[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 220 (Friday, November 13, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72558-72560]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25106]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0213; Project Identifier 2019-NE-03-AD; Amendment
39-21324; AD 2020-23-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Rolls-Royce plc) Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (RRD) Tay 611-8C model
turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by reports of low-pressure
compressor (LPC) rotor blade retention lug failure. This AD requires
limiting the service life of the LPC rotor blades based on the number
of dry-film lubricant (DFL) re-applications. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective December 18, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 18,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, Dahlewitz,
Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany; phone: +49 0 33-7086-4040; fax: +49 0 33-
7086-51-4040; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view this
service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(781) 238-7759. It is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No.FAA-2019-0213.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0213; 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 address for Docket Operations is
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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Caufield, Aviation Safety
Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain RRD Tay 611-8C
model turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
May 6, 2019 (84 FR 19745). The NPRM was prompted by reports of LPC
rotor blade retention lug failures. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to
require a determination of the number of DFL re-applications that have
been applied to the LPC rotor blades and, depending on the number of
DFL re-applications, replacement of LPC rotor blades. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD 2018-0055, dated March 12, 2018 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to address the unsafe condition on these products. The MCAI
states:

    The airworthiness limitations for the Tay 611-8C engines, which
are approved by EASA, are currently defined and published in the
ALS. Among others, the ALS contains limitation(s) applicable to the
maximum number of Dry Film Lubrication (DFL) treatments applied on
fan blade retention lugs. These instructions have been identified as
mandatory for continued airworthiness. Failure to accomplish these
instructions could result in an unsafe condition.
    In addition to the ALS, RRD issued the NMSB to provide
alternative methods to establish, in case this cannot be determined
from the engine maintenance records, the number of DFL treatments
that have been applied to an engine.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2019-0213.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Modify Applicability

    NetJets Aviation (NJA) requested that engines which have
incorporated the 12,000 cycle life limit on LPC rotor blade, part
number JR58319, per the Airworthiness Limitations section 05-10-01-870-
002, chapter 05-10-01, Rolls-Royce (RR) Tay Propulsion System Time
Limits Manual, be excluded from the applicability of this AD.
    The FAA disagrees because the low cycle fatigue life limit of
12,000 cycles for the LPC rotor blade is a separate requirement from
the requirement of this AD to also limit the number of dry film
lubricant re-applications.

Comment Regarding DFL Re-application Limit

    NJA noted that dry film re-application is only accomplished in an
engine overhaul shop, and the 12 DFL-application limit every 1,300
cycles will not be exceeded if the life limit is being tracked. The FAA
disagrees. The FAA notes that there are tasks in the Aircraft
Maintenance Manual (AMM) for DFL re-applications that are not limited
to shop visits. Therefore, this AD is necessary to address those cases
in which the AMM DFL re-application tasks are necessary and the engine
is not in the shop. This AD requires that when a complete

record of the total number of DFL re-applications is unavailable, count
one DFL re-application for every 1,300 flight cycles of blade use.

Request to Add Engine Serial Numbers

    NJA requested that the serial numbers for the 12 affected engines
be included in this AD.
    The FAA disagrees. The applicability of this AD is to RRD Tay 611-
8C model turbofan engines, with LPC rotor blades, P/N JR58319,
installed, and is not based on serial numbers of the engines. The
number ``12'' in the Costs of Compliance section is an estimate of the
number of affected engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed except for minor editorial
changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed RRD Non-Modification Service Bulletin TAY-72-1835,
Initial Issue, dated December 15, 2017. The service information
describes procedures for marking the LPC rotor blades with a suffix
code during the next scheduled LPC fan blade removal. 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 ADDRESSES.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 12 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Record Search to establish number of  1.5 work-hours x $85                 $0          $127.50           $1,530
 DFL re-applications.                  per hour = $127.50.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of aircraft
that might need these replacements.

                                               On-condition costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                        Labor cost               Parts cost            Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace LPC rotor blade..............  2 work-hours x $85 per   $11,270................  $11,440
                                        hour = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2020-23-08 Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Rolls-Royce plc): Amendment 39-21324; Docket No.
FAA-2019-0213; Project Identifier 2019-NE-03-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective December 18,
2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (RRD) Tay
611-8C model turbofan engines, with low-pressure compressor (LPC)
rotor blades, part number (P/N) JR58319, installed.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code, 7230 Turbine Engine
Compressor Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of LPC rotor blade retention lug
failures. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of the LPC
rotor blade. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
loss of engine power in flight and reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
determine the number of dry film lubrication (DFL) re-applications
that were applied to each LPC rotor blade by reviewing the
maintenance records. If a complete record of the total number of DFL
re-applications is unavailable, count one DFL re-application for
every 1,300 flight cycles of blade use.
    (i) If the number of DFL re-applications is less than 13, mark
the LPC rotor blade with a suffix code during the next scheduled LPC
fan blade removal using the instructions in the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 3.B.(1)(c)[2] or 3.F.(1)(c)[2], as
applicable, of RRD Non-Modification Service Bulletin TAY-72-1835,
Initial Issue, dated December 15, 2017.
    (ii) If the number of DFL re-applications is 13 or more, replace
the LPC rotor blade with a part eligible for installation before
further flight.
    (2) [Reserved]

(h) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install a LPC rotor
blade on any engine unless it has been determined that the LPC rotor
blade has less than 13 DFL re-applications and has been marked in
accordance with paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO 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 local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
ECO Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. You may email your request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Barbara
Caufield, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (781) 238-
7199; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2018-0055, dated March 12, 2018, for more information. You may
examine the EASA AD in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2019-0213.

(k) 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.
    (i) Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (RRD) Non-Modification
Service Bulletin TAY-72-1835, Initial Issue, dated December 15,
2017.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For RRD service information identified in this AD, contact
Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, Dahlewitz,
Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany; phone: +49 0 33-7086-4040; fax: +49 0
33-7086-51-4040; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) 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, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on November 3, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-25106 Filed 11-12-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30296-30297]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13650]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. FAA-2019-32]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Aero-Flite
FireFighting Academy

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's

awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process.
Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of
information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of
the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before July 16, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2019-0415
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

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

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 20, 2019.
Brandon Roberts,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2019-0415.
    Petitioner: Aero-Flite FireFighting Academy.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  60.4 and 60.15.
    Description of Relief Sought: Sections 60.4 and 60.15 prescribe, in
pertinent part, that the evaluation of a Flight Simulation Training
Device (FSTD) for initial qualification must be in accordance with the
FSTD standard that is in effect at the time of the evaluation. The
standard currently in effect for the initial qualification of Aero-
Flite's BAE-146 FSTD is 14 CFR part 60, Appendix A. Aero-Flite proposes
to use FSTD requirements from Transport Canada's TP9685E (rev 2)
document in lieu of the current 14 CFR part 60, Appendix A.

[FR Doc. 2019-13650 Filed 6-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 70)]
[Notices]
[Page 19535-19537]
[DOCID:fr10ap08-99]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57610; File No. SR-CBOE-2008-14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Establish a
Solicitation Auction Mechanism and To Amend Its Automated Improvement
Mechanism

April 3, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On February 7, 2008, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposal to establish a new automated mechanism for
auctioning larger-sized orders and to modify its existing automated
improvement mechanism (``AIM'') to permit its use for the execution of
complex orders. The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on February 28, 2008.\3\ The Commission received
no comments regarding the proposed rule change. This order approves the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57357 (February 20,
2008), 73 FR 10837.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Under CBOE Rules 6.45A, Priority and Allocation of Equity Option
Trades on the CBOE Hybrid System, and 6.45B, Priority and Allocation of
Trades in Index Options and Options on ETFs on the CBOE Hybrid System,
order entry

firms that electronically enter orders are required to expose an
unsolicited agency order (``Agency Order'') for at least 3 seconds
before crossing it against an order that it has solicited from other
broker-dealers.\4\ Currently, an order entry firm can comply with this
requirement by entering the Agency Order on the Exchange, waiting 3
seconds, and then entering the solicited order. According to the
Exchange, because of the 3-second exposure requirement, order entry
firms have no level of assurance that they will be able to
electronically pair solicited orders against Agency Orders for
executions. As an alternative, CBOE has developed AIM, which permits an
Agency Order to be electronically executed against principal or
solicited interest.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See CBOE Rule 6.45A.02 and 6.45B.02.
    \5\ See CBOE Rule 6.74A, Automated Improvement Mechanism
(``AIM'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE has also developed an enhanced auction mechanism for larger-
sized simple and complex Agency Orders that are to be executed against
solicited orders (the ``Auction''). The proposal would implement this
functionality in options classes designated by the Exchange. Such
orders would be required to be for at least 500 contracts, must be
entered as all-or-none limit (``AON'') orders,\6\ and would be executed
only if the price is at or better than the CBOE best bid or offer
(``BBO'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange's existing rules provide that an AON order may
be crossed with another AON order if all bids or offers at the same
price at which the cross is to be effected have been filled. See,
e.g., Interpretation and Policy .01 to CBOE Rule 6.44, Bids and
Offers in Relation to Units of Trading. The proposed Auction system
is modeled after this principle, except that it would allow the
crossing of large-sized AON orders to take place so long as there
are no public customer orders at the proposed price and there is
insufficient size at an improved price to accommodate the Agency
Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When a proposed solicited cross is entered into the Auction, the
Exchange would send a Request for Responses (``RFR'') message to all
members that have elected to receive such messages. Members would then
have 3 seconds to respond with a price that would improve the proposed
execution price for the Agency Order, except that responses would not
be entered for the account of an options market maker from another
options exchange. Responses may be entered and executed at prices that
are in a multiple of the applicable minimum price increment that has
been designated by the Exchange for the series, which increment may not
be less than $0.01. The Exchange believes this would allow for greater
flexibility in pricing large-sized orders and provide for a greater
opportunity for price improvement.
    The Auction will conclude at the sooner of various conditions.\7\
At the conclusion of the Auction, the Agency Order would be executed
against the solicited order unless there is sufficient size to execute
the entire Agency Order at a price (or prices) that improves the
proposed crossing price. In the case where there is one or more public
customer orders resting in the book at the proposed execution price on
the opposite side of the Agency Order, the solicited order would be
cancelled and the Agency Order would be executed against other bids
(offers) if there is sufficient size at the bid (offer) to execute the
entire size of the Agency Order (size would be measured considering
resting orders and quotes and responses).\8\ If there is not sufficient
size to execute the entire Agency Order, the proposed cross would not
be executed and both the Agency Order and solicited order would be
cancelled. Additionally, the proposed cross would not be executed and
