[Federal Register: June 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 119)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 35356-35360]
[DOCID:fr22jn10-17]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0552; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-095-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
200B, and 747-200F Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede two existing airworthiness
directives (AD) that apply to certain Model 747-100, 747-200B, and 747-
200F series airplanes. The existing ADs currently require inspections
to detect fatigue-related skin cracks and corrosion of the skin panel
lap joints in the fuselage upper lobe, and repair if necessary. One of
the existing ADs, AD 94-12-09, also requires modification of certain
lap joints and inspection of modified lap joints. The other AD, AD 90-
15-06, requires repetitive detailed external visual inspections of the
fuselage skin at the upper lobe skin lap joints for cracks and evidence
of corrosion, and related investigative and corrective actions. This
proposed AD would reduce the maximum interval of the post-modification
inspections, and adds post-repair inspection requirements for certain
airplanes. This proposed AD results from reports of cracking on
modified airplanes. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct
fatigue cracking and corrosion in the fuselage upper lobe skin lap
joints, which could lead to rapid decompression of the airplane and
inability of the structure to carry fail-safe loads.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 6, 2010.

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 proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
425-227-1152.

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: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
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-2010-0552;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-095-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 July 3, 1990, we issued AD 90-15-06, Amendment 39-6653 (55 FR
28600, July 12, 1990), for certain Boeing Model 747-100, 747-200B, and
747-200F series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive detailed
external visual inspections of the fuselage skin at the upper lobe skin
lap joints for cracks and evidence of corrosion, and related
investigative and corrective actions. We issued that AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking and corrosion in the fuselage skins, which
could lead to rapid decompression of the airplane and inability of the
structure to carry fail-safe loads.
    On June 2, 1994, we issued AD 94-12-09, Amendment 39-8937 (59 FR
30285, June 13, 1994), for certain Boeing Model 747-100, 747-200B, and
747-200F series airplanes. That AD requires inspections to detect
fatigue cracking and corrosion of the skin panel lap joints in the
fuselage upper lobe, and repair if necessary. That AD also requires
modification of certain lap joints and inspections of modified lap
joints. That AD resulted from reports of cracking, corrosion, and
bulging of the skin lap joints on Boeing Model 747-100, 747-200B, and
747-200F series airplanes. We issued that AD to prevent rapid
decompression of the airplane and the inability of the structure to
carry fail-safe loads.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 94-12-09 and AD 90-15-06, Boeing has performed a
fleet-wide evaluation of the skin panel lap joints for widespread
fatigue damage (WFD) and determined that the post-modification
inspection interval of AD 94-12-09 needs to be reduced. In addition,
lap joints where the upper (overlapping) skin thickness at the upper
row of fasteners is 0.071 inch or less need to be further modified to
preclude WFD. WFD of the lap joints can link up and result in large
skin cracks, and possible rapid in-flight decompression of the
airplane.

Related Rulemaking

    We are considering issuing related rulemaking to address the
identified unsafe condition. The related rulemaking would refer to
Revision 1, dated April 16, 2009, of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53A2463, which is related to this unsafe condition. That AD would
require further modification of all the affected lap joints with an
upper skin thickness of 0.071 inch or less. Once the modification in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2463 is accomplished,
the post-modification inspections will be accomplished in accordance
with that rule, not this one.

Relevant Service Information

    AD 90-15-06 refers to Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, dated
December 21, 1989, as the appropriate source of service information for
the required actions specified in that AD. AD 94-12-09 refers to Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993, as
the appropriate source of service information for the required actions
specified in that AD. We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-
2307, Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-
2307, Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009, reduces the maximum post-
modification inspection interval specified in Boeing Service Bulletin
747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993, from 3,000 to 1,000
flight cycles and references a structural modification for lap joints
where the upper (overlapping) skin thickness at the upper row of
fasteners is 0.071 inch or less. In addition, Boeing Service Bulletin
747-53-2307, Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009, specifies a post-repair
internal surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the
skin at any external doubler repairs greater than 40 inches in length
(in the horizontal direction).

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the
same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which
would supersede AD 90-15-06 and AD 94-12-09. This proposed AD does not
retain any requirements of AD 90-15-06. This proposed AD would retain
the inspection requirements of AD 94-12-09 but with reduced maximum
intervals of the post-modification inspections from 3,000 flight cycles
to 1,000 flight cycles. In addition, this proposed AD would require a
post-repair internal surface HFEC inspection of the skin at any
external doubler repairs greater than 40 inches in length (in the
horizontal direction). This proposed AD would also require
accomplishing the actions specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-
2307, Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009, described previously, except as
discussed under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service
Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 3, dated April 16,
2009, specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to
repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing
those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization that we have
authorized to make those findings.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 94-12-09, and
none of the requirements of AD 90-15-06. Since AD 94-12-09 was issued,
the AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have been
rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have
changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Corresponding requirement in
      Requirement in  AD 94-12-09                this proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (a)..........................  paragraph (g).
paragraph (b)..........................  paragraph (h).
paragraph (c)..........................  paragraph (i).
paragraph (d)..........................  paragraph (j).
paragraph (e)..........................  paragraph (k).
paragraph (f)..........................  paragraph (l).
paragraph (g)..........................  paragraph (m).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 23 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                                          Average                                                  U.S.-
                  Action                    Work hours   labor rate     Parts           Cost per airplane        registered           Fleet cost
                                                          per hour                                               airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection (required by AD 94-12-09).....          208          $85           $0  $17,680 per inspection cycle            7  $123,760 per inspection
                                                                                cycle.
Modification (required by AD 94-12-09)...        8,160           85            0  $693,600....................            7  $4,855,200.
Post-Modification Inspection (required by           56           85            0  $4,760 per inspection cycle.            7  $33,320 per inspection
 AD 94-12-09).                                                                                cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-6653 (55 FR
28600, July 12, 1990), and Amendment 39-8937 (59 FR 30285, June 13,
1994), and adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-0552; Directorate Identifier
2009-NM-095-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by August 6,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 90-15-06, Amendment 39-6653; and AD
94-12-09, Amendment 39-8937.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
200B, and 747-200F series airplanes, certificated in any category,
as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 3,
dated April 16, 2009.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53:
Fuselage.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of fatigue cracking. The
Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking and corrosion in the fuselage upper lobe
skin panel lap joints, which could lead to the rapid decompression
of the airplane and the inability to carry fail-safe loads.

Compliance

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

Restatement of Requirements of AD 94-12-09, With Revised Service
Information

Inspection

    (g) Within 1,000 flight cycles after July 13, 1994 (the
effective date of AD 94-12-09), and thereafter at the intervals
specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD,
perform inspections at the upper lobe skin panel lap joints in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2,
dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After
the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be used.
    (1) Perform a detailed external visual inspection to detect
cracks and evidence of corrosion (bulging skin between fasteners,
blistered paint, dished fasteners, popped rivet heads, or loose
fasteners) in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307,
Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16,
2009. After the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be
used. Repeat that inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed
2,000 flight cycles until the modification required by paragraph (k)
of this AD is accomplished.
    (2) Perform a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection to
detect cracks in the skin at the upper row of fasteners of the skin
panel lap joints forward of body station (BS) 1000 in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October
14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After the effective
date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be used. Repeat that inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,000 flight cycles until the
modification required by paragraph (k) of this AD is accomplished.
    (3) Perform a HFEC inspection to detect cracks in the skin at
the upper row of fastener holes of the skin panel lap joints aft of
BS 1480 to 2360 in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-
2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April
16, 2009. After the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may
be used. Repeat that inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 6,000 flight cycles until the modification required by
paragraph (k) of this AD is accomplished.
    (h) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) or (l) of this AD, or if any corrosion is found for
which material loss exceeds 10 percent of the material thickness,
accomplish paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October
14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After the effective
date of this AD, use only Revision 3.
    (1) Prior to further flight, repair any crack or corrosion
found, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307,
Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16,
2009. After the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be
used.
    (2) Within 18 months after accomplishing the repair, accomplish
the ``full'' modification described in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated
April 16, 2009; for the remainder of any skin panel lap joint in
which a crack is found, or in which corrosion is found that exceeds
10 percent of the material thickness, in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or
Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After the effective date of this
AD, only Revision 3 may be used.
    (i) If no crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, but corrosion is found for which the
material loss does not exceed 10 percent of the material thickness:
Accomplish the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of
this AD for the entire affected skin panel lap joint, in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October
14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After the effective
date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be used.
    (1) Within 500 flight cycles after accomplishing the inspection
during which the corrosion was found, and thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 500 flight cycles until the ``full'' modification
required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD is accomplished: Perform a
HFEC inspection to detect cracks of the corroded skin panel lap
joint, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307,
Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16,
2009. After the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be
used.
    (2) Within 36 months after accomplishing the inspection during
which the corrosion was found: Accomplish the ``full'' modification,
in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2,
dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After
the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be used.
    (j) The inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD shall
be performed by removing the paint and using an approved chemical
stripper; or by ensuring that each fastener head is clearly visible.
    (k) Except as provided in paragraph (m) of this AD, prior to the
accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles, or within the next 1,000
flight cycles after July 13, 1994, whichever occurs later:
Accomplish the modification described in Boeing Service Bulletin
747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3,
dated April 16, 2009; as a ``full'' modification of the skin panel
lap joints at the locations specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and
(k)(2) of this AD, as applicable, in accordance with Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or
Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. After the effective date of this
AD, use only Revision 3. Accomplishment of this modification
terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (g)
of this AD.
    (1) For airplane line numbers 001 through 058, inclusive: Modify
the skin panel lap joints at Stringer 12 (left and right), station
520 to 1,000; and Stringer 19 (left and right), station 520 to 740.
    (2) For airplane line numbers 59 through 200, inclusive: Modify
the skin panel lap joints at Stringer 12 (left and right), station
740 to 1,000; and Stringer 19 (left and right), station 520 to 740.
    (l) For all airplanes: Perform an external HFEC inspection to
detect skin cracks of any modified skin panel lap joints at the
times specified in paragraphs (1)(1), (1)(2), and (1)(3) of this AD,
as applicable, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-
2307, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1993; or Revision 3, dated April
16, 2009. As of the effective date of this AD, only Revision 3 may
be used. Repeat that inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 3,000 flight cycles, except as required by paragraph (n) of
this AD.
    (1) For skin panel lap joints on which the ``full'' modification
has been accomplished: Within 10,000 flight cycles after
accomplishment of that modification.
    (2) For skin panel lap joints on which the ``optional''
(partial) modification has been accomplished: Within 7,000 flight
cycles after accomplishment of that modification.
    (3) For skin panel lap joints having deep countersink fasteners
located at Section 42 on which the ``full'' modification, as
described in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, dated December 21,
1989, has been accomplished: Within 5,000 flight cycles after
accomplishment of that modification.
    (m) In lieu of the ``full'' modification required by paragraph
(k) of this AD, the ``optional'' (partial) modification described in
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307, Revision 2, dated October 14,
1993; or Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009; may be accomplished for
skin panels that have an outer thickness of 0.090 inches or less,
and that do not have any cracks, corrosion, or an existing
structural repair on the skin panel lap joint. After the effective
date of this AD, only Revision 3 may be used. The ``optional''
(partial) modification shall not be accomplished at deep countersink
fastener locations. Accomplishment of this modification terminates
the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

