[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 145 (Monday, July 31, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49280-49283]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16096]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1487; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01626-T;
Amendment 39-22504; AD 2023-14-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-09-11
and AD 2022-21-12, which applied to all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28
Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. AD 2020-09-11 and AD 2022-21-12 required
revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable,
to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. Since
the FAA issued AD 2022-21-12, new or more restrictive tasks and
limitations have been introduced. This AD continues to require the
actions of AD 2022-21-12, and also requires revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations; as specified in a European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by
reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 15, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 15,
2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of
December 1, 2022 (87 FR 68621, November 16, 2022).
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by September 14, 2023.

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 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.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1487; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For material incorporated by reference in this AD, contact
EASA,

Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999
000; email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find
this material on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1487.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 206-
231-3225; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments
about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-1487; Project Identifier MCAI-
2022-01626-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this final rule because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Dan
Rodina, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2022-21-12, Amendment 39-22211 (87 FR 68621,
November 16, 2022) (AD 2022-21-12), for all Fokker Services B.V. Model
F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. AD 2022-21-12 was prompted by an MCAI
originated by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States
of the European Union. EASA issued AD 2022-0027, dated February 18,
2022 (EASA AD 2022-0027), to correct an unsafe condition.
    AD 2022-21-12 required revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA issued AD 2022-21-12 to
prevent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2022-21-12 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2022-21-12, EASA superseded AD 2022-0027
and issued EASA AD 2022-0260, dated December 20, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-
0260) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes.
The MCAI states that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations
have been developed.
    EASA AD 2022-0027, dated February 18, 2022, superseded EASA AD
2020-0024, dated February 13, 2020 (which corresponds to FAA AD 2020-
09-11, Amendment 39-19907 (85 FR 30592, May 20, 2020) (AD 2020-09-11).
AD 2020-09-11 requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations (a prior revision of the airworthiness
limitations section (ALS) document required by AD 2022-21-12). The FAA
has therefore determined that this AD should also supersede AD 2020-09-
11.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address reduced structural integrity
of the airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1487.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2022-0260 specifies new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations for airplane structures and safe life limits.
    This AD also requires EASA AD 2022-0027, dated February 18, 2022,
which the Director of the Federal Register approved for incorporation
by reference as of December 1, 2022 (87 FR 68621, November 16, 2022).
    This material 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.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is issuing this AD after determining that the
unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on
other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD retains the requirements of AD 2022-21-12. This AD also
requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations, which are specified in EASA AD 2022-0260 described
previously, as incorporated by reference. Any differences with EASA AD
2022-0260 are identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
AD.
    This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance
documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections). Compliance with
these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have
been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed
by this 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 (AMOC) according to paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of

information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs.
The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs.
As a result, the FAA retains the IBR of EASA AD 2022-0027 and
incorporates EASA AD 2022-0260 by reference in this AD. This AD
requires compliance with EASA AD 2022-0027 and EASA AD 2022-0260
through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as
exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Using common terms that
are the same as the heading of a particular section in EASA AD 2022-
0027 or EASA AD 2022-0260 does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2022-0027 or EASA AD 2022-0260.
Service information required by EASA AD 2022-0027 and EASA AD 2022-0260
for compliance will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No.
FAA-2023-1487 after this AD is published.

Airworthiness Limitation ADs Using the New Process

    The FAA's process of incorporating by reference MCAI ADs as the
primary source of information for compliance with corresponding FAA ADs
has been limited to certain MCAI ADs (primarily those with service
bulletins as the primary source of information for accomplishing the
actions required by the FAA AD). However, the FAA is now expanding the
process to include MCAI ADs that require a change to airworthiness
limitation documents, such as airworthiness limitation sections.
    For these ADs that incorporate by reference an MCAI AD that changes
airworthiness limitations, the FAA requirements are unchanged.
Operators must revise the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the new
airworthiness limitation document. The airworthiness limitations must
be followed according to 14 CFR 91.403(c) and 91.409(e).
    The previous format of the airworthiness limitation ADs included a
paragraph that specified that no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions and intervals
are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in
the AMOCs paragraph under ``Additional AD Provisions.'' This new format
includes a ``New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals''
paragraph that does not specifically refer to AMOCs, but operators may
still request an AMOC to use an alternative action or interval.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and
comment procedures for rules when the agency, for ``good cause,'' finds
that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking
comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA
authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days,
upon a finding of good cause.
    There are currently no domestic operators of these products.
Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are
unnecessary, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). In addition, for the
forgoing reason, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The requirements of the RFA do not apply when an agency finds good
cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and
comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt
this rule without notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    Currently, there are no affected U.S.-registered airplanes. If an
affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the
future, the FAA provides the following cost estimates to comply with
this AD:
    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection
program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined
that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane
estimate.
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the new actions
to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

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.
    The FAA is 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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-09-11, Amendment 39-19907
(85 FR 30592, May 20, 2020) and AD 2022-21-12, Amendment 39-22211 (87
FR 68621, November 16, 2022); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

2023-14-04 Fokker Services B.V.: Amendment 39-22504; Docket No. FAA-
2023-1487; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01626-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective August 15, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2020-09-11, Amendment 39-19907 (85 FR 30592,
May 20, 2020) (AD 2020-09-11) and AD 2022-21-12, Amendment 39-22211
(87 FR 68621, November 16, 2022) (AD 2022-21-12).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070
and 0100 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection
Program, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2022-21-12, with no changes. Except as specified in paragraph (h) of
this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times
specified in, and in accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD 2022-0027, dated February 18, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-
0027). Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance or
inspection program required by paragraph (j) of this AD terminates
the requirements of this paragraph.

(h) Retained Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0027, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the exceptions specified in paragraph
(h) of AD 2022-21-12, with no changes.
    (1) Where EASA AD 2022-0027 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using December 1, 2022 (the effective date of AD 2022-
21-12).
    (2) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA
AD 2022-0027 do not apply to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2022-0027 specifies revising ``the
AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this AD
requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, within 90 days after December 1, 2022 (the effective
date of AD 2022-21-12).
    (4) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2022-0027 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Retained Restrictions on Alternative Actions and Intervals With No
Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2022-21-12, with no changes. Except as required by paragraph (j) of
this AD, after the existing maintenance or inspection program has
been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals are allowed unless they are
approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref. Publications''
section of EASA AD 2022-0027.

(j) New Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Except as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2022-0260, dated December 20, 2022 (EASA AD
2022-0260). Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance
or inspection program required by this paragraph terminates the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

(k) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0260

    (1) This AD does not adopt the requirements specified in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA AD 2022-0260.
    (2) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2022-0260 specifies revising ``the
AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this AD
requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA 2022-0260 is at the applicable ``associated
thresholds'' and ``limitations'' as incorporated by the requirements
of paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2022-0260, or within 90 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (4) This AD does not adopt the provisions specified in
paragraphs (4) and (5) of EASA AD 2022-0260.
    (5) This AD does not adopt the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2022-0260.

(l) New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (j) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) and intervals are allowed unless they
are approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref.
Publications'' section of EASA AD 2022-0260.

(m) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation Branch, 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 responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (n) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Fokker Services B.V.'s EASA
Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(n) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aviation
Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
August 15, 2023.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022-0260,
dated December 20, 2022.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
December 1, 2022 (87 FR 68621, November 16, 2022).
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022-0027,
dated February 18, 2022.
    (ii) Reserved
    (5) For EASA ADs 2022-0027 and 2022-0260, contact EASA, Konrad-
Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000;
email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find these
EASA ADs on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (6) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD
docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1487.
    (7) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on July 8, 2023.
Michael Linegang,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-16096 Filed 7-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                EPA ICR No. 1710.08; OMB Control No. 2070-0151

                                 ATTACHMENT 3

                        Project-Based Rental Assistance

                             24 CFR 35, Subpart H

                    TITLE 24--HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

PART 35--LEAD-BASED PAINT POISONING PREVENTION IN CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES

                  Subpart H--Project-Based Rental Assistance

Sec. 35.700  Purpose and applicability.

    Source: 64 FR 50210, Sept. 15, 1999, unless otherwise noted.

    (a) This subpart H establishes procedures to eliminate as far as practicable lead-based paint hazards in residential properties receiving project-based assistance under a HUD program. The requirements of this subpart apply only to the assisted dwelling units in a covered property and any common areas servicing those dwelling units. This subpart does not apply to housing receiving rehabilitation assistance or to public housing, which are covered by subparts J and M of this part, respectively.
    (b) For the purposes of competitively awarded grants under the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program (HOPWA), the Supportive Housing Program (42 U.S.C. 11381-11389) and the Shelter Plus Care Program project-based rental assistance and sponsor-based rental assistance components (42 U.S.C. 11402-11407), the requirements of this
subpart shall apply to grants awarded pursuant to Notices of Funding Availability published on or after October 1, 1999. For the purposes of formula grants awarded under the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program (HOPWA) (42 U.S.C. 12901 et seq.), the requirements of this subpart shall apply to activities for which program funds are first obligated on or after September 15, 2000.

Sec. 35.705  Definitions and other general requirements.

    Definitions and other general requirements that apply to this subpart are found in subpart B of this part.

Sec. 35.710  Notices and pamphlet.

    (a) Notice. If evaluation or hazard reduction is undertaken, each owner shall provide a notice to occupants in accordance with Sec. 35.125.
    (b) Lead hazard information pamphlet. The owner shall provide the lead hazard information pamphlet in accordance with Sec. 35.130.

Sec. 35.715  Multifamily properties receiving more than $5,000 per unit.

    The requirements of this section shall apply to a multifamily residential property that is receiving an average of more than $5,000 per assisted dwelling unit annually in project-based assistance.

    (a) Risk assessment. Each owner shall complete a risk assessment in accordance with Sec. 35.1320(b). A risk assessment is considered complete when the owner receives the risk assessment report. Until the owner conducts a risk assessment as required by this section, the
requirements of paragraph (d) of this section shall apply. After the risk assessment has been conducted the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section shall apply. Each risk assessment shall be completed no later than the following schedule or a schedule otherwise
determined by HUD:
    (1) Risk assessments shall be completed on or before September 17, 2001, in a multifamily residential property constructed before 1960.
    (2) Risk assessments shall be completed on or before September 15, 2003, in a multifamily residential property constructed after 1959 and before 1978.
    (b) Interim controls. Each owner shall conduct interim controls in accordance with Sec. 35.1330 to treat the lead-based paint hazards identified in the risk assessment. Interim controls are considered completed when clearance is achieved in accordance with Sec. 35.1340. Interim controls shall be completed no later than the following schedule:
    (1) In units occupied by families with children of less than 6 years of age and in common areas servicing those units, interim controls shall be completed no later than 90 days after the completion of the risk assessment. In units in which a child of less than 6 years of age moves in after the completion of the risk assessment, interim controls shall be completed no later than 90 days after the move-in.
    (2) In all other dwelling units, common areas, and the remaining portions of the residential property, interim controls shall be completed no later than 12 months after completion of the risk
assessment for those units.
    (c) Ongoing lead-based paint maintenance and reevaluation activities. Effective immediately after completion of the risk assessment required in Sec. 35.715(a), the owner shall incorporate
ongoing lead-based paint maintenance and reevaluation into the regular building operations in accordance with Sec. 35.1355, unless all lead-based paint has been removed. If the reevaluation identifies new lead-based paint hazards, the owner shall conduct interim controls in accordance with Sec. 35.1330.
    (d) Transitional requirements--(1) Effective date. The requirements of this paragraph shall apply effective September 15, 2000, and continuing until the applicable date specified in Sec. 35.715(a) (1) or (2) or until the owner conducts a risk assessment, whichever is first.
    (2) Definitions and other general requirements that apply to this paragraph are found in subpart B of this part.
    (3) Ongoing lead-based paint maintenance. The owner shall incorporate ongoing lead-based paint maintenance activities into regular building operations, in accordance with Sec. 35.1355(a), except that clearance is not required.
    (4) Child with an environmental intervention blood lead level. If a child of less than 6 years of age living in a dwelling unit covered by this paragraph has an environmental intervention blood lead level, the owner shall comply with the requirements of Sec. 35.730.

Sec. 35.720  Multifamily properties receiving up to $5,000 per unit, and single family properties.

    Effective September 15, 2000, the requirements of this section shall apply to a multifamily residential property that is receiving an average of up to and including $5,000 per assisted dwelling unit annually in project-based assistance and to a single family residential property
that is receiving project-based assistance through the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program, the Project-Based Certificate program, or any other HUD program providing project-based assistance.
    (a) Activities at initial and periodic inspection.--(1) Visual assessment. During the initial and periodic inspections, an inspector trained in visual assessment for deteriorated paint surfaces in
accordance with procedures established by HUD shall conduct a visual assessment of all painted surfaces in order to identify any deteriorated paint.
    (2) Paint stabilization. The owner shall stabilize each deteriorated paint surface in accordance with Sec. 35.1330(a) and Sec. 35.1330(b) before occupancy of a vacant dwelling unit or, where a unit is occupied, within 30 days of notification of the results of the visual assessment. Paint stabilization is considered complete when clearance is achieved in accordance with Sec. 35.1340.
    (3) Notice. The owner shall provide a notice to occupants in accordance with Secs. 35.125(b) (1) and (c) describing the results of the clearance examination.
    (b) Ongoing lead-based paint maintenance activities. The owner shall incorporate ongoing lead-based paint maintenance activities into regular building operations in accordance with Sec. 35.1355(a), unless all lead-based paint has been removed.
    (c) Child with an environmental intervention blood lead level. If a child of less than 6 years of age living in a dwelling unit covered by this section has an environmental intervention blood
lead level, the owner shall comply with the requirements of Sec. 35.730.

Sec. 35.725  Section 8 Rent adjustments.

    HUD may, subject to the availability of appropriations for Section 8 contract amendments, on a project by project basis for projects receiving Section 8 project-based assistance, provide adjustments to the maximum monthly rents to cover the costs of evaluation for and reduction of lead-based paint hazards, as defined in section 1004 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992.

Sec. 35.730  Child with an environmental intervention blood lead level.

    (a) Risk assessment. Within 15 days after being notified by a public health department or other medical health care provider that a child of less than 6 years of age living in a dwelling unit to which this subpart applies has been identified as having an environmental intervention blood lead level, the owner shall complete a risk assessment of the dwelling unit in which the child lived at the time the blood was last sampled and of common areas servicing the dwelling unit. The risk assessment shall be conducted in accordance with 35.1320(b) and is considered complete when the owner receives the risk assessment report. The requirements of this paragraph apply regardless of whether the child is or is not still living in the unit when the owner receives the

