[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50414-50417]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20476]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0857; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-244-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and
-500 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of an
approximate 8-inch crack found in the fuselage skin under the aft drain
mast. This proposed AD would require a detailed inspection for cracking
and corrosion of the channel and fillers adjacent to the drain mast
bolts, an inspection to determine the location of the bonding strap, a
measurement of the washers under the drain mast bolts, and related
investigative actions and repair if necessary. We are proposing this AD
to detect and correct cracking in the fuselage skin and internal
support structure, which could result in uncontrolled decompression of
the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 5, 2012.

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

     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-0857;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-244-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

    We received a report of an aft drain mast found loose on a Model
737-400 series airplane with approximately 30,500 total flight cycles.
Further investigation revealed the fuselage skin and surrounding back-
up structure were cracked. An 8-inch crack common to the fuselage skin
was hidden under the drain mast. The crack was likely caused by
incorrect installation of the drain mast. A drain mast that is not
installed correctly can cause cracks in the fuselage skin and the
internal support structure. The skin cracks cannot be seen because they
are hidden by the drain mast. This condition, if not corrected, could
result in uncontrolled decompression of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated
October 31, 2011.
    For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011, this service bulletin
describes procedures for doing a detailed inspection for cracking and
corrosion of the channel and fillers adjacent to the drain mast bolts,
an inspection to determine the location of the bonding strap, a
measurement of the washers under the drain mast bolts, and related
investigative actions and repair if necessary. Related investigative
actions include removing the drain mast and doing a high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) and detailed inspection for cracking and corrosion of
the skin, channel, and fillers. This service bulletin also specifies
contacting Boeing for repair instructions and doing the repair.
    For airplanes identified as Group 2 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011, this service bulletin
specifies contacting Boeing for inspection and repair instructions and
doing the actions.
    The compliance time for the inspection is within 120 days, and
before further flight for the repair.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service
Information.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011,
specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to
inspect and repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would
require that those actions be accomplished in one of the following
ways:
     In accordance with 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 (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 612 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                       Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed inspection, bonding strap   4 work-hours x $85 per                $0             $340         $208,080
 inspection, washer measurement.      hour = $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do certain necessary conditional
actions that would be required based on the results of the proposed
inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these actions:

                                               On-condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                   Labor cost                 Parts cost      product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drain mast removal, HFEC and detailed        5 work-hours x $85 per hour = $425.....           $0          $425
 inspections, and drain mast installation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the repair specified in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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 adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2012-0857; Directorate Identifier
2011-NM-244-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by October 5, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1318, dated October 31, 2011.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of an approximate 8-inch crack
found in the fuselage skin under the aft drain mast. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracking in the fuselage skin and
internal support structure, which could result in uncontrolled
decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Repair

    (1) For airplanes identified as Group 1 airplanes in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011: At the
times specified in paragraph 1.E. ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011, do the actions
specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), and (g)(1)(iii) of
this AD, and do all related investigative actions and repair, as
applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011,
except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD. Related
investigative actions and repairs must be done before further
flight. If the drain mast is found to be installed correctly, no
further action is required by this paragraph.
    (i) Do a detailed inspection for cracking and signs of corrosion
of the channel and the fillers adjacent to the drain mast bolts.
    (ii) Inspect the bonding strap for the correct location.
    (iii) Measure the diameter and thickness of the washers under
the drain mast bolts.
    (2) For airplanes identified as Group 2 airplanes in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011: Within
120 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect and repair, as
required, using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (i) of this AD. Repairs must be done before
further flight.

(h) Exception

    (1) Where Paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011, specifies a
compliance time after the original issue date of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011, this AD
requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the
effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes identified as Group 1 airplanes in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318, dated October 31, 2011: If any
cracking or sign of corrosion is found during any inspection
required by this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1318,
dated October 31, 2011, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action, before further flight, repair the crack or sign of corrosion
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (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. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager

of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, 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.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 8, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-20476 Filed 8-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 145 (Monday, August 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 41466]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16421]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR21-10-000]

Notice of Request for Emergency Relief; Airlines for America;
Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority; Alaska Air Group, Inc.; Allegiant Air;
American Airlines, Inc.; Delta Air Lines, Inc.; Federal Express Corp.;
Frontier Airlines; JetBlue Airways Corp.; National Air Carrier
Association; Southwest Airlines Co.; World Fuel Services, Inc.

    Take notice that on July 26, 2021, Airlines for America, Reno-Tahoe
Airport Authority, Alaska Air Group, Inc., Allegiant Air, American
Airlines, Inc., Delta Air Lines, Inc., Federal Express Corporation,
Frontier Airlines, JetBlue Airways Corporation, National Air Carrier
Association, Southwest Airlines Co., and World Fuel Services, Inc.
(collectively, Movants) filed a request for the Commission to exercise
its emergency powers pursuant to Section 1(15) of the Interstate
Commerce Act (ICA), to allow, or if necessary direct, SFPP, L.P. (SFPP)
to temporarily provide priority treatment to jet fuel shipments from
origins on SFPP's North Line to Reno, Nevada. Movants submit that
emergency action from the Commission is necessary to prevent jet fuel
shortages, cancelled flights, and disruption to critical passenger and
cargo transportation at Reno-Tahoe International Airport throughout
August. Movants request that the Commission direct SFPP to immediately
give priority in transportation to jet fuel and provide an additional
20,000 barrels of jet fuel capacity, or 541 barrels per day, above the
jet fuel already scheduled for shipment through Monday, September 6,
2021.
    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 and 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 a motion to intervene, as appropriate. Anyone filing a
motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Petitioner.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of comments,
protests, and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) (502-8659).
    Comments due: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on July 27, 2021.