New Requirements of This AD

Post-Modification Inspection at Reduced Intervals

    (n) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (l) of this AD
at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (n)(1) and
(n)(2) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat the inspection at intervals
not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles.
    (1) Within 3,000 flight cycles after the last inspection done in
accordance with paragraph (l) of this AD.

    (2) Within 1,000 flight cycles after the last inspection done in
accordance with paragraph (l) of this AD or 500 flight cycles after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

Post-Repair Inspection for External Doubler Repair

    (o) For all airplanes: Do an internal surface HFEC inspection
for cracking of the skin at any external doubler repairs greater
than 40 inches in length (in the horizontal direction) within 1,000
flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
53-2307, Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009. Thereafter, perform that
inspection at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.
    (p) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (o) of this AD, repair in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2307,
Revision 3, dated April 16, 2009.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (q)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Or, e-mail information to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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 principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation Authorization who has been authorized by
the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 90-15-06,
Amendment 39-6653; and AD 94-12-09, Amendment 39-8937; are approved
as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 16, 2010.
Robert D. Breneman,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-15054 Filed 6-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 172 (Thursday, September 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54644-54645]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21636]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9900-72-Region3]

2013 Fall Joint Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission and the
Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency is
announcing the joint 2013 Fall Meeting

of the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Northeast
Visibility Union (MANE-VU). The meeting agenda will include topics
regarding reducing ground-level ozone precursors and matters relative
to Regional Haze and visibility improvement in Federal Class I areas in
a multi-pollutant context.

DATES: The meeting will be held on November 14, 2013 starting at 9:15
a.m. and ending at 4:00 p.m.
    Location: The Embassy Suites, 900 10th Street NW., Washington, DC
20001;<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For documents and press inquiries
contact: Ozone Transport Commission, 444 North Capitol Street NW.,
Suite 322, Washington, DC 20001;<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Web site: http://www.otcair.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 contain
at Section 184 provisions for the Control of Interstate Ozone Air
Pollution. Section 184(a) establishes an Ozone Transport Region (OTR)
comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Vermont, parts of Virginia and the District of Columbia. The
purpose of the OTC is to deal with ground-level ozone formation,
transport, and control within the OTR.
    The Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) was formed in
2001, in response to EPA's issuance of the Regional Haze rule. MANE-
VU's members include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the Penobscot Indian Nation, the
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe along with EPA and Federal Land Managers.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Agenda: Copies of the final agenda will be available from the OTC
office<PHONE_NUMBER>; by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via the OTC Web
site at http://www.otcair.org.

    Dated: August 22, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-21636 Filed 9-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11332-11334]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03439]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-1048]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Kosciuszko Bridge Construction, Newtown Creek,
Brooklyn and Queens, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish two safety zones on the
navigable waters of Newtown Creek, NY. The first safety zone is within
500 feet of the two barges and assist vessels to be used for the
removal and loading of the existing center span from the Kosciuszko
Bridge at mile 2.1. The second is from approximately 370 yards south
(upstream) of the Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1 and Newtown Creek's
confluence with the East River at mile 0.0 during transport of the
existing center span to an offsite location. This action is necessary
to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters during the
lowering and securing of the existing bridge's center span onto two
barges within the Federal navigation channel and during the barge's
outbound transit through Newtown Creek to the East River tentatively
scheduled during April-May, 2017. This proposed rulemaking would
prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zones unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port New York or a designated
representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-1048 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Jeff Yunker, Sector New York
Waterways Management Division; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port New York
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
NYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Coast Guard issued a Bridge Permit dated August 21, 2013
approving the location and construction of the Kosciuszko Bridge across
Newtown Creek, mile 2.1, between the Boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn,
NY. The bridge carries Interstate 278, also known as the Brooklyn-
Queens Expressway over Newtown Creek. On May 23, 2014 the New York
State Department of Transportation awarded a $554 million dollar
contract to design and build the replacement bridge. On December 4,
2014 construction began on the eastbound replacement bridge. All
vehicle traffic is expected to be shifted onto this new bridge in the
spring of 2017. Once traffic has been shifted to the new bridge the
existing bridge will be demolished and replaced with a new bridge
carrying Interstate 278 westbound traffic over Newtown Creek.
    On November 29, 2016, NYSDOT notified the Coast Guard that it will
be lowering the existing center span from the Kosciuszko Bridge over
Newtown Creek at mile 2.1 onto two barges within the Newtown Creek
Federal navigation channel, securing the center span to the barges for
transit, rotating the barges, and towing the barges through Newtown
Creek to the East River for final upland disposal. The center span is
259 feet long, 88 feet 8 inches wide, 46 feet high, and weighs 2,400
tons. This operation is dependent on the ongoing construction of the
new eastbound span of the new Kosciuszko Bridge being built adjacent
to, and south (upstream) of, the existing bridge and tides during
daylight hours. NYSDOT has identified April 1-24, May 1-23, and May 30-
31, 2017 as being conducive to this operation. The Coast Guard proposes
to make this rule enforceable through December 31, 2017 as a
contingency for any unforeseen delays to the bridge construction
schedule. The loading and securing of the bridge span to the two barges
is expected to take a minimum of 24-hours and the towing time to the
East River is expected to be one hour. The entire process is expected
to last at least 48 hours. Hazards from this operation include
accidental falling debris. The two barges will block at least 109 feet
of the 130 foot wide Newtown Creek Federal navigation channel during
loading, securing, and towing operations. The COTP has determined that
potential hazards associated with these operations would be a safety
concern for anyone within a 500-foot radius of the tugs and barges.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels
and the navigable waters within a 500-foot radius of the two barges and
assist vessels when loading, securing, and transporting the center span
of the Kosciuszko Bridge through Newtown Creek before, during, and
after the operations. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under
authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish two safety zones for approximately
48 hours between April 1 and May 31, 2017. The safety zone would cover
all navigable waters of Newtown Creek within 500 feet of the two barges
and assist vessels to be used for the removal and loading of the
existing center span from the Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1 and

within 500 feet of two barges and their assist vessels in Newtown Creek
from approximately 370 yards south (upstream) of the existing
Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1 and Newtown Creek's confluence with the
East River during transport of the existing center span to an offsite
location. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of
vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the
loading, securing, rotating the two barges for transit, and
transporting the center span of the Kosciuszko Bridge through Newtown
Creek. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zones
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.
    The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this
document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zones. Vessel traffic
would not be able to transit around these safety zones as the two
barges carrying the Kosciuszko Bridge center span would block a minimum
of 109 feet of the 130 foot wide Federal navigation channel for
approximately 48 hours during the loading, and securing of the center
span on to the barges, and then rotating the barges in preparation for
towing through Newtown Creek. During the approximate one-hour transit
time from the bridge site to the East River vessels would not be able
to meet or overtake the two barges with three assist tugs as the
combined width of these vessels would be 109 feet and the Federal
navigation channel is only 130 feet wide. However, the New York City
Department of Environmental Protection, U.S. Concrete, Bayside Fuel Oil
Depot, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency all reported the
requested 48-hour channel closure would not negatively impact their
operations south (upstream) of the bridge. U.S. Concrete stated they
require at least two weeks' notice if the closure is anticipated to
last longer than 48 hours. Facilities downstream of the bridge would
not be required to move vessels moored at their facility as long as
they do not extend into the Federal navigation channel and would be
able to depart the facility before, or after, the two barges carrying
the bridge span are towed past the facility. Moreover, the Coast Guard
would issue a Local Notice to Mariners and a Broadcast Notice to
Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zones may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV A above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this

action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
proposed rule involves a stationary safety zone lasting approximately
48 hours and a moving safety zone lasting approximately one hour that
would prohibit transit within 500 feet of the two barges and assist
vessels carrying the bridge span. Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record
keeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-1048 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-1048  Safety Zone; Kosciuszko Bridge Construction,
Newtown Creek, Brooklyn and Queens, NY.

    (a) Location. (1) The following area is a safety zone: All waters
from surface to bottom of Newtown Creek within 500 feet of the two
barges and assist vessels while lowering and securing the existing
Kosciuszko Bridge center span at mile 2.1 to the two barges. This area
is bound by the following approximate positions: northwest of a line
drawn from 40[deg]43'34.9'' N., 073[deg]55'42.0'' W. to
40[deg]43'36.8'' N., 073[deg]55'39.8'' W. (approximately 500 feet south
(upstream) of the Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1), and southeast of a
line drawn from 40[deg]43'40.6'' N., 073[deg]55'52.8'' W. to
40[deg]43'43.1'' N., 073[deg]55'49.9'' W. (approximately 500 feet
downstream of the Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1) (NAD 83).
    (2) The following area is a moving safety zone: All waters from
surface to bottom of Newtown Creek within 500 feet of the two barges
and assist vessels while transiting Newtown Creek between Latitude
40[deg]43'30.0'' N. (approximately 370 yards south (upstream) of the
Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1), and east of a line drawn from the
following approximate positions: 40[deg]44'17.1'' N., 073[deg]57'45.6''
W. to 40[deg]44'10.4'' N., 073[deg]57'45.6'' W. (at the confluence with
the East River) (NAD 83).
    (b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    (1) Designated representative. A ``designated representative'' is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated by the COTP to act on his or her
behalf. A designated representative may be on an official patrol vessel
or may be on shore and will communicate with vessels via VHF-FM radio
or loudhailer. In addition, members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be
present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.
    (2) Official patrol vessels. Official patrol vessels may consist of
any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law enforcement
vessels assigned or approved by the COTP.
    (c) Enforcement periods. (1) This section is effective from April 1
to December 31, 2017 but will only be enforced when active center span
lowering, securing, and towing operations are in progress.
    (2) The Coast Guard will rely on marine broadcasts and local notice
to mariners to notify the public of the time and duration that the
safety zone will be enforced. Violations of this safety zone may be
reported to the COTP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on VHF-Channel 16.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23, as well as the following regulations, apply.
    (2) During periods of enforcement, all persons and vessels must
comply with all orders and directions from the COTP or a COTP's
designated representative.
    (3) During periods of enforcement, upon being hailed by a U.S.
Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the
operator of the vessel must proceed as directed.

    Dated: January 18, 2017.
Michael H. Day,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2017-03439 Filed 2-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 116 (Monday, June 17, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 36279]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14422]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: [78 FR 35075, June
11, 2013].

STATUS: Closed Meeting.

PLACE: 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC.

DATE AND TIME OF PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED MEETING: June 13, 2013 at 2:00
p.m.

CHANGE IN THE MEETING: Additional Item.
    The following matter will also be considered during the 2:00 p.m.
Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 13, 2013: a personnel
matter.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or her designee, has
certified that, in her opinion, one or more of the exemptions as set
forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(2) and (6),
permit consideration of the scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Walter, as duty officer, voted to consider the item
listed for the Closed Meeting in closed session, and determined that no
earlier notice thereof was possible.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact the Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Dated: June 12, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-14422 Filed 6-13-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


	PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION WORKSHEET

PART I: Information Collection Request

This worksheet replaces the previous OMB 83-I form for Information Collection Requests (ICRs).  This worksheet is intended to help ICR preparers transition between the paper 83-I system and use of the RISC/OIRA Consolidated Information System (ROCIS) ICR Module for submitting ICRs to OMB/OIRA.  This form is not intended for submission to OMB.  For additional guidance on completing this worksheet please consult the two OMB guidance documents: ROCIS How To Guide for Agency Users of the ICR Module and ROCIS IC Q&A, located at:   HYPERLINK "http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/download.html"  http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/download.html  , or visit EPA’s ICR webpage   HYPERLINK "http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/"  http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/  and contact your appropriate ICR desk officer.

Agency/Subagency originating request:  USEPA/Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Title:  NSPS for Fossil Fuel-Fired Steam generating units (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart D)

3. Type of information collection  (check one)

(See instructions)

 □ New collection

 X Extension of a currently approved collection

 □ Revision of a currently approved collection

 □ Nonmaterial or non-substantive change to a currently approved collection

4.  OMB Control Number:    2060-0026

5.  EPA ICR Number:  1052.08

6. Type of review requested (check one)

   a.  X    Regular

   b.      Emergency - Approval requested by:           /          /

   c.      Delegated

If Emergency, please attach justification.( 4000 characters maximum)

7. Requested expiration date (check one)

   a. X Three years from approval date

   b.      Six Months from approval date (Maximum for Emergency reviews)

c.      Other

 Specify:            /              (mm/yyyy)

  or Number of Months from Approval Date

8. Does this ICR contain surveys, censuses, or employ statistical methods?

        Yes           X     No

9.  Is a Privacy Impact Assessment required by the E-Government Act of 2002 for this ICR?  (A PIA is needed for a new, electronic collection of information.)

                                    Yes            X      No

10. Abstract Owners or operators of affected facilities must: make one-time only notification of occurrences such as construction/reconstruction and startup; submit reports containing information such as monitoring system performance and excess emission; and maintain records of occurrences such as startups and shutdowns.  Reporting is semiannual.

11.  Citations for Authorizing Statute(s) (Required if any change in burden is a Program Change Due to New Statute)

 a.      Public Law

    Pub.L. -

    Sec -

    Name of law -

 b.      US Code

    US Code -

    USC -

    Name of Law -

 c.      Executive Order

    EO -

    Name/Subject of EO -

 d.      Statute

    Statute at large -

    USC -

    Name of Statute -

12. Associated Rulemaking Information	      (For Rule Related ICRs Only)

Stage of Rulemaking (check one)	Federal Register Citation

RIN:                         -                         	     a.      Proposed Rule			        Volume            Page number ____________

Publication Date           /          /____

SAN:                                                               b.     	Interim Final or Final Rule

For a Proposed Rule, OMB will not consider an ICR complete until the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking has been published.

For a Final Rule, please put the ICR reference number for the ICR reviewed at the proposed rule stage in Box 4.

For ICRs associated with Interim Final or Final rules that are not significant under EO.

11. Federal Register Notices & Comments (For Non-Rule Related and Renewal ICRs Only)

Federal Register Citation

60-day Notice:	  Volume            Page number   35652                                     Publication Date	  06 / 21 / 06

30-day Notice:	  Volume            Page number                                         	  Publication Date            /          /

Did the Agency receive public comments on this ICR?       Yes    X No

Unless submitted as an Emergency or Associated with Rulemaking, OMB will not consider an ICR complete until the 30-day notice has been published.

12866, please attach a draft of the Federal Register document.

13.  Annual Cost to Federal Gov (in real dollars):

$                         125,702

16. Agency contact:

    Name:        Zofia Kosim

    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

    E-mail:      HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

If a change in burden is due to a Program Change Due to New Statute, identify the Citations for New Statutory Requirements:

Add New Citation:

  a.      Public Law

    Pub.L. -

    Sec -

    Name of law -

 b.      US Code

    US Code -

    USC -

    Name of Law -

 c.      Executive Order

    EO -

    Name/Subject of EO -

   d.      Statute

    Statute at large -

    USC -

    Name of Statute -

If Program Change is due to Agency Discretion, please categorize the reduction. Burden reduction from (select one):

a.      Cutting Redundancy

b.      Using Information Technology

c.      Changing Regulations

d.      Changing Forms

e.      Miscellaneous Actions

If Program Change is due to Agency Discretion, please categorize the increase in burden. Burden increase caused by (select one):

              a.      Changing Regulations

              b.      Miscellaneous Actions

Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported; that is, provide a short statement how the reduction in burden was achieved or why the increase in burden occurred. (If you need more space, please provide a short summary here and elaborate in the Supporting Statement.)

There has been no change in regulation and in burden

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION WORKSHEET

Part II: Information Collection Detail

(IMPORTANT:  Part II must be completed for each Information Collection (IC) activity associated with the ICR.  Please be sure that you copy this portion of the template as many times as necessary so that each IC has its own Part II submission.  For more information on how to break your ICR into ICs, please see OMB’s ROCIS IC Q&A, located at:   HYPERLINK "http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/download.html"  http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/download.html

1.  Title of Information Collection (IC): NSPS for Fossil Fuel-Fired Steam Generating Units (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart D)

3.  Is this a Common Form?

4. Obligation to respond (check one)

5. Frequency of reporting (check all that apply)

     Yes

 	 X     No

 (A common form is defined as a form set up by one Agency , which can be used by other Federal Agencies and Departments.)

    a.        Voluntary

    b.        Required to obtain or retain benefits

    c.   X    Mandatory

  a.       Hourly (24 -7)

    b. __  Hourly Bus (40 per week)

  c.       Daily (7 per week)

  d.       Daily Bus (5 per week)

  e.       Weekly (52 per year)

  f.       Monthly

    g.       Yearly

  h.       Every Decade

  i.      Quarterly

  j.   X  Semi-annually

  k.      Biennially

  l.       Other  (Describe                    )

6.  CFR Citation(s) for the information collection under review (if applicable).

Title:       New Source Performance Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Steam Generating Units

Part 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart D

Section__N/A

7.  Information Collection Instruments (attach additional rows as necessary)

Form Name

EPA Form #

URL

(required unless Not Electronic)

Is this collection available electronically?  (Yes/No)

If yes, can this collection be submitted electronically?  (Yes/No)

8.  Federal Enterprise Architecture Business Reference Model (Required for any Reporting Requirements)

(Please note:  most EPA ICRs will be aligned with the Environmental Management FEA Line of Business.  Included below is this and other likely categories.  For a full listing of the FEA Business Reference Model, categories and definitions, see:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/FY07_Ref_Model_Mapping_Quic kGuide.pdf

Please check one.                                                                                Please check one.

  FORMCHECKBOX   None

X Environmental Management

  FORMCHECKBOX   Environmental Monitoring and Forecasting

  FORMCHECKBOX   Environmental Remediation

  FORMCHECKBOX   Pollution Prevention and Control

X None

  FORMCHECKBOX   Health

  FORMCHECKBOX   Illness Prevention

  FORMCHECKBOX   Immunization Management

  FORMCHECKBOX   Public Health Monitoring

  FORMCHECKBOX   Health Care Services

  FORMCHECKBOX   Consumer Health and Safety

  FORMCHECKBOX   None

  FORMCHECKBOX   Natural Resources

  FORMCHECKBOX   Water Resource Management

  FORMCHECKBOX   Conservation, Marine and Land Management

  FORMCHECKBOX   Recreational Resource Management and Tourism

  FORMCHECKBOX   Agricultural Innovation and Services

  FORMCHECKBOX   None

  9.  Privacy Act System of Records (if applicable)

Title:

        Federal Register Citation:     Volume ________             Page number ____________         Publication date	           /          /____

10. Respondents

          a. Total #	          660

  b. Small Entity #         0

  c.  Percent Electronic  0

	Affected public (choose one)

a.            Individuals or households

b. X   Private Sector (If Private Sector check all that apply)

 X     Business or other for-profits

      Not-for-profit institutions

      Farms

c.             State, Local, or Tribal Governments

d.            Federal Government

11. Frequency: How often on average will each respondent respond to the Information Collection?

      Number of Responses per Respondent ____________

      Per (select the most appropriate time period for this collection)

         a.      Hour (24-7) - 8736 per year

         b.      Business Hour (40 per week) - 2080 per year

         c.      Day (7 per week) - 364 per year

         d.      Business Day (5 per week) - 260 per year

         e.      Week - 52 per year

         f.      Month - 12 per year

         g.      Year

         h.      Decade

         i.      Quarter - 4 per year

         j.  X    Half-Year - 2 per year

         k.      Biennial - 0.5 per year

         l.       Other  (Describe                    )

Calculated: Annual Frequency = 2 reports/year per respondent________________

Calculated: Annual Number Of Responses = _1320

14. Hour and Cost Burden

Enter the hours and cost (per response) broken out by reporting, record keeping, and third-party disclosure.

	Time per Response	Hour per response	Annual Hour Burden	Cost per Response	Annual cost Burden

Reporting	1 hr	1	1,320	N/A	N/A

Record keeping	0.25 hr	0.25	60,225	7,500	9,900,000

Third party disclosure

Total	1.25 hr	1.25	61,545	7,500	9,900,000

15. Allocate the change in burden.

Total Requested	Change Due to

New Statute

Change Due to

Agency Discretion

Due to

Agency Estimate

Change Due

Violation

Currently Approved

a. Annual Responses

1,320

1,320

b. Annual Hour Burden

hours

61,545

hours

hours

hours

hours

hours

61,545

c. Annual Cost Burden

$9,900,000

$

$

$

$

$9,900,000

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION WORKSHEET

Part III: Information Collection Request Completeness Check

Complete this checklist prior to submitting the information collection package to the Clearance Officer.  The Clearance Officer will use the information contained in this checklist, along with other information, to certify the information collection prior to submission to OMB.

The supporting statement:

X Identifies the statute or regulation authorizing the collection of the information

X  Describes efforts taken to avoid the collection of similar information already available, or collected under a different information collection

X  Describes, if applicable, methods to minimize the burden on small businesses or other small entities

X  Is written using plain English, and all terminology used is unambiguous and understandable to those required to respond to the collection

X  Indicates how long records specified in the collection are to be maintained by persons required to maintain the records

X  Has dedicated resources to ensure the proper use and processing of the information being collected to enhance (as appropriate) the value of the information to agencies and the public.

X  Indicates the use of a statistical survey method (if applicable) that produces valid and reliable results while minimizing undue burden.

X  Describes the intended use of information technology to reduce burden and where possible avoid unnecessary system and technology costs.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION WORKSHEET

Part IV: Certification

Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with'

5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: 	The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3), appear at the end of the instructions.  The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

	(a)  It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

	(b)  It avoids unnecessary duplication;

	(c)  It reduces burden on small entities;

	(d)  It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

	(e)  Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

	(f)  It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

	(g)  It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3):

		(I)  Why the information is being collected’

		(ii)  Use of information;

		(iii)  Burden estimate;

		(iv)  Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);

		(v)   Nature and extent of confidentiality; and

		(vi)  Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

	(h)  It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management

                          and use of the information to be collected (see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

	(I)  It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and

	(j)  It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official                                                                        Michael S. Alushin, Director

Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division

                                                                                Office of Compliance

                                                                                Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance	Date

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Signature of Senior Official or designee

Oscar Morales, Director

                                                                                Collection Strategies  Division

                                                                                Office of Environmental Information	Date

5 CFR 1320.9 reads “As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency (through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify (and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information --

     “(a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

     “(b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

     “(c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C § 601(6)), the use of such techniques as:

“(1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond;

“(2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof;

“(3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

      “(d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

      “(e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

       “(f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

       “(g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8(b)(3); [see below]

       “(h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of  the information in a manner  which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

       “(I)  uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and

       “(j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public.”

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3) requires that each collection of information:

        “(3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of:

“(I) the reasons the information is planned to be and/or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of  the agency;

“(ii) the way such information is planned to be and/or has been used to further the proper performance of  the functions of the agency;

“(iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of  the average burden of  the collection (together  with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of  this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden);

“(iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit (citing authority), or mandatory (citing authority);

	“(v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any (citing authority); and

$

%

&

G

H

v

w

x

y

ž

Ÿ

Õ

Õ

Ö

×

Ø

Þ

ß

n

r

Ì

Ð

Ø	@

Ø	@

Ø	@

Ø	@

Ø	@

Ø	@

Ø	@

N¶

옍

N¶

N¶

h{

N¶

N¶

N¶

N¶

@

@

@

@

@

È

h{

h{

!਀&䘋

옍

옍

h{

h{

옍

摧ẞ|

摧ẞ|

愀Ȥ摧⭎

摧ẞ|

CJ

aJ

摧ẞ|

葞и摧ẞ|ఀ“(vi) the fact that any agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information  unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.”