notification of the environmental intervention blood lead level. The requirements of this paragraph (a) shall not apply if the owner conducted a risk assessment of the unit and common areas servicing the unit between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date when the owner received the notification of the environmental intervention blood lead level. If a public health department has already conducted an evaluation of the dwelling unit, the requirements of this paragraph shall not apply.
    (b) Verification. After receiving information from a person who is not a medical health care provider that a child of less than 6 years of age living in a dwelling unit covered by this subpart may have an environmental intervention blood lead level, the owner shall immediately verify the information with the public health department or other medical health care provider. If that department or provider verifies that the child has an environmental intervention blood lead level, such verification shall constitute notification, and the owner shall take the action required in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section.
    (c) Hazard reduction. Within 30 days after receiving the report of the risk assessment conducted pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section or the evaluation from the public health department, the owner shall complete the reduction of identified lead-based paint hazards in
accordance with Sec. 35.1325 or Sec. 35.1330. Hazard reduction is considered complete when clearance is achieved in accordance with Sec. 35.1340 and the clearance report states that all lead-based paint hazards identified in the risk assessment have been treated with interim controls or abatement or the public health department certifies that the lead-based paint hazard reduction is complete. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if the owner, between the date the child's blood was last sampled and the date the owner received the notification of the environmental intervention blood lead level, already conducted a risk assessment of the unit and common areas servicing the unit and completed reduction of identified lead-based paint hazards.
    (d) Notice. If evaluation or hazard reduction is undertaken, each owner shall provide a notice to occupants in accordance with Sec. 35.125.
    (e) Reporting requirement. The owner shall report the name and address of a child identified as having an environmental intervention blood lead level to the public health department within 5 working days of being so notified by any other medical health care professional.


[Federal Register: May 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 100)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 29720-29722]
[DOCID:fr22my08-14]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0584; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-315-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dornier Model 328-100 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all AvCraft Dornier Model 328-100
airplanes. The existing AD currently requires modifying the electrical
wiring of the fuel pumps; installing insulation at the hand flow
control and shut-off valves, and other components of the environmental
control system; and installing markings at fuel wiring harnesses. The
existing AD also requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations
section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to
incorporate new inspections of the fuel tank system. This proposed AD
would replace the flight-hour-based threshold for conducting certain
initial inspections, with an 8-year threshold. This proposed AD results
from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. 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 June 23, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact 328 Support
Services GmbH, P.O. Box 1252, D-82231 Wessling, Germany.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Groves, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1503; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0584;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-315-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 June 15, 2005, we issued AD 2005-13-24, amendment 39-14161 (70
FR 36470, June 24, 2005), for all AvCraft Dornier Model 328-100
airplanes. That AD requires modifying the electrical wiring of the fuel
pumps; installing insulation at the flow control and shut-off valves,
and other components of the environmental control system; and
installing markings at fuel wiring harnesses. That AD also requires
revising the Airworthiness Limitations section (ALS) of the
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new inspections
of the fuel tank system. That AD resulted from fuel system reviews
conducted by the manufacturer.

We issued that 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.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2005-13-24, the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Community, has assumed responsibility for the airplane model
subject to this AD, and has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2006-
0197 [Corrected], dated July 11, 2006. The EASA airworthiness directive
revises the threshold for conducting the initial inspections specified
in the ALS. That threshold was originally specified in the German
airworthiness directive that corresponds to AD 2005-13-24: German
airworthiness directive D-2005-001, dated January 26, 2005.

Relevant Service Information

    AvCraft Dornier has issued Service Bulletin SB-328-00-445, Revision
1, dated June 17, 2005. We referred to the original issue of the
service bulletin, dated August 23, 2004, as the appropriate source of
service information for accomplishing certain actions required by AD
2005-13-24. The procedures in Revision 1 of the service bulletin are
essentially the same as those in the original issue. However, Figure 4,
a wiring harness diagram, is corrected in Revision 1 of the service
bulletin. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
    We have also reviewed Section F, ``Fuel Tank System Limitations,''
of the Dornier 328 Airworthiness Limitations Document (hereafter
referred to as ``the ALD''), Revision 15, dated January 15, 2005. The
limitations in the document are divided into two sections as follows:
     System Code 28-00-00 (sub-tasks 28-00-00-02 and 28-00-00-
03) specifies the scheduled maintenance tasks, which are detailed
inspections of the outer and inner internal fuel tank harness.
     System Code 28-00-99-00 (sub-tasks 28-00-99-01, 28-00-99-
02, and 28-00-99-03) specifies critical design configuration control
limitations (CDCCLs).

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    These airplanes are manufactured in Germany and are type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. As described in FAA
Order 8100.14A, ``Interim Procedures for Working with the European
Community on Airworthiness Certification and Continued Airworthiness,''
dated August 12, 2005, the EASA has kept the FAA informed of the
situation described above. We have examined the EASA's findings,
evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to
issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for
operation in the United States.
    This proposed AD would supersede AD 2005-13-24 and would retain the
requirements of the existing AD. This proposed AD would also replace
the flight-hour-based threshold for conducting certain initial
inspections, with a calendar-based threshold.

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 16 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The actions that are required by AD 2005-13-24 and retained in this
proposed AD take about 70 work hours per airplane, at an average labor
rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts cost about $14,118 per
airplane. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the currently
required actions is $315,488, or $19,718 per airplane.
    The new proposed action to revise the Airworthiness Limitations
section would take about 1 work hour per airplane. Based on these
figures, the estimated cost of the new actions specified in this
proposed AD for U.S. operators is $1,280, or $80 per airplane.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-14161 (70 FR 36470, June 24, 2005) and adding the
following new airworthiness directive (AD):

328 Support Services GmbH (Formerly Avcraft Aerospace GmbH): Docket
No. FAA-2008-0584; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-315-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 23,
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005-13-24.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Dornier Model 328-100 airplanes,
certificated in any category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from 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.

Compliance

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

    Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include inspections. Compliance with these
inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have
been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas
addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able to
accomplish the inspections 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 (j) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Restatement of the Requirements of AD 2005-13-24

Modification and Installations

    (f) Within 12 months after July 29, 2005 (the effective date of
AD 2005-13-24), do the actions in Table 1 of this AD in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of AvCraft Service Bulletin SB-
328-00-445, dated August 23, 2004; or Revision 1, dated June 17,
2005.

                         Table 1.--Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                By accomplishing all the
          Do the following actions--             actions specified in--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Modify the electrical wiring of the left-  Paragraph 2.B(1) of the
 hand and right-hand fuel pumps.                service bulletin.
(2) Install insulation at the left-hand and    Paragraph 2.B(2) of the
 right-hand flow control and shut-off valves,   service bulletin.
 and other components of the environmental
 control system.
(3) Install markings at fuel wiring harnesses  Paragraph 2.B(3) of the
                                                service bulletin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Revision to Airworthiness Limitations

    (g) Within 12 months after July 29, 2005, revise the
Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness by inserting a copy of Dornier Temporary Revision ALD-
080, dated October 15, 2003, into the Dornier 328 Airworthiness
Limitations Document. Thereafter, except as provided in paragraphs
(i) and (j) of this AD, no alternative inspection intervals may be
approved for this fuel tank system.

New Requirements of This AD

Revised Initial Compliance Time

    (h) For Tasks 28-00-00-02 and 28-00-00-03 (``Detailed Inspection
of Outer Fuel Tank harness internal, LH/RH,'' and ``Detailed
Inspection of Inner Fuel Tank harness internal, LH/RH''), as
identified in Dornier Temporary Revision ALD-080, dated October 15,
2003, or Section F, ``Fuel Tank System Limitations,'' of the Dornier
328 Airworthiness Limitations Document (ALD), Revision 15, dated
January 15, 2005; the initial compliance time is within 8 years
after the effective date of this AD. Thereafter, except as provided
by paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD, these tasks must be
accomplished at the repetitive interval specified in Section F,
``Fuel Tank System Limitations,'' of the Dornier 328 ALD, Revision
15, dated January 15, 2005.

Later Revisions of the ALD

    (i) After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD, no alternative inspections, inspection
intervals, or CDCCLs may be used unless the inspections, intervals,
or CDCCLs are part of a later revision of Section F, ``Fuel Tank
System Limitations,'' of the Dornier 328 ALD, Revision 15, dated
January 15, 2005, that is approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
(or its delegated agent); or unless the inspections, intervals, or
CDCCLs are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this
AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, ANM-116, International Branch, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for
this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Related Information

    (k) EASA airworthiness directive 2006-0197 [Corrected], dated
July 11, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 14, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-11469 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 5, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 60727]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19137]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of
the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the
Securities and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on
Wednesday, September 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: The meeting will be webcast on the Commission's website at
www.sec.gov.

STATUS: This meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. (ET) and will be open to
the public via webcast on the Commission's website at www.sec.gov.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    1. The Commission will consider whether to approve a proposed
amendment to the National Market System Plan Governing the Consolidated
Audit Trail (``CAT NMS Plan'') to implement a revised funding model
(``Executed Share Model'') for the consolidated audit trail (``CAT'')
and to establish a fee schedule for CAT fees for the self-regulatory
organizations that are participants to the CAT NMS Plan in accordance
with the Executed Share Model.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: August 30, 2023.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-19137 Filed 8-31-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1  	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0917; FRL-       ]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Redesignation of the Richmond-Petersburg 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
to Attainment and Approval of the Area’s Maintenance Plan and 2002
Base-Year Inventory

AGENCY:	Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:	Final rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is approving a redesignation request and a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia.  The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) is
requesting that the Richmond-Petersburg nonattainment area (herein
referred to as the “Richmond Area” or the “Area”) be
redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS).  In conjunction with its redesignation
request, the Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision consisting of a
maintenance plan for the Richmond Area that provides for continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 11 years, until 2018.
Concurrently, EPA is approving the Commonwealth’s maintenance plan for
the 8-hour ozone standard.  EPA is not taking final action in this
rulemaking on the Commonwealth’s request that the 8-hour maintenance
plan supersede the previous maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard.
EPA is also approving the adequacy determination for the motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Richmond 8-hour
maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, and is
approving those MVEBs.  EPA is also approving the 2002 base year
emissions inventory for the Area.  EPA is approving the redesignation
request, the maintenance plan, and the 2002 base year emissions
inventory as revisions to the Virginia SIP in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EFFECTIVE DATE:    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 This final rule is effective on
[insert date 15 days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES:  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA- R03-OAR-2006-0917.  All documents in the docket are listed
in the     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov
website.  Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.  Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
through     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov
or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at
the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.  Copies
of the State submittal are available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Amy Caprio,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail

at   HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I.  Background

On April 12, 2007 (72 FR 18434), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia.  On May 10, 2007 (72
FR 26581), EPA published a correction to the NPR.  The correction to the
NPR fixed Table 5 in the original NPR.  The NPR proposed approval of
Virginia’s redesignation request, a SIP revision that establishes a
maintenance plan for the Richmond Area that sets forth how the Richmond
Area will maintain attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 11
years, and a 2002 base year emissions inventory.  The formal SIP
revisions were submitted by the VADEQ on September 18, 2006, September
20, 2006, September 25, 2006 and supplements on November 17, 2006 and
February 13, 2007.  Other specific requirements of Virginia’s
redesignation request SIP revision for the maintenance plan and the
rationales for EPA’s proposed actions are explained in the NPR and
will not be restated here.  On May 14, 2007, EPA received a comment,
from Dominion Resources Services, Inc., in support of its April 12, 2007
NPR.  Also, On May 11, 2007, EPA received adverse comments on the said
April 12, 2007 NPR.  A summary of the comments submitted and EPA’s
responses are provided in Section II of this document.

II.  Summary of Public Comments and EPA Responses

Comment:  The commenter states that Dominion Resources Services, Inc.
supports EPA’s redesignation proposal for the Richmond-Petersburg Area
and urges EPA to move forward with a final redesignation rulemaking.

Response:  EPA acknowledges the comment of support for our final action.

Comment:  We received comments that claimed Virginia had not fulfilled
all applicable Part D requirements under the 8-hour NAAQS.
Specifically, the comments claimed that because the Richmond area was
initially designated as a moderate nonattainment area Virginia was
required to have provisions in the SIP for the following three control
technique guidelines (CTGs):  (1) Reactor Processes and Distillation
Processes (notice of release: 58 FR 60197, November 15, 1993); (2) Wood
Furniture manufacturing Operations (notice of release: 61 FR 25223, May
20, 1996); and, (3) Shipbuilding and Ship repair Surface Coating
Operations (notice of release: 61 FR 44050, August 27, 1996).

Response:  EPA disagrees with the comment.  While the Richmond area was
initially classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the
8-hour ozone NAAQS in an April 30, 2004 final rule (69 FR 23858), the
area was reclassified as marginal by a September 22, 2004 final rule (69
FR 56697) pursuant to the authority of section 181(a)(4) of the CAA.
Under section 181(a)(4), an ozone nonattainment area may be reclassified
“if an area classified under paragraph (1) (Table 1) would have been
classified in another category if the design value in the area were 5
percent greater or 5 percent less than the level on which such
classification was based.”  See 69 FR at 56700, September 22, 2004.

Under subpart 2 to Part D, the classification of an ozone nonattainment
area has three main consequences:  first, certain control programs,
required SIP submissions and other requirements are mandated by section
182; second, the area receives a statutorily mandated attainment date
pursuant to section 181; and, last, in the case of marginal areas,
certain requirements under section 172(c), such as an attainment
demonstration or contingency measures, are not applicable.   In
addition, with respect to Reasonably Available Control Technology
(RACT), section 182(a)(2)(A), which sets forth the specifics of the
applicable Part D requirements for marginal areas, only requires states
correct certain deficiencies in their RACT SIP which were required prior
to enactment of the 1990 Amendments to the CAA on November 15, 1990.
With respect to CTG RACT requirements, section 182(a)(2)(A) required
correction of deficiencies in rules to implement CTGs issued before
November 15, 1990.  In contrast, for moderate areas section 182(b)(2) of
the CAA requires among other things implementation of RACT for any
existing sources covered by any CTG issued by EPA after November 15,
1990 until the date of attainment.  The CTGs specified in the comment
were all issued after November 15, 1990 and therefore not subject to
section 182(a)(2)(A).

Comment:  We received comments that claimed Virginia had not fulfilled
all applicable Part D requirements under the 1-hour NAAQS.
Specifically, the comments claimed that because the Richmond area was
designated as a moderate nonattainment area Virginia was required to
have provisions in the SIP for the following three control technique
guidelines (CTGs):  (1) Reactor Processes and Distillation Processes
(notice of release: 58 FR 60197, November 15, 1993); (2) Wood Furniture
manufacturing Operations (notice of release: 61 FR 25223, May 20, 1996);
and, (3) Shipbuilding and Ship repair Surface Coating Operations (notice
of release: 61 FR 44050, August 27, 1996).

Response:  EPA redesignated the Richmond nonattainment area from
nonattainment for attainment for the 1-hour NAAQS on November 17, 1997.
In that action, EPA made a final determination that the area had
fulfilled all applicable Part D requirements.  We have not re-opened
that issue in the context of this rulemaking.

Comment:  The commenter states that the April 12, 2007 Federal Register
states that EPA “… notified Virginia that it was required to
implement the contingency measures contained in the SIP approved
maintenance plan” (referring to the 1-hour ozone plan).   The
commenter states that there were violations of the 1-hour ozone standard
in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004.  The commenter requests
clarification whether contingency measures for the 1-hour ozone
violations were implemented.