    Dated: July 26, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-16421 Filed 7-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 222 (Wednesday, November 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 72132]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29389]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Thirty-Seventh Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (224) Airport
Security Access Control Systems

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

ACTION: Notice of Thirty-Seventh RTCA Special Committee 224 meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Thirty-Seventh RTCA Special Committee 224 meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held December 11th from 10:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or
Karan Hofmann, Program Director, RTCA, Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202)
330-0680.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 224. The agenda
will include the following:

Friday, December 11, 2015

    1. Welcome/Introductions/Administrative Remarks
    2. Review/Approve Previous Meeting Summary
    3. Report from the TSA
    4. Report on Safe Skies on Document Distribution
    5. Report on TSA Security Construction Guidelines progress
    6. Review of DO-230G Sections
    7. Action Items for Next Meeting
    8. Time and Place of Next Meeting
    9. Any Other Business
    10. Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Plenary information will be
provided upon request. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a
written statement to the committee at any time.

     Issued in Washington, DC, on November 10, 2015.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, Next Generation, Enterprise Support
Services Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-29389 Filed 11-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


From: Finman, Hodayah H (OES<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:21 PM

To: Lee, Amanda I.

Cc: Thompson, John E (OES); Klein, Jeffrey M

Subject: FW: 2007 CUE rule

Amanda-

Sorry, two more changes.

1. On page 40, can we change the word "authorized" in the second sentence of the first full paragraph to "requested."

2. On page 42, in light of the recent court decision, can we change the sentence "Both amounts are larger than the amount of CSAs in the preceding year of the exemption program and represent the continued regulatory implementation of U.S. commitments expressed in relevant Decisions of the Parties including Decision XVII/9(5)." to "Both amounts are larger than the amount of CSAs in the preceding year of the exemption program and take into account Decisions of the Parties including Decision XVII/9(5)."

Thanks

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

Hodayah Finman

US Department of State (OES/ENV)

+1<PHONE_NUMBER> (tel)

+1<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax)

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

From: Finman, Hodayah H (OES)

Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 1:29 PM

To: Lee, Amanda I.

Cc: Thompson, John E (OES); Klein, Jeffrey M

Subject: 2007 CUE rule

Amanda-

State has some minor comments on the 2007 final CUE rule which don't need to be raised on the call today but should be given to EPA for their consideration.  Our only issue for the call today will be the sourcing of methyl bromide for research purposes.

John, Jeff and I will be on the call at 2pm.

Hodayah

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

Other considerations:

1. On page 35 Section E, do we want to broaden this a bit to encourage both use and emissions minimization (as in Decision IX/6)?

2. On page 37 last para before section F, 2nd sentence - the writing is unclear. Reduced supply leading to users 'limiting' emissions is rather ambiguous. Could we say reduced supply will incentivize use minimization and therefore emissions limitations.

3. Page 46 indicates that by taking 7.5% of baseline and accounting for current trends, it will result in an inventory approximately equal to the CUE authorized by parties for 2007. One question is whether they mean the inventory available at the beginning or the end of 2007?


Home Address: 	City: 	State:

Inspection Guidelines	Must Correct	Verifier Approved	N/A

Attic Framing 	1.1 Raised-heel truss installed in the attic 1	(	(	(

	1.2 Raised platform installed for HVAC air handler 2	(	(	(

Exterior Above-Grade Walls	2.1 Optimum Value Engineered (OVE) framing
including all of the below:

	2.1.1 All corners insulated to edge 3, AND;	(	(	(

	2.1.2 All headers above windows & doors insulated 4, AND;	(	(	(

	2.1.3 Framing limited at all windows & doors 5, AND;	(	(	(

	2.1.4 All interior / exterior wall intersections insulated 6, AND;	(	(
(

	2.1.5 Unnecessary studs have been eliminated 7, OR;	(	(	(

	2.2 Continuous insulated sheathing, OR;	(	(	(

	2.3 Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs), OR;	(	(	(

	2.4 Insulated Concrete Forms (ICFs), OR;	(	(	(

	2.5 Double wall framing 8	(	(	(

Verifier: 	Verifier Inspection Date: 	Verifier Initials:

Raised-heel trusses shall elevate the roof adequately for full-depth
attic insulation at the attic perimeter. Alternatively, construct a
conditioned attic.

HVAC air handler platform in unconditioned attics shall be framed to
allow full-depth insulation below.

All exterior corners shall have insulation extend to exterior wall
sheathing using either “California Corners” (i.e., two studs in
‘L’ configuration with furring or drywall clips as needed to support
drywall) or equivalent alternative framing technique.

Minimum R-5 insulated headers shall be provided with either
prefabricated insulated headers, two-ply headers with insulation
between, single-ply headers insulated on one side, or equivalent
assembly.

Framing at windows shall be limited to a maximum of two king/jack studs
to support the header and window sill and the use of additional jack
studs only as needed for window support.

Insulation shall run continuously behind interior/exterior wall
intersections using ladder blocking, full length 2”x6” or 1”x6”
furring behind the first partition stud, drywall clips, or other
equivalent alternative.

Continuous vertical framing member extending from the bottom plate to
the top plate shall not be adjacent to any other such framing member
unless specified in structural engineered framing layout.

Double walls shall include two independently framed walls with all
framing offset and continuous insulation except at windows, doors and
other penetrations.

OMB Control No. xxxx-xxxx

ENERGY STAR Qualified Homes

Framing Quality Checklist & Notes

EPA Form 5900-177

The government estimates the average time needed to fill out this form
is 0.40 hours and welcomes suggestions for reducing this effort. Send
comments (referencing OMB Control Number) to the Director, Collection
Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,
Washington, D.C. 20460.

ENERGY STAR Qualified Homes

Indoor Air Quality Notes


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7161-7162]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03665]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA 2019-0135]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Changes in
Permissible Stage 2 Airplane Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The collection involves information used to issue special
flight authorizations for non-revenue transports and non-transport jet
operations of Stage 2 airplanes at U.S. airports. Only a minimal amount
of data is requested to identify the affected parties and determine
whether the purpose for the flight is one of those enumerated by law.
This collection is required under the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of
1990 (as amended by Pub. L. 106-113) and the FAA Modernization and
Reform Act of 2012.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by April 30, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments:
    By Electronic Docket: www.regulations.gov (Enter docket number into
search field).
    By mail: Sandy Liu, 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591,
Attn: AEE-100.
    By fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity

of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden could be
minimized without reducing the quality of the collected information.
The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in the request
for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandy Liu by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0652.
    Title: Changes in Permissible Stage 2 Airplane Operations.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 1050-8.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.

Background

    This collection is required under the Airport Noise and Capacity
Act of 1990 (as amended by Pub. L. 106-113) and the FAA Modernization
and Reform Act of 2012. This information is used by the FAA to issue
special flight authorizations for nonrevenue operations of transports
and nontransport jet Stage 2 airplanes at U.S. airports. Only minimal
amount of data is requested to identify the affected parties and
determine whether the purpose for the flight is one of the ones
enumerated in the law.
    Respondents: Approximately 30 applicants.
    Frequency: Information is collected occasionally when services
enumerated for a Stage 2 airplane are requested within the United
States.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 7.5 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 26, 2019.
Sandy Liu,
Engineer, Noise Division, Office of Environment and Energy, Noise
Division, AEE-100.
[FR Doc. 2019-03665 Filed 2-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65727-65728]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25854]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0822]

Anchorage Grounds; Delaware Bay and Atlantic Ocean, Delaware

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of inquiry; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is considering amending its regulations to
establish new anchorage grounds in the Delaware Bay and Atlantic Ocean.
We are considering this action after receiving requests suggesting
additional anchorage grounds are necessary to accommodate current and
future vessel traffic, improve navigation safety, and because
traditional anchorage areas may not be available due to planned or
potential offshore wind energy development. We invite your comments on
whether we should initiate a rulemaking to amend our existing anchorage
regulations based on this, or if the status quo should be maintained or
other actions considered.

DATES: Your comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on
or before January 28, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0822 using the Federal portal at https://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
notice of inquiry, call or email Marine Science Technician Second Class
(MST2) Thomas Welker, Sector Delaware Bay, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
(215) 271-4814, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Mr. Jerry Barnes,
Fifth Coast Guard District (dpw), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (757)
398-6230, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

ACPARS Atlantic Coast Port Access Study
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
FR Federal Register
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
WGS84 World Geodetic System 1984

II. Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is considering amending its regulations to
establish new anchorage grounds in the Delaware Bay and Atlantic Ocean.
Our authority to establish anchorage grounds comes from 33 U.S.C. 471.
    The Delaware Bay and River supports a diverse marine transportation
system which includes the ports of Wilmington, DE; New Castle, DE;
Philadelphia, PA; Camden-Gloucester City, NJ; and serves as an entry
point for vessels bound for the port of Baltimore, MD, through the
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. Global trends in shipping indicate
carriers continue to invest in larger vessels and these vessels are
arriving at Delaware River ports. A river deepening project is nearing
completion that will increase the Federal project depth from 40 to 45
feet from Philadelphia, PA, and Camden, NJ, to the mouth of the
Delaware Bay. Large vessels bound for Delaware River ports often wait
offshore at anchor in unregulated areas between the Eastern Directed
Traffic area and Southeastern Directed Traffic Area, or in various
places along the dredged channel through the lower bay. Vessels anchor
for a broad range of purposes including taking on stores, transferring
of personnel, engaging in bunkering operations, or lightering.
Designated anchorage grounds are available and regulations covering the
use of these anchorages are set out in 33 CFR 110.157. These anchorