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 190)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 57892]
[DOCID:fr02oc06-15]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket Nos. RM06-16-000 and RM06-22-000]

Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk Power System

Issued September 18, 2006.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice announcing rulemaking process.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
announcing a rulemaking process for mandatory Reliability Standards for
the Bulk-Power System and specifically, its inclusion of certain
Reliability Standards proposed by the North American Electric
Reliability Council (NERC) in the Commission's upcoming Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking which will be issued in Docket No. RM06-16-000. The
Commission will also open a new proceeding in Docket No. RM06-22-000,
which will process additional Reliability Standards proposed by NERC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan First, Office of the General
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426;<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 28, 2006, the North American
Electric Reliability Council, on behalf of its affiliate, the North
American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC Corporation, and
collectively NERC), filed 27 proposed Reliability Standards for
Commission approval. The Commission certified NERC Corporation as the
Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) in an order issued July 20, 2006 in Docket No.
RR06-1-000.
    NERC requested that these 27 proposed Reliability Standards be
included in the upcoming Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) in Docket
No. RM06-16-000. Because of their close relationship with Reliability
Standards already filed in that docket, the Commission will address 19
of the 27 proposed Reliability Standards in the upcoming NOPR in Docket
No. RM06-16-000. The 19 Reliability Standards to be addressed in this
docket are:

INT-001-1--Interchange Information
INT-003-1--Interchange Transaction Implementation
INT-004-1--Dynamic Interchange Transaction Modifications
INT-005-1--Interchange Authority Distributes Arranged Interchange
INT-006-1--Response to Interchange Authority
INT-007-1--Interchange Confirmation
INT-008-1--Interchange Authority Distributes Status
INT-009-1--Implementation of Interchange
INT-010-1--Interchange Coordination Exemptions
EOP-005-1--System Restoration Plans
MOD-013-1--Dynamics Data Requirements and Reporting Procedures
MOD-016-1--Actual and Forecast Demands, Net Energy for Load,
Controllable DSM
PRC-002-1--Define Regional Disturbance Monitoring and Reporting
Requirements
PRC-018-1--Disturbance Monitoring Equipment Installation and Data
Reporting
VAR-001-1--Voltage and Reactive Control
VAR-002-1--Generator Operation for Maintaining Network Voltage
Schedules
TOP-002-1--Normal Operations Planning
IRO-006-3--Reliability Coordination--Transmission Loading Relief
BAL-006-1--Inadvertent Interchange

    The Commission is also opening a new Docket No. RM06-22-000 for
processing the remaining 8 proposed Reliability Standards. No
preliminary comments are being sought at this time. A proposed
rulemaking will be issued later, and we will allow comments then. The 8
Reliability Standards included in this docket are:

CIP-002-1--Cyber Security--Critical Cyber Asset Identification
CIP-003-1--Cyber Security--Security Management Controls
CIP-004-1--Cyber Security--Personnel and Training
CIP-005-1--Cyber Security--Electronic Security Perimeter(s)
CIP-006-1--Cyber Security--Physical Security of Critical Cyber
Assets
CIP-007-1--Cyber Security--Systems Security Management
CIP-008-1--Cyber Security--Incident Reporting and Response Planning
CIP-009-1--Cyber Security--Recovery Plans for Critical Cyber Assets

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-15797 Filed 9-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 87 (Friday, May 4, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26476-26477]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10825]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0660; FRL-9668-9]

Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New
Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of public hearings.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2012,
the proposed rule, ``Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas
Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating
Units.'' The EPA is making two announcements: first, two public
hearings will be held for the proposed Standards of Performance for
Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility
Generating Units, and, second, the comment period for this rulemaking
will be extended until June 25, 2012.

DATES: The public hearings will be held on May 24, 2012.

ADDRESSES: There will be two public hearings held on May 24, 2012. The
Washington, DC hearing will be held at the Ariel Rios East Building, in
Room 1153 located at 1301 Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Chicago, Illinois hearing will be held at
the Ralph H. Metcalfe Federal Building in the Lake Michigan Room (12th
Floor) located at 77 West Jackson, Chicago, Illinois 60603, telephone
(312) 886-9404.
    For both the Washington, DC and Chicago, Illinois hearings,
visitors must go through a metal detector, sign in with the security
desk, be accompanied by an employee and show photo identification to
enter the building.
    The public hearing in Washington, DC will convene at 8:30 a.m. and
will continue until 4:30 p.m. A lunch break is scheduled from 12:00
p.m. until 1:00 p.m. The EPA plans to conclude the hearing at 4:30 p.m.
All Washington, DC times are Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The public
hearing in Chicago will convene at 8:30 a.m. and will continue until
4:30 p.m. A lunch break is scheduled from 12:00 p.m. until 1:00 p.m.
The EPA plans to conclude the hearing at 4:30 p.m. All Chicago times
are Central Daylight Time (CDT). The EPA's Web site for the rulemaking,
which includes the proposal and information about the hearings, can be
found at: http://epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you would like to present oral
testimony at the public hearing, please contact Ms. Pamela Garrett,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-01),
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone: (919) 541-
7966; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(preferred method for registering). The last day to register to present
oral testimony in advance will be Friday May 18, 2012. If using email,
please provide the following information: the time you wish to speak
(morning or afternoon), name, affiliation, address, email address and
telephone and fax numbers. Time slot preferences will be given in the
order requests are received. Additionally, requests to speak will be
taken the day of the hearings at the hearing registration desk and
accommodated as time allows, although preferences on speaking times may
not be able to be fulfilled. If you require the service of a
translator, please let us know at the time of registration.
    Questions concerning the March 27, 2012, proposed rule should be
addressed to Mr. Christian Fellner, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D 243-04),
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile number: (919) 541-
5450; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Public hearing: The proposal for which the EPA is holding the
public hearings was published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2012
(77 FR 22392), and is available at: http://www.epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/ and also in the docket identified below. The
public hearings will provide interested parties the opportunity to
present oral comments regarding the EPA's proposed standards, including
data, views or arguments concerning the proposal. The EPA may ask
clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but will not
respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and
supporting information submitted during the comment period will be
considered with the same weight as any oral comments and supporting
information presented at the public hearing.
    Commenters should notify Ms. Garrett if they will need specific
equipment or if there are other special needs related to providing
comments at the public hearings. The EPA will provide equipment for
commenters to make computerized slide presentations if we receive
special requests in advance. Oral testimony will be limited to 5
minutes for each commenter. The EPA encourages commenters to submit to
the docket a copy of their oral testimony electronically (via email or
CD) or in hard copy form.
    The public hearing schedules, including lists of speakers, will be
posted on the EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/. Verbatim transcripts of the hearings and
written statements will be included in the docket for the rulemaking.
The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearings; however, please plan for the
hearing to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule.

How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The EPA has established a docket for the proposed rule, ``Standards
of

Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources:
Electric Utility Generating Units'' under No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0660,
available at www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: April 30, 2012.
Mary Henigin,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2012-10825 Filed 5-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 55061]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23076]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[Regional Docket No. II-2012-01; FRL-9933-81-Region 2]

Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit; NY; Seneca
Energy II, LLC

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final action.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR
70.8(d), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator signed
an Order, dated June 29, 2015, granting in part and denying in part a
petition filed by Gary A. Abraham on behalf of Finger Lakes Zero Waste
Coalition, Inc. (dated December 22, 2012) asking the EPA to object to
the Title V operating permit (Permit No. 8-3244-00040/00002) issued by
the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to
Seneca Energy II, LLC (Seneca) relating to the Ontario County Landfill
Gas-to-Energy Facility (Facility) in western New York. Sections 307(b)
and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide that the petitioner may ask for
judicial review by the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit of those portions of the Order that deny objections
raised in the petition.

DATES: Any such petition for review of this Order must be received by
November 13, 2015 pursuant to section 307(b) of the CAA.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final Order, the petitions, and
other supporting information during normal business hours at EPA Region
2, 290 Broadway, New York, New York. If you wish to examine these
documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before the
visiting day. Additionally, the final Order is available electronically
at: http://www.epa.gov/region7/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/seneca_response2012.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Riva, Chief, Permitting
Section, Air Programs Branch, Clean Air and Sustainability Division,
EPA, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007,
telephone (212) 637- 4074, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the
above EPA Region 2 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA affords the EPA a 45-day period to
review, and object to, as appropriate, a title V operating permit
proposed by a state permitting authority. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA
authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator, within 60 days
after the expiration of this review period, to object to a Title V
operating permit if the EPA has not done so. Petitions must be based
only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable
specificity during the public comment period provided by the state,
unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise
these issues during the comment period or that the grounds for the
objection or other issues arose after this period. The claims are
described in detail in Section IV of the Order. In summary, the issues
raised are that: (1) The Title V permit does not consider the Ontario
County Landfill (Landfill) and the Facility a single source even though
they together meet the 3-factor source determination test; and (2) the
Facility's Title V permit is a ``sham permit.'' The EPA's rationale for
partially granting and partially denying the claims raised in the
petition are described in the Order.

    Dated: August 26, 2015.
Catherine McCabe,
Deputy Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-23076 Filed 9-11-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11256-11257]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04177]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Government/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the bi-annual meeting of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Aeronautical Charting Forum (ACF) to
discuss informational content and design of aeronautical charts and
related products, as well as instrument flight procedures development
policy and design criteria.

DATES: The ACF is separated into two distinct groups. The Instrument
Procedures Group (IPG) will meet April 28, 2015 from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. The Charting Group will meet April 29 and 30, 2015 from 8:30 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be hosted by Pragmatics, Inc. Company at
1761 Business Center Drive, Reston, VA 20190.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information relating to the
Instrument Procedures Group, contact Thomas E. Schneider, FAA, Flight
Procedures Standards Branch, AFS-420, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., P.O.
Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For information relating to the Charting Group, contact Valerie S.
Watson, FAA, National Aeronautical Navigation Products (AeroNav
Products), Quality Assurance & Standards, AJV-344, 1305 East-West
Highway, SSMC4, Station 3409, Silver Spring, MD 20910; telephone: (301)
427-5155.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Sec.  10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App. II), notice is
hereby given of a meeting of the FAA Aeronautical Charting Forum to be
held from April 28 through April 30, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
at Pragmatics Inc. Company, at their offices at 1761 Business Center
Drive, Reston, VA 20190.
    The Instrument Procedures Group agenda will include briefings and
discussions on recommendations regarding pilot procedures for
instrument flight, as well as criteria, design, and developmental
policy for instrument approach and departure procedures.
    The Charting Group agenda will include briefings and discussions on
recommendations regarding aeronautical charting specifications, flight
information products, and new aeronautical charting and air traffic
control initiatives. Attendance is open to the interested public, but
will be limited to the space available.
    Please note the following special security requirements for access
to the Pragmatics, Inc. Corporation Headquarters. A picture I.D. is
required of all U.S. citizens. All foreign national participants are
required to have a passport. Additionally, not later than March 30,
2015, foreign national attendees must provide their name, country of
citizenship, company/organization representing, and country of the
company/organization. Send the information to: Steve VanCamp,
Pragmatics Inc., FAA, Aviation Safety--Flight Standards Service, AFS-
420, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK,
73125 or via Email (preferred) to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Foreign
nationals who do not provide the required information will

not be allowed entrance--NO EXCEPTIONS.
    The public must make arrangements by April 8, 2015, to present oral
statements at the meeting. The public may present written statements
and/or new agenda items to the committee by providing a copy to the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section not later
than April 7, 2015. Public statements will only be considered if time
permits.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 23, 2015.
Valerie S. Watson,
Co-Chair, Aeronautical Charting Forum.
[FR Doc. 2015-04177 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 249 (Friday, December 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 61777]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28194]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3396-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

California; Emergency and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an
emergency for the State of California (FEMA-3396-EM), dated December 8,
2017, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued December 8, 2017.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated December 8, 2017, the President issued an emergency declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as
follows:

    I have determined that the emergency conditions in certain areas
of the State of California resulting from wildfires beginning on
December 4, 2017, and continuing, are of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant an emergency declaration under the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (``the Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
an emergency exists in the State of California.
    You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for
required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the
Stafford Act, to save lives and to protect property and public
health and safety, and to lessen or avert the threat of a
catastrophe in the designated areas. Specifically, you are
authorized to provide assistance for emergency protective measures
(Category B), limited to direct Federal assistance, under the Public
Assistance program.
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are
hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these
purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal emergency
assistance and administrative expenses.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department
of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Mark
Armstrong, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this declared emergency.
    The following areas of the State of California have been designated
as adversely affected by this declared emergency:

    Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Barbara, and Ventura
Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to
direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-28194 Filed 12-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


Protection of Stratospheric Ozone; Listing of Substitutes in the Foam Sector Response to Late Comments This document presents EPA's response to comments to the Notice of Data Availability ( March 10, 2004, 69 FR 11358) received after the close of the comment period ( April 9, 2004). EPA received seven late comments to the NODA. They are found in docket OAR 2003 0228 numbers 33 39. The specific points raised in the comments and the responses are as follows:

Comment: One commenter provides comments on previous comments submitted to this docket found at OAR 2003 0228 22. This commenter disagrees with the comments in document # 22 and states the following: ° EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act ( CAA) to find the use of HCFC 141b unacceptable in foam. Sections 605, 606 and 610 do not limit EPA's authority under Section 612. ° EPA's proposal does not violate the North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA) because finding HCFC 141b unacceptable for use in foam would apply to all HCFC 141b, both foreign and domestic. ° EPA's grandfathering policy does not prevent EPA from finding the use of HCFC 141b unacceptable because grandfathering deals with " retroactive application of a changed federal regulation, not the imposition of a new policy in the future."

Response: EPA responds directly to the comments found in document # 22 within the final rule. Generally, EPA agrees with this commenter and explains the Agency's responses to document # 22 in detail in Section IV of the final rule.

Comment: Three commenters recommend that if EPA finalizes its proposal to change the listing of HCFC 141b to unacceptable in foam applications as of January 1, 2005, that EPA allow continued use of HCFC 141b for research and development purposes for their foreign customers.

Response: EPA addresses this recommendation in detail in Sections III and IV of the final rule. The final rule will allow the continued use of HCFC 141b in foam applications for research and development purposes.

Comment: One commenter states that it believes that EPA did not provide the public sufficient notice and comment on the proposal to change the listing of HCFC 141b to unacceptable in foam.

Response: EPA disagrees with this commenter and asserts that it has provided the public with ample notice and opportunity to comment on the proposal to list HCFC 141b unacceptable for foam end uses. Specifically, EPA published the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( NPRM) in the Federal Register ( FR) on July 11, 2000 ( 65 FR 42653). That notice explicitly proposed to change the listing of HCFC 141b in foam as unacceptable and allowed 60 days for public comment. Subsequently, EPA published a Notice of Data Availability ( NODA) in the FR on May 23, 2001 ( 66 FR 28408) sharing new information on the technical feasibility of using alternatives to HCFCs in foam and allowed 30 days for public comment. In a July 2002 final rule, EPA deferred taking final action on its proposal to list HCFC 141b as unacceptable in foam pending the development of additional information regarding the feasibility of alternatives ( 67 FR 47706). EPA published another NODA in the FR on March 10, 2004 ( 69 FR 11385) requesting public comment on the accuracy of more new information related to the technical feasibility of using alternatives to HCFC 141b in foam applications. That comment period also lasted for 30 days. In the March 2004 NODA, EPA stated, " We [ EPA] plan to consider this information and any comment received during the comment period in determining what future action to take on our July 11, 2000 proposal regarding the use of HCFC 141b in foam blowing applications." ( 69 FR 11358). Based on these actions, EPA has provided sufficient notice and opportunity to comment on the 2000 proposal to change the listing of HCFC 141b from acceptable to unacceptable for use in foam applications as of January 1, 2005. The public had no fewer than three opportunities to provide information and comment to EPA, with the most recent being in March 2004.

In addition, EPA published a final rule in 2003 that provided an update on the status of the use of HCFC 141b in foams to the potentially effected entities ( January 21, 2003, 68 FR 2819). The HCFC Allowance Allocation Final rule established the HCFC 141b exemption allowance petition process. Petitioners responding to that process provided EPA with detailed specific information on the technical viability and commercial availability of alternatives to HCFC 141b as well as information on the quantity of available stockpile of HCFC 141b.

Moreover, the public has been on notice since 1993 that EPA considered HCFCs transitional substances and that industry ( including the foam industry) should strive to develop non ozone depleting alternatives. Specifically, a 1993 final rule established the production and import phaseout schedule for HCFCs in the U. S., starting with HCFC 141b. The schedule identified January 1, 2003 as the phaseout date for HCFC 141b ( 58 FR 65018). Based on that rule, the foam industry had ten years to identify, develop and test alternatives before HCFC 141b was phased out of production in the U. S. Furthermore, the 1994 Significant New Alternatives Policy ( SNAP) final rule stated that the approval of HCFCs as acceptable alternatives to CFCs was on an interim basis while other non ozone depleting alternatives were being developed ( 59 FR 13044).

In addition to the multiple regulatory actions described above, EPA provided many routine updates on the status of the use of HCFC 141b in foam applications. For example, EPA produced factsheets and guidance ( distributed via industry associations and posted on the EPA website), presented at conferences and meetings, including meetings with the Spray Polyurethane Foam Alliance ( SPFA) and individual foam industry members, and annual presentations at the Alliance for the Polyurethane Industry ( API).

Comment: One commenter disagrees with the comments presented in document # 33 of the docket and reiterates their belief that EPA cannot change the listing of HCFC 141b to unacceptable without receiving a petition from the public under Section 612( d). The commenter further states that HCFC 141b remains as safe to use as an alternative to CFC 11 today as it was when it was approved by SNAP in 1994.

Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter. Section IV of the final rule addresses EPA's ability to change the listing of HCFC 141b from acceptable to unacceptable in foam without a specific petition from the public. As explained in the 2000 proposal, EPA has the authority to amend its regulations and change SNAP determinations independent of any petitions ( 65 FR 42659). Nothing in the statute bans such action and EPA believes that inherent in our authority to promulgate regulations initially is the authority to review and revise those regulations as the state of science advances.

The commenter misconstrues EPA's action as concluding that circumstances have changed the safety of using HCFC 141b as compared with CFC 11. In doing so, the commenter also misconstrues the test that applies in considering the acceptability of alternatives. In this rulemaking, EPA has concluded that as compared with 1994 when HCFC 141b was listed as acceptable, there are now other alternatives that are currently or potentially available that reduce the overall risk to human health and the environment. This is consistent with CAA Section 612( c). At the time HCFC 141b was found acceptable for use as a substitute for CFC 11 in foam applications, EPA put the industry on notice, stating that HCFCs were considered transitional substances and that the Agency was finding them acceptable as an interim measure ( 59 FR 13083) while other alternatives were being evaluated and developed. When EPA proposed in 2000 to change the listing of HCFC 141b from acceptable to unacceptable for use in foam blowing, the Agency believed that non ozone depleting alternatives that posed less risk to human health and the environment were technically and economically viable. Based on comments and information received during the comment period on that proposal, EPA deferred its decision on the use of HCFC 141b until the after the production and import phaseout occurred on January 1, 2003. As demonstrated by the 2004 NODA and data from the HCFC 141b exemption allowance petitions, EPA now has information that proves non ozone depleting alternatives that pose a lower risk to human health and the environment are technically viable and commercially available in all major foam applications. Therefore, EPA is issuing this final rule and changing the listing of HCFC 141b to unacceptable for use in foam blowing.

Comment: A commenter reiterates its belief that any EPA action to find the use of HCFC 141b unacceptable would be in violation of NAFTA and the Montreal Protocol. Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter and addresses both of these issues in detail in Section IV of the final rule. EPA's action is related to the use of HCFC 141b in foam applications in the U. S. and is developed under the authority of Section 612 of the Clean Air Act. The rule does not distinguish whether the HCFC 141b is from a foreign or domestic source and therefore is not in contravention of NAFTA's non discriminatory clause. Moreover, this action does not prevent the production and import of HCFC 141b into the U. S., which is controlled by the HCFC Allowance Allocation rule under the authority of Sections 605 and 606 of the CAA. Further, this action does not prevent the production and import of products containing HCFC 141b into the U. S., which is controlled by the Nonessential Products Ban final rule under the authority of Section 610 of the CAA. The assertion that this action impacts the import of products containing HCFC 141b and necessitates a re allocation of production allowances is inaccurate.

Comment: One commenter states that Section 612 of the CAA does not give EPA the authority to regulate the " replacement" of an ODS by a foreign producer. In other words, EPA cannot prevent the use of HCFC 141b found in spray foam systems blended in foreign countries.

Response: As provided above, EPA's rule does not regulate activities that occur in foreign countries. The rule will prohibit " replacement" of the ODS that occurs when the blowing agent is reacted with the other ingredients of the spray foam systems by the contractor who sprays the foam system to create the actual foam product ( e. g., roof, wall, pipe insulation). Because this final rule finds the use of HCFC 141b in foam applications unacceptable as of January 1, 2005, the spraying of a foam system containing HCFC 141b in the U. S., irrespective of where the foam system is actually blended, would be subject to this restriction.

Comment: One commenter disagrees with an industry comment found within document # 31 of the docket which stated HCFC 141b has a shelf life of only one year. This statement was found in a transcript of a meeting EPA held with members of SPFA in October 2003. The industry member stated that they required new production of HCFC 141b in 2004 because they believed stockpiled HCFC 141b had a shelf life of only one year. EPA advised that member to submit any documentation they had to support that belief with their HCFC 141b exemption allowance petition. The commenter to this NODA objected to the statement by the industry member regarding the shelf life of stockpiled HCFC 141b and stated that they have test data that shows HCFC 141b stored within industry guidelines can be stored for over 5 years. They also have patented additives and processes to assist in storing and recovering contaminated HCFC 14.

Response: This final rule is related to the use of HCFC 141b in foam applications, regardless of whether the HCFC 141b is stockpiled or newly produced. Although the commenter's data could demonstrate the shelf life of HCFC 141b is longer than 1 The import of HCFC 141b itself to the U. S. has been banned since January 1, 2003 per the 1993 phaseout schedule ( 58 FR 65018) established under the Montreal Protocol and Sections 605 and 606 of the CAA. what was suggested elsewhere in the docket, EPA did not make a determination on the shelf life of stockpiled HCFC 141b for this final rule. EPA's analysis of confidential information submitted from producers, importers and formulators of HCFC 141b shows that any remaining HCFC 141b stockpiled by the foam industry in the U. S. will be depleted by the end of 2004 ( OAR 2003 0228 0009). Thus, even if the issue of shelf life could have been relevant for this rulemaking, such a determination was not needed since EPA concluded stockpiles would be depleted by the end of 2004. For further details, EPA responds to issue of the quantity of remaining stockpiled HCFC 141b in the U. S. in 2005 in Sections III and IV of the final rule.

Comment: One commenter recommends that EPA ban the import of pre blended polyurethane foam systems containing HCFC 141b as of January 1, 2005. They also recommend EPA ban the use of all foam systems containing HCFC 141b as of January 1, 2006. They state EPA should allow the use of HCFC 141b for another year in order to account for any remaining stockpiled HCFC 141b or any inventoried foam systems containing HCFC 141b.

Response: EPA addresses all of the issues the commenter raised in Sections III and IV of the final rule, including the import of pre blended polyurethane foam systems containing HCFC 141b and the use of both stockpiled HCFC 141b and inventoried foam systems containing HCFC 141b. As explained above, this action is taken pursuant to Section 612 of the CAA which regulates the use of HCFC 141b in foam applications in the U. S. and does not provide the authority to regulate the import of HCFC 141b. 1 Also, as noted above and in the final rule, EPA's analysis of the remaining HCFC 141b stockpiled by the foam industry in the U. S. demonstrates that the stockpile will be exhausted by the end of 2004. No direct evidence was provided to show there in fact would be stockpiled HCFC 141b available for use in the foam industry in 2005.