Response:  EPA asserts that implementation of previous contingency
measures for the 1-hour ozone standard is irrelevant to the approval of
the 8-hour ozone redesignation request.  The Richmond Area is currently
in attainment with the 8-hour ozone standard.   The redesignation of the
Richmond Area for the 1-hour ozone standard (62 FR 61237, November 17,
1997) addressed the 1-hour ozone requirements adequate for redesignation
of the 1-hour ozone standard.  The status of contingency measures for
the 1-hour maintenance plan is not an applicable Part D requirement for
implementation of or redesignation for the 8-hour ozone standard and
therefore is not relevant to this action.

However, in response to the request for clarification, several
inaccuracies in the comment are of note.  First, the commenter
incorrectly references the April 12, 2007 Federal Register.  The
statement quoted is not found in the April 12, 2007 Federal Register
notice of proposed rulemaking, nor in any of the supporting documents
associated with the proposed 8-hour ozone redesignation request for the
Richmond Area.  The statement is actually found in an unrelated proposed
rule dated October 7, 2002, pertaining to revisions to the 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan.   This proposed rule was not finalized.  Second, the
commenter incorrectly reports the violations of the 1-hour standard.
There were violations of the 1-hour NAAQS only in the years 1998, 1999
and 2002.

Regarding the implementation of contingency measures for these 1-hour
ozone violations, in response to the 1998 and 1999 violations, open
burning restrictions were implemented by a state regulation as a
contingency measure in 2000.  Also, the Commonwealth implemented
additional control measures, including the NOx SIP Call, after the 2002
1-hour ozone violation.

Comment:  The commenter states that the Henrico County Monitor measured
exceedances of the 8-hour ozone standard during the 2005 and 2006 ozone
season and that EPA should either delay final approval of the
redesignation request until the end of the 2007 ozone season to
determine if this monitor shows a violation of the 8-hour ozone
standard, or EPA should conduct an evaluation on whether this monitor is
projected to have no more than three exceedances during 2007.

Response:  EPA acknowledges that preliminary 2006 air quality data
indicates a fourth high value of 0.086 parts per million (ppm) at the
Henrico County monitor.  However, in accordance with Appendix I to 40
CFR Part 50, compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS is met at an ambient
air monitoring site when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm; it is not based on the number of days which exceed the
8-hour ozone standard.  40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I.  The preliminary
four highest 8-hour ozone monitoring values at the Henrico County,
Virginia monitor (one of the monitors located in the Richmond Area) for
2006 were 0.097 ppm, 0.096 ppm, 0.086 ppm, and 0.086 ppm.  The design
value at the Henrico County monitor for monitoring years 2003-2005 shows
attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS with a design value of 0.080 ppm.  In
addition, preliminary 2004-2006 air quality data indicate that the
Henrico County monitor continues to show attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS
with a design value of 0.081 ppm.  Thus exceedances at this monitor did
not prevent the area from reaching and continuing to show attainment of
the 8-hour standard.  Preliminary data from other monitors in the area
also showed attainment. See Table 1 below for preliminary 2006 air
quality monitoring data.

Table 1: Richmond Monitors, Preliminary Fourth Highest 8-Hour Ozone
Concentrations, parts per million (ppm)

Monitor	AQS ID #	2006

Chesterfield County 	510410004	0.077

Henrico County 	510870014	0.086

Hanover County 	510850003	0.082

Charles City County 	510360002	0.081

The Chesterfield County monitor would have an 8-hour design value for
2004-2006 of 0.076 ppm.  The Henrico County monitor would have an 8-hour
design value for 2004-2006 of 0.081 ppm.  The Hanover County monitor
would have an 8-hour design value for 2004-2006 of 0.081.  The Charles
City County monitor would have an 8-hour design value for 2004-2006 of
0.080.  These preliminary data and design values show that the
site-specific ozone design values (average fourth-high daily maximum
8-hour ozone concentrations over the period of 2004-2006) for all
monitoring sites in the Richmond Area are below 0.084 ppm.  Therefore,
the EPA believes that the Richmond Area continues to attain the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.

With regard to delaying approval of the Richmond Area redesignation
request and conducting an evaluation of the monitor, EPA may redesignate
an Area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if three years of
quality assured data indicate that the Area has attained the standard.
The most recent quality-assured air quality data indicates that the Area
is attaining the standard and preliminary data for 2006 show that the
Area is still attaining the standard at the time of the redesignation.
EPA has determined that the Richmond Area has attained the 8-hour
standard and has met all of the applicable requirements for
redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act. The
Commonwealth’s maintenance plan demonstrates that the Area is
projected to maintain the standard.  Consistent with the requirements of
section 175A and 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, the Commonwealth has submitted
a maintenance plan for the Richmond Area for the 8-hour ozone standard
which shows continued maintenance and continuing reductions in NOx and
VOC emissions through 2018 further decreasing peak ozone levels and
maintaining ozone attainment.  Furthermore, as demonstrated by the
contingency measure provisions required by section 175A(d), the CAA
clearly anticipates and provides for situations where an area might
monitor a violation of the NAAQS after having been redesignated to
attainment.  The Commonwealth has included contingency measure
provisions consistent with CAA requirements in its maintenance plan to
address any possible future violation of the NAAQS.