Last Revised 7/13/2006

Last Revised 7/13/2006


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 12, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67291-67292]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26913]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 12, 2013 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0843; Special Conditions No. 25-500-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc., Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-
500-1A11 Series Airplanes; Design Roll Maneuver Condition

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final Special Conditions; Request for Comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc.
Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series airplanes. These airplanes
will have a novel or unusual design feature associated with an
electronic flight control system that provides roll control of the
airplanes through pilot inputs to the flight computers. The applicable
airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety
standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the
additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary
to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is November 12,
2013. We must receive your comments by December 27, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2013-0843
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477- 19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Freisthler, FAA, Airframe and
Cabin Safety Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of, and
opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is
unnecessary because the substance of these special conditions has been
subject to the public comment process in several prior instances with
no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good
cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon
issuance.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On December 10, 2009, Bombardier Inc. applied for a type
certificate for their new Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series
airplanes (hereafter collectively referred to as ``C-series''). The C-
series airplanes are swept-wing monoplanes with a pressurized cabin.
They share an identical supplier base and significant common design
elements. The fuselage is an aluminum alloy material, blended double-
bubble fuselage design, sized for nominal 5-abreast seating. Each
airplane's powerplant consists of two under-wing Pratt and Whitney
PW1524G ultra-high bypass, geared turbofan engines. Flight controls are
fly-by-wire flight with two passive/uncoupled side sticks. Avionics
include five landscape primary cockpit displays. The dimensions of the
airplanes encompass a wingspan of 115 feet; a height of 37.75 feet; and
a length of 114.75 feet for the Model BD-500-1A10 and 127 feet for the
Model BD-500-1A11. Passenger capacity is designated as 110 for the
Model BD-500-1A10 and 125 for the Model BD-500-1A11. Maximum takeoff
weight is 131,000 pounds for the Model BD-500-1A10 and 144,000 pounds
for the Model BD-500-1A11. Maximum takeoff thrust is 21,000 pounds for
the Model BD-500-1A10 and 23,300 pounds for the Model BD-500-1A11.
Range is 3,394 miles (5,463 kilometres) for both models of airplanes.
Maximum operating altitude is 41,000 feet for both models of airplanes.
    The current design roll maneuver requirement in Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25 is inadequate for addressing an
aircraft with electronic flight controls that affect maneuvering. These
special conditions will adjust the current roll maneuver requirement,
Sec.  25.349, to take into account the effects of an electronic flight
control system.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, Bombardier Inc. must show
that the C-series airplanes meet the applicable provisions of part 25
as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-129 thereto.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the C-series airplanes because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar
novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the C-series airplanes must comply with the fuel vent and
exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under Sec.  611 of Public Law 92-574,
the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.17(a)(2).

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The C-series airplanes will incorporate the following novel or
unusual design features:
    The airplanes are equipped with an electronic flight control system
that provides control through pilot inputs to the flight computer.
Current part 25 airworthiness regulations account for control laws for
which aileron deflection is proportional to control stick deflection.
They do not address any nonlinearities or other effects on aileron
actuation that may be caused by electronic flight controls. Since this
type of system may affect flight loads, and therefore the structural
capability of the airplanes, special conditions are needed to address
these effects.

Discussion

    These special conditions differ from current requirements in that
they require that the roll maneuver be based on defined actuation of
the cockpit roll control as opposed to defined deflections of the
aileron itself. Also, the special conditions require an additional load
condition at VA, in which the cockpit roll control is
returned to neutral following the initial roll input.
    These special conditions differ from similar special conditions
applied on previous programs. These special conditions are limited to
the roll axis only, whereas previous special conditions also included
the pitch and yaw axes. Special conditions are no longer needed for the
pitch or yaw axes, because Amendment 25-91 takes into account the
effects of an electronic flight control system in those axes (Sec.
25.331 for pitch and Sec.  25.351 for yaw).

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series airplanes. Should Bombardier
Inc. apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to
include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design
feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on two model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is
unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change
from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would
significantly affect the certification of the airplanes, the FAA has
determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary and
impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting these special
conditions upon publication in the Federal Register. The FAA is
requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that
may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for
comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for the Bombardier Inc. Models BD-500-1A10
and BD-500-1A11 series airplanes.

Design Roll Maneuver Condition

    In lieu of compliance to Sec.  25.349(a):
    The following conditions, speeds, and cockpit roll control motions
(except as the motions may be limited by pilot effort) must be
considered in combination with an airplane load factor of zero and of
two-thirds of the positive maneuvering factor used in design. In
determining the resulting control surface deflections, the torsional
flexibility of the wing must be considered in accordance with Sec.
25.301(b):
    1. Conditions corresponding to steady rolling velocities must be
investigated. In addition, conditions corresponding to maximum angular
acceleration must be investigated for airplanes with engines or other
weight concentrations outboard of the fuselage. For the angular
acceleration conditions, zero rolling velocity may be assumed in the
absence of a rational time history investigation of the maneuver.
    2. At VA, sudden movement of the cockpit roll control up
to the limit is assumed. The position of the cockpit roll control must
be maintained until a steady roll rate is achieved and then must be
returned suddenly to the neutral position.
    3. At VC, the cockpit roll control must be moved
suddenly and maintained so as to achieve a roll rate not less than that
obtained in paragraph (2).
    4. At VD, the cockpit roll control must be moved
suddenly and maintained so as to achieve a roll rate not less than one
third of that obtained in paragraph (2).

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 19, 2013.
Ross Landes,
Acting Manager,Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-26913 Filed 11-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P