With regard to the continued use of stockpiled foam systems containing HCFC 141b in inventory at the end of 2004, there is no data demonstrating the quantity of foam systems containing HCFC 141b remaining in inventory at the end of the 2004 would require an entire calendar year to apply. In fact, as EPA explained in the final rule, winter is historically the slowest time for the spray foam sector so the quantity of foam systems containing HCFC 141b is expected to be low at the end of 2004. Additionally, the spray foam sector has been on notice for over 10 years regarding the need to transition to non ozone depleting alternatives, which includes appropriately managing their stockpiles of HCFC 141b and foam systems containing HCFC 141b and transitioning to alternatives as soon as they are qualified ( as some companies have already done). But, in order to accommodate those users that may have foam systems containing HCFC 141b in inventory at the end of 2004 due to weather delays, in the final rule, EPA is allowing the use of those systems through the first quarter of 2005. EPA believes this is a sufficient amount of time to apply any inventoried systems without penalizing those companies who have invested in alternatives in good faith and in accordance with the established phaseout schedule for HCFC 141b.

Comment: Two commenters recommend that due to a logistical delay in a SPFA project with Factory Mutual ( FM) to qualify foam roofing systems blown with alternatives to HCFC 141b, EPA should change the listing of HCFC 141b from acceptable to unacceptable to be effective January 1, 2006 as opposed to January 1, 2005. This delay was due to FM failing to test the samples submitted by SPFA in a timely manner and a closure of the FM offices during move scheduled for July and August 2004. The commenters also both request EPA reconsider its decision on the 2003 and 2004 HCFC 141b exemption allowance petitions.

Response: While the delay in the SPFA/ FM project ( sponsored by EPA through a three year grant to SPFA) is untimely for the 6 different spray foam formulations ( i. e. samples) that are part of the project, EPA believes this delay does not warrant a year's delay in the effective date of the unacceptable listing decision for HCFC 141b. In spray foam roofing, there may be up to 70 formulations used to make roofs, with typically about 20 formulations that are used to supply roofing contractors. With respect to FM credentials, FM insures spray foam roofs, not spray foam formulations. This is an important distinction because the 30 40% of spray roofs sold in the U. S. with FM credentials cited by the commenters could be based on as little as 5 or 6 formulations, sold by only a few formulators. This application does not represent the majority of the spray foam roofing market. More to the point, this delay in the SPFA/ FM project does not prevent formulators that would like to offer FM credentialed roofs to contractors from pursuing FM credentials independently and by the end of 2004.

Moreover, the information EPA has from the spray foam formulators demonstrates alternatives for HCFC 141b in spray foam are technically viable and commercially available today. The commenters did not provide any evidence to show that demand for FM credentialed spray roofs cannot be met by formulators with products that are already approved or are expected to be approved by the end of 2004, independent of this project. In fact, based on data supplied but the industry, EPA believes that the demand in spray foam in 2005, including FM credentialed spray roofing, can be met with alternatives that are already approved or expected to be approved later this year. For these reasons and because any further delay in the transition to non ozone depleting alternatives penalizes companies that have made investments and good faith efforts to transition to alternatives in a timely manner, EPA does not believe a delay until 2006 is justified. The commenters' request that EPA reconsider its decisions on the individual 2003 and 2004 HCFC 141b exemption allowance petitions to allow new production of HCFC 141b beyond the phaseout date is outside of the scope of this rulemaking. The HCFC Allowance Allocation rule established the petition process for formulators of HCFC 141b and described the requirements for petitioning EPA for an exemption allowance ( January 21, 2003, 68 FR 2819). Specifically, 40 CFR 82.16( h)( 3) of the regulation states that a petitioner may file a one time appeal to EPA's denial of its petition within 10 working days of receipt of EPA's denial. The regulatory deadlines for the petition process were established in order to bring the process to an expeditious conclusion. All of the regulatory deadlines for the HCFC 141b exemption allowance petition process are set forth in Section 82.16( h), and EPA has met all of its required deadlines regarding petitions from 2003 and 2004. Because the time periods for filing appeals for both the 2003 and 2004 petitions have expired, there is no basis for appeal at this time.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26124-26127]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08961]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-1130; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-008-AD;
Amendment 39-18492; AD 2015-09-04 R1]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Gliders

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015-09-04 for DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH Model DG-1000T gliders equipped with a Solo
Kleinmotoren Model 2350 C engine. This AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as engine shaft failure and consequent propeller detachment.
We are issuing this AD to require actions to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 6, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of June 6, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of May
26, 2015 (80 FR 25591, May 5, 2015).

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
1130; or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Solo
Kleinmotoren GmbH, Postfach 600152, 71050 Sindelfingen, Germany;
telephone: +49 7031 301-0; fax: +49 7031 301-136; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://aircraft.solo-online.com and DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH, Otto Lilienthal Weg 2/Am Flugplatz, 76646 Bruchsal,
Germany; telephone: +49 7251 3020-0; fax: +49 7251 3020-200; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/
index.php?id=1329. You may view this

referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 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 Docket No. FAA-2015-1130.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Model
DG-1000T gliders equipped with a Solo Kleinmotoren Model 2350 C engine.
The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on February 4, 2016 (81
FR 5944), and proposed to revise AD 2015-09-04, Amendment 39-18150 (80
FR 25591, May 5, 2015).
    Since we issued AD 2015-09-04, Amendment 39-18150 (80 FR 25591, May
5, 2015), new service information has been issued that includes
procedures for replacement of the excenter axle-pulley assembly and
installation of an elastomeric damper element between the propeller and
upper pulley. This optional modification will allow resuming engine
operation.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No.: 2015-0052R1, dated November 19, 2015 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct the above-referenced unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    An occurrence of engine shaft failure and consequent propeller
detachment was reported on a Solo 2350 C engine.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to additional cases
of release of the propeller from the engine, possibly resulting in
damage to the sailplane, or injury to persons on the ground.
    To address this unsafe condition, EASA issued Emergency AD 2013-
0217-E to prohibit operation of the engine. That AD was later
revised to introduce an optional modification, through Solo
Kleinmotoren Service Bulletin (SB) 4603-14, to install a modified
excenter axle-pulley assembly, allowing to resume operation of the
engine.
    Since EASA AD 2013-0217R1 was issued, another occurrence of
engine shaft failure and propeller detachment was reported on a Solo
2350 C engine which had been modified in accordance with Solo
Kleinmotoren SB 4603-14.
    Consequently, EASA issued Emergency AD 2015-0052-E, which
superseded AD 2013-0217R1, to prohibit operation of all Solo 2350 C
engines, including those engines which had been modified in
accordance with Solo Kleinmotoren SB 4603-14. That AD also required
a one-time inspection of the propeller shaft to detect cracks and
the reporting of findings.
    Since that AD was issued, Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH developed
modification drawing nb. 2031211-V2 available for in service
application through Solo SB 4603-17 and DG Flugzeugbau GmbH
developed modifications drawing nb. 10 M 067, available for in
service application through DG Flugzeugbau Technical Note (TN) 1000/
26 which include replacement of excenter axle-pulley assembly and
installation of an elastomeric damper element between the propeller
and upper pulley.
    This AD is revised to introduce optional modifications to allow
resuming operation of an engine.

    You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-1130-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (81 FR 5944, February 4,
2016) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (81 FR 5944, February 4, 2016) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (81 FR 5944, February 4, 2016).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR 51

    We reviewed Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH Anleitung zur Inspektion
(English translation: Inspection Instruction), Nr. 4603-1, Ausgabe
(English translation: Dated) March 26, 2015; Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH
Technische Mitteilung (English translation: Service Bulletin) Nr. 4603-
17, Ausgabe (English translation: Dated) July 15, 2015; and DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical note No. 1000/26, dated September 23, 2015,
with 10M072 titled Propellermontage nach TM 1000-26 (English
translation: Propeller assembly TN 1000-26), dated July 14, 2015. Solo
Kleinmotoren GmbH Anleitung zur Inspektion (English translation:
Inspection Instruction), Nr. 4603-1, Ausgabe (English translation:
Dated) March 26, 2015, describes procedures for inspecting the
propeller shaft for cracking and reporting the results to the
manufacturer. Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH Techniseche Mitteilung (English
translation: Service Bulletin) Nr. 4603-17, Ausgabe (English
translation: Dated) July 15, 2015, describes procedures for replacement
of the excenter axle-pulley assembly. DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical
note No. 1000/26, dated September 23, 2015, describes procedures for
removing the excenter axle-pulley assembly and sending it to Solo
Kleinmotoren GmbH for modification with a new rear bearing, axle, and
elastomeric damper element. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 2 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about .5 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic operational limitation requirement of this AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this portion of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $85, or $42.50 per product.
    We also estimate that it will take about 1.5 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic axle inspection (remove, inspect, and
reinstall) requirement of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this portion of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $255, or $127.50 per product.
    We also estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product
to comply with the optional axle with drive belt pulley unit
replacement and engine test run of this AD. The average labor rate is
$85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $100 per product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this optional AD
action on U.S. operators to be $540, or $270 per product.
    We also estimate that it will take about .5 work-hour per product
to comply with the removal of the operational limitation requirement
after doing the optional replacement of this

AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD action on
U.S. operators to be $85, or $42.50 per product.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591. ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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-
1130; 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 the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-18150 (80 FR
25591, May 5, 2015) and adding the following new AD:

2015-09-04 R1 DG Flugzeugbau GmbH: Amendment 39-18492; Docket No.
FAA-2015-1130; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-008-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 6,
2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2015-09-04, Amendment 39-18150 (80 FR 25591,
May 5, 2015) (``AD 2015-09-04'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Model DG-1000T gliders,
all serial numbers, that are:
    (1) Equipped with a Solo Kleinmotoren Model 2350 C engine; and
    (2) Certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 72: Engine.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as engine shaft
failure with consequent propeller detachment. We are issuing this AD
to prevent failure of the engine shaft with consequent propeller
detachment, which could result in damage to the glider or injury of
persons on the ground.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) As of November 25, 2013 (the effective date retained from AD
2013-22-14, Amendment 39-17646 (78 FR 65869, November 4, 2013)), do
not operate the engine unless the engine is modified following
instructions that are FAA-approved specifically for this AD.
    (2) Modification of an engine following the instructions in Solo
Kleinmotoren Service Bulletin 4603-14, dated April 28, 2014, is not
an acceptable modification to comply with paragraph (f)(1) of this
AD.
    (3) As of May 26, 2015 (the effective date retained from AD
2015-09-04), place a copy of this AD into the Limitations section of
the aircraft flight manual (AFM).
    (4) Within the next 30 days after May 26, 2015 (the effective
date retained from AD 2015-09-04), do a one-time inspection
(magnetic particle or dye penetrant) of the propeller shaft
following Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH Anleitung zur Inspektion (English
translation: Inspection Instruction), Nr. 4603-1, Ausgabe (English
translation: dated) March 26, 2015.

    Note 1 to paragraph (f)(4) of this AD:  This service information
contains German to English translation. The EASA used the English
translation in referencing the document. For enforceability
purposes, we will refer to the Solo Kleinmotoren service information
as it appears on the document.

    (5) Within the next 30 days after May 26, 2015 (the effective
date retained from AD 2015-09-04), report the results of the
inspection required in paragraph (f)(4) of this AD to Solo
Kleinmotoren GmbH. Include the serial number of the engine and the
operational time since change of the axle in your report. You may
find contact information for Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH in paragraph
(i)(5) of this AD.
    (6) At any time after June 6, 2016 (the effective date of this
AD), you may modify the engine following Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH
Techniseche Mitteilung (English translation: Service Bulletin) Nr.
4603-17,

Ausgabe (English translation: Dated) July 15, 2015; and DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical note No. 1000/26, dated September 23,
2015, with 10M072 titled Propellermontage nach TM 1000-26 (English
translation: Propeller assembly TN 1000-26), dated July 14, 2015.
This modification allows engine operation.

    Note 2 to paragraph (f)(6) of this AD:  This service information
contains German to English translation. The EASA used the English
translation in referencing the document. For enforceability
purposes, we will refer to the Solo Kleinmotoren service information
and the DG Flugzeugbau GmbH as it appears on the document.

    (7) Before further flight after doing the modification allowed
in (f)(6) of this AD, remove the AD placed into the Limitations
section of the AFM as required in paragraph (f)(3) of this AD.

 (g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, a federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information
subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless
that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.:
2015-0052R1, dated November 19, 2015, for related information. You
may examine the MCAI on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-1130-0002.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
June 6, 2016.
    (i) Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH Techniseche Mitteilung (English
translation: Service Bulletin) Nr. 4603-17, Ausgabe (English
translation: Dated) July 15, 2015.

    Note 3 to paragraphs (i)(3)(i) and (i)(3)(ii) of this AD:  This
service information contains German to English translation. The EASA
used the English translation in referencing the document. For
enforceability purposes, we will refer to the Solo Kleinmotoren
service information and the DG Flugzeugbau GmbH as it appears on the
document.

    (ii) DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical note No. 1000/26, dated
September 23, 2015, with 10M072 titled Propellermontage nach TM
1000-26 (English translation: Propeller assembly TN 1000-26), dated
July 14, 2015.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
May 26, 2015 (80 FR 25591, May 5, 2015).
    (i) Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH Anleitung zur Inspektion (English
translation: Inspection Instruction), Nr. 4603-1, Ausgabe (English
translation: Dated) March 26, 2015.

    Note 4 to paragraph (i)(4)(i) of this AD:  This service
information contains German to English translation. The EASA used
the English translation in referencing the document. For
enforceability purposes, we will refer to the Solo Kleinmotoren
service information as it appears on the document.

    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact Solo
Kleinmotoren GmbH, Postfach 600152, 71050 Sindelfingen, Germany;
telephone: +49 7031 301-0; fax: +49 7031 301-136; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://aircraft.solo-online.com/com.
    (6) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148. In addition, you can access this service information
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2015-1130.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 11, 2016.
Melvin Johnson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-08961 Filed 4-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P