EPA believes that the contingency measures, which are a component of the
maintenance plan, set forth the steps that the Commonwealth will
undertake to preserve attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard if air
quality indicators show that the air quality of the Richmond Area has
declined to the point when contingency measures to reverse that
deterioration of air quality should begin being implemented.  Thus, for
all the above reasons, EPA sees no reason to delay approval of the
Commonwealth’s redesignation request

III.  Final Action

EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Virginia’s redesignation request,
maintenance plan, and 2002 base year emissions inventory because the
requirements for approval have been satisfied.  EPA has evaluated
Virginia’s redesignation request, submitted on September 20, 2006, and
determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.  EPA believes that the redesignation request
and monitoring data demonstrate that the Richmond Area has attained the
8-hour ozone standard.  The final approval of this redesignation request
will change the designation of the Richmond Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  EPA is approving the
associated maintenance plan for the Richmond Area, submitted on
September 25, 2006, as a revision to the Virginia SIP.  EPA is approving
the 8-hour maintenance plan for the Richmond Area because it meets the
requirements of section 175A.  EPA is not taking final action in this
rulemaking on the Commonwealth’s request that the 8-hour maintenance
plan supersede the previous 1-hour maintenance plan.  EPA is approving
the MVEBs submitted by Virginia in conjunction with its redesignation
request.  EPA is also approving the 2002 base year emissions inventory,
submitted on September 18, 2006 and supplemented by VADEQ on November
17, 2006 and February 13, 2007, as a revision to the Virginia SIP.  In
this final rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public that we have found
that the MVEBs for NOx and VOCs in the Richmond Area for the 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan are adequate and approved for conformity
purposes.  As a result of our finding, the Cities of Petersburg,
Colonial Heights, Hopewell, and Richmond, and the Counties of Prince
George, Chesterfield, Hanover, Henrico, and Charles City, Virginia must
use the MVEBs from the submitted 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for
future conformity determinations.  The adequate and approved MVEBs are
provided in the following table:

Adequate and Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) in Tons
Per Day (TPD)

Budget Year	NOx	VOC

2011	43.661	32.343

2018	26.827	23.845

Richmond is subject to the CAA’s requirements for marginal ozone
nonattainment areas until and unless it is redesignated to attainment.

IV.  Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A.  General Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this final
action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
"Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use"  (66 Fed. Reg. 28355 (May 22, 2001)).  This action
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the
Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements on small entities.
Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and
does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).  This final rule also does not
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it affects the status of a
geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or
allow the state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements,
and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.  This final rule also
is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.  In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS.  It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act.  Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new requirements on sources.  Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of
1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.  As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this
final rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct.  EPA has complied with Executive
Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings
implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General’s
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order.

B.  Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States.  EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.  This rule is not a
“major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C.  Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial
review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [insert date 60 days from date of
publication of this document in the Federal Register].  Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action.

This action, to approve the redesignation request, maintenance plan,
adequacy determination for MVEBs, and the 2002 base year emissions
inventory for the Richmond Area, may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.  (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxides, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas

          /s/

__________				                        ___________________________

Dated: 	 May 25, 2007				   	Donald S. Welsh,

							Regional Administrator,

							Region III.

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52 - [AMENDED]

1.  The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart VV– Virginia

2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry for the 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, Richmond-Petersburg, VA
Area at the end of the table to read as follows:

§ 52.2420  		Identification of plan.

*		*		*		*		*

(e)***

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision	Applicable geographic area	State
submittal date	EPA approval date	Additional

explanation

*                    *                      *                   *
           *                 *                    *

8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory
Richmond-Petersburg, VA Area  	9/18/06; 9/20/06; 9/25/06; 11/17/06;
2/13/07	[Insert Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number
where the document begins]

PART 81 - [AMENDED]

	3.  The authority citation for Part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

	4.  In § 81.347 the table entitled "Virginia - Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)" is amended by revising the entry for the Richmond-Petersburg,
VA Area to read as follows:

§ 81.347              Virginia

*          *          *          *          *

		Virginia - Ozone (8-Hour Standard)

Designated Area	Designationa	Category/Classification

	Date1	Type	Date1	Type

*          *          *         *         *          *          *

Richmond-Petersburg, VA Area

Charles City County	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]
Attainment

Chesterfield County	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]
Attainment

Colonial Heights City	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]
Attainment

Hanover County	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]	Attainment

Henrico County	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]	Attainment

Hopewell City	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]	Attainment

Petersburg City	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]
Attainment

Prince George County 	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]
Attainment

Richmond City	[Insert date 15 days from date of publication]	Attainment

*          *          *         *         *          *          *

aIncludes Indian country located in each county or area except otherwise
noted.

1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

*          *          *         *         *

 It should be noted that the Hanover County Monitor was the design value
monitor during monitoring years 2003-2005 having a design value of 0.082
ppm.

 Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, allows for redesignation, providing
that: (1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS; (2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k); (3) EPA determines that the improvement
in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in
emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and
applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions; (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance
plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A; and (5)
The State containing such area has met all requirements applicable to
the area under section 110 and Part D.

  PAGE   15


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 45 (Monday, March 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12470-12471]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05390]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER15-1080-000]

Beethoven Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Beethoven Wind, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application
includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of
future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to

intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is March 23, 2015.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also 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 email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 3, 2015.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-05390 Filed 3-6-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P