both the Agency Order and solicited order would be cancelled if the
execution price would be inferior to the BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Auction shall conclude at the sooner of: (i) The end of
the response period, (ii) upon receipt by the Hybrid Trading System
(``Hybrid'') of an unrelated order (in the same series as the Agency
Order) that is marketable against either the Exchange's disseminated
quote (when such quote is the NBBO) or the responses, (iii) upon
receipt by Hybrid of an unrelated limit order (in the same series as
the Agency Order and on the opposite side of the market as the
Agency Order) that improves any response, (iv) any time a response
matches the Exchange's disseminated quote on the opposite side of
the market from the responses, or (v) any time there is a quote lock
on the Exchange pursuant to CBOE Rule 6.45A(d) or 6.45B(d). See
paragraph (b)(2) of proposed CBOE Rule 6.74B, Solicitation Auction
Mechanism.
    \8\ When the Agency Order is executed at an improved price(s) or
at the proposed execution price against electronic orders, quotes
and responses, priority would be pursuant to the allocation
algorithm in effect pursuant to CBOE Rule 6.45A or 6.45B, as
applicable. The allocation for simple and complex orders would be
the same, except that complex orders would also be subject to the
complex order priority rules applicable to bids and offers in the
individual series legs of a complex order contained in paragraphs
(d) or .06 of CBOE Rule 6.53C, Complex Orders on the Hybrid System,
as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule would also require members to deliver to
customers a written document, in a form approved by the Exchange,
describing the terms and conditions of the Auction mechanism prior to
executing Agency Orders using the Auction mechanism.
    The proposed rule would also specify that members may not use the
Auction mechanism to circumvent the Exchange's rules limiting principal
order transactions.\9\ Additionally, the Exchange notes that for
purposes of paragraph (e) to CBOE Rule 6.9, Solicited Transactions,
which paragraph prohibits anticipatory hedging activities prior to the
entry of an order on the Exchange, the terms of an order would be
considered ``disclosed'' to the trading crowd on the Exchange when the
order is entered into the Auction mechanism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See CBOE Rules 6.45A.01, 6.45B.01, 6.74, Crossing Orders,
and 6.74A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange is proposing to expand its existing AIM
auction, which currently only applies to simple orders, to cover
complex orders. Accordingly, complex orders would be eligible for
execution through AIM at a net debit or net credit price provided the
Auction eligibility requirements of the AIM rule are satisfied and the
Agency Order is eligible for AIM considering its complex order type,
order origin code (i.e., non-broker-dealer public customer, broker-
dealers that are not Market-Makers or specialists on an options
exchange, and/or Market-Makers or specialists on an options exchange),
class, and marketability as determined by the Exchange. Allocation of
complex orders that are subject to AIM will be the same as the existing
allocation procedures, provided that the complex order priority rules
applicable to bids and offers in the individual series legs of a
complex order contained in CBOE Rule 6.53C(d) or 6.53C.06, as
applicable, will continue to apply. In addition, the Exchange is
proposing to provide in its rules that it may determine on a class-by-
class basis that orders of 500 or more contracts may be executed
through AIM without considering prices that might be available on other
options exchanges. All other aspects of the AIM auction will continue
to apply unchanged.

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\10\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market

and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest. The Commission believes that the proposal should
allow for greater flexibility in pricing large-sized orders and may
provide a greater opportunity for price improvement. The Commission
also notes that the proposal is substantially similar to requirements
set forth in the rules of another exchange.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \12\ See paragraphs (d) and (e) of ISE Rule 716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2008-14), be, and
hereby is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-7505 Filed 4-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 240 (Friday, December 13, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68294-68295]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26896]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-RSPA-2005-20323; Docket No. PHMSA-2008-0141]

Pipeline Safety: Request for Special Permit; Northern Natural Gas
Company

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this notice to solicit public comments on
two (2) requests received from the Northern Natural Gas Company to
renew previously issued special permits. These special permit renewal
requests seek relief from compliance from certain requirements in the
Federal pipeline safety regulations. At the conclusion of the 30-day
comment period, PHMSA will review the comments received from this
notice as part of its evaluation to grant or deny the special permit
renewal requests.

DATES: Submit any comments regarding these special permit renewal
requests by January 13, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference the docket number for the specific
special permit renewal request and may be submitted in the following
ways:
     E-Gov website: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System: 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: Docket Management System: 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
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: You should identify the docket number for the special
permit renewal request you are commenting on at the beginning of your
comments. If you submit your comments by mail, please submit two (2)
copies. To receive confirmation that PHMSA has received your comments,
please include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may
submit comments at http://www.Regulations.gov.
    Note: There is a privacy statement published on http://www.Regulations.gov. Comments, including any personal information
provided, are posted without changes or edits to http://www.Regulations.gov.
    Confidential Business Information: 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 notice 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 notice, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Pursuant to 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Sec.  190.343, you may ask PHMSA to give confidential
treatment to information you give to the agency by taking the following
steps: (1) Mark each page of the original document submission
containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along with the
original document, a second copy of the original document with the CBI
deleted; and (3) explain why the information you are submitting is CBI.
Unless you are notified otherwise, PHMSA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this notice. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to Kay McIver, DOT, PHMSA PHP-80, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Any commentary PHMSA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this matter.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General: Ms. Kay McIver by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Technical: Mr. Steve Nanney by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA has received the following two (2)
special permit renewal requests:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Docket No.                 Requester            Regulation(s)             Nature of special permit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA-RSPA-2005-20323...........  Northern Natural  49 CFR 192.625(b)(1).......  To reauthorize Northern Natural
                                   Gas Company                                    to continue its operation of
                                   (Northern                                      special permit segment 2 as
                                   Natural).                                      defined in the original
                                                                                special permit issued on April
                                                                                10, 2010, and renewed on April
                                                                                7, 2015, for the non-
                                                                                odorization of a pipeline
                                                                                lateral. Special permit
                                                                                segment 1 is not being
                                                                                requested for permit renewal
                                                                                as this pipeline was abandoned
                                                                                and relocated.
                                                                                The special permit renewal
                                                                                request seeks to continue
                                                                                waiving compliance from 49 CFR
                                                                                192.625(b)(1) for the
                                                                                exclusion from installing and
                                                                                operating odorization
                                                                                equipment on special permit
                                                                                segment 2 defined as 0.369
                                                                                miles of 4\1/2\-inch diameter
                                                                                La Crescent Branch Line (MNB
                                                                                73701) located in Houston
                                                                                County, Minnesota. The special
                                                                                permit conditions that were
                                                                                imposed would continue to
                                                                                remain in effect.
                                                                                This special permit segment has
                                                                                a maximum allowable operating
                                                                                pressure (MAOP) of 800 pounds
                                                                                per square inch gauge (psig).

PHMSA-2008-0141.................  Northern Natural  49 CFR 192.625(b)(1).......  To reauthorize Northern Natural
                                   Gas Company                                    to continue its operation as
                                   (Northern                                      defined in the original
                                   Natural).                                      special permit issued on April
                                                                                10, 2010, and renewed on April
                                                                                7, 2015, for the non-
                                                                                odorization of a pipeline
                                                                                lateral.
                                                                                The special permit renewal
                                                                                request seeks to waive
                                                                                compliance from 49 CFR
                                                                                192.625(b)(1) for the
                                                                                exclusion from installing and
                                                                                operating odorization
                                                                                equipment on a 2.031-mile
                                                                                segment of the 14-inch
                                                                                diameter Sioux Falls Pipeline
                                                                                located in Lincoln County,
                                                                                South Dakota.
                                                                                The special permit conditions
                                                                                that were imposed would
                                                                                continue to remain in effect.
                                                                                This special permit segment has
                                                                                a MAOP of 446 psig.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Northern Natural Gas Company requests for special permit
renewals and the existing special permits are available for review and
public comment in the respective dockets. We invite interested persons
to review and submit comments on the special permit renewal requests in
the dockets. Please include any comments on potential safety and
environmental impacts that may result if the renewals of the special
permits are granted.
    Before issuing a decision on the special permit renewal requests,
PHMSA will evaluate all comments received on or before the comment
closing date. Comments received after the closing date will be
evaluated, if it is possible to do so without incurring additional
expense or delay. PHMSA will consider each relevant comment we receive
in making our decision to grant or deny these requests.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 10, 2019, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2019-26896 Filed 12-12-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: July 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 133)]
[Notices]
[Page 39313-39315]
[DOCID:fr12jy06-64]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0520; FRL-8074-9]

Prothioconazole; Notice of Filing of a Pesticide Petition for
Establishment to Regulations for Residues in or on Soybean Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the establishment of regulations for the combined
residues of prothioconazole and its desthio metabolite in or on soybean
commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 11, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0520 and pesticide petition number PP
6F7073, by one of the following methods:
    - Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    - Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
    - Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S.

Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is
(703) 305-5805.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0520. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation
of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lana Coppolino, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    -You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
    - Crop production (NAICS code 111).
    - Animal production (NAICS code 112).
    - Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
    - Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    -This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    -i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    -ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    -iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    -iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    -v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    -vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    -vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use
of profanity or personal threats.
    -viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    -EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations in
40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
food commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition
contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA
section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting
of the pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA
rules on this pesticide petition.
    -Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov. To locate this information on the home page

of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the OPP
docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking on
the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents in the docket
for the pesticide including the petition summary.

New Tolerance

    PP 6F7073. Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W.Alexander Drive; Research
Triangle

Park, NC 27709, proposes to establish a tolerance for the combined
residues of the fungicide prothioconazole and its desthio metabolite in
or on food commodities soybean, seed at 0.15 parts per million (ppm),
soybean, forage at 5 ppm; soybean, hay at 22 ppm. Bayer CropScience has
submitted an analytical method for determining residues of concern in
plants extracts residues of prothioconazole and JAU6476-desthio and
converts the prothioconazole to JAU6476-desthio and JAU6476-sulfonic
acid. Following addition of internal standards the sample extracts are
analyzed by Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry
(LC/MS/MS). Radiovalidation and independent laboratory validation have
shown that the method adequately quantifies prothioconazole residues in
treated commodities. The analytical method for analysis of large animal
tissues includes extraction of the residues of concern, followed by
addition of an internal standard to the extract. The extract is then
hydrolyzed to release conjugates, partitioned and analyzed by LC/MS/MS
as prothioconazole, JAU6476-desthio and JAU6476-4-hydroxy. The method
for analysis of milk eliminated the initial extraction step in the
tissue method.] This method is use to measure and evaluate the chemical
residue(s).

List of Subjects

    -Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed
additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 28, 2006.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. E6-10862 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 26, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-14318

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   FREEDOM AIRLINES, INC.,    filed   1/21/03,  for:

XX Exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point Phoenix, Arizona, and the terminal point
Guadalajara, Mexico.

Applicant rep: Brian S. Gillman<PHONE_NUMBER> DOT Analyst: Linda L.
Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The authority granted was effective when taken: _February 25, 2003,
through _February 25, 2005.

Action taken by: 	 Paul L. Gretch

			Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated: 	XX  Holder’s
certificate of public convenience and necessity

			XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

________________________________________________________________________
________

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.  Consistent with our standard practice, the dormancy
notice period will begin on May 1, 2003, Freedom Airlines’ proposed
startup date for services in the Phoenix-Guadalajara market.

________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

APPENDIX

U.S. CARRIER

Standard Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of operations authorized by the attached notice, the
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations and with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

										10/2002

 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, inform
its Principal Security Inspector of its plans.


[Federal Register: February 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 25)]
[Notices]
[Page 6406]
[DOCID:fr09fe09-33]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-75-001]

Pioneer Transmission, LLC; Notice of Filing

February 2, 2009.
    Take notice that on January 26, 2009, Pioneer Transmission, LLC
submitted a Study Report pursuant to their Formula Rate and Incentive
Rate Filing submitted on October 15, 2008, in response to the
Commission's December 11, 2008 letter.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online 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>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on February 13, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-2605 Filed 2-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70334-70335]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29229]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1159; Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-34-AD;
Amendment 39-16864; AD 2011-23-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. Turboshaft
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Honeywell International Inc. LTS101-600A-2, -3, -3A, and LTS101-700D-2
turboshaft engines with certain power turbine governors (PTG) model AL-
AB1, installed, that are marked with compliance symbol N or P, or with
no compliance symbol, on the PTG identification plate. This AD requires
initial and repetitive replacements of the affected PTGs. This AD was
prompted by reports of two accidents where the engines suddenly lost
power and the helicopters had to make emergency autorotation landings,
leading to substantial damage to the helicopters. We are issuing this
AD to prevent loss of engine power, leading to emergency autorotation
landing and damage to the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective November 29, 2011.
    We must receive comments on this AD by December 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: 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.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Baitoo, Aerospace Engineer, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd.,
Lakewood, CA 90712; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We received reports of two accidents where the engines suddenly
lost power and the helicopters had to make emergency autorotation
landings. Investigation revealed that PTG spool bearings, part number
(P/N) 2523973 Revision N and P/N 2523973 Revision P, could fail
prematurely. PTGs with these affected spool bearings require repetitive
replacements before the spool bearings wear out prematurely. This
condition, if not corrected, could result in sudden engine power loss,
the helicopter making an emergency autorotation landing, and
substantial damage to the helicopter.

FAA's Determination

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

AD Requirements

    This AD requires initial and repetitive replacements of PTGs model
AL-AB1, P/N 4-301-289-03, 4-301-289-05, 4-301-289-09, 4-301-101-16, and
4-301-101-18, that are marked with compliance symbol N or P, or with no
compliance symbol, on the PTG identification plate.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD interim action. If final action is later
identified, we might consider further rulemaking then.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because of
the premature failure of the affected PTGs. Therefore, we find that
notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and
that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than
30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2011-1159 and
Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-34-AD at the beginning of your comments.
We

specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this 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 AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 83 Honeywell International
Inc. LTS101-600A-2, -3, -3A, and LTS101-700D-2 turboshaft engines,
installed on helicopters of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
will take about 3 work-hours to replace a PTG on each engine. Required
parts would cost about $3,500 per engine. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of
this AD for one PTG replacement to U.S. operators, to be $311,665.

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

    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,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2011-23-13 Honeywell International Inc.: Amendment 39-16864; Docket
No. FAA-2011-1159; Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-34-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 29, 2011.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Honeywell International Inc. LTS101-600A-2, -
3, -3A, and LTS101-700D-2 turboshaft engines with a power turbine
governor (PTG) model AL-AB1, part number 4-301-289-03, 4-301-289-05,
4-301-289-09, 4-301-101-16, or 4-301-101-18, installed, that is
marked with compliance symbol N or P, or with no compliance symbol,
on the PTG identification plate.

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of two accidents where the
engines suddenly lost power and the helicopters had to make
emergency autorotation landings, leading to substantial damage to
the helicopters. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of engine
power, leading to emergency autorotation landing and damage to the
helicopter.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) PTGs Marked With Compliance Symbol N, or With No Compliance Symbol

    (g) For PTGs that are marked with compliance symbol N, or with
no compliance symbol, on the PTG identification plate:
    (1) If the PTG has more than 150 operating hours time-since-new
(TSN), time-since-overhaul (TSO), or time-since-replacement (TSR),
on the effective date of this AD, replace it with a PTG that is
eligible for installation, within the next 50 operating hours.
    (2) If the PTG has 150 or fewer operating hours TSN, TSO, or
TSR, on the effective date of this AD, replace it with a PTG that is
eligible for installation, before accumulating 200 total operating
hours.
    (3) Thereafter, replace it with a PTG that is eligible for
installation, within every 200 operating hours TSN, TSO, or TSR.

(h) PTGs Marked With Compliance Symbol P

    (i) For PTGs that are marked with compliance symbol P, on the
PTG identification plate:
    (1) Replace it with a PTG that is eligible for installation,
before accumulating 900 operating hours.
    (2) Thereafter, replace it with a PTG that is eligible for
installation within every 900 operating hours TSN, TSO, or TSR.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Robert Baitoo,
Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Honeywell International Inc. Service Bulletin No. LTS101-73-
20-A0268, dated August 23, 2011, also pertains to this AD.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Honeywell International Inc., P.O. Box 52181, Phoenix, AZ 85072-
2181, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Web site: http://portal.honeywell.com/wps/portal/aero.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 4, 2011.
Peter A. White,
Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-29229 Filed 11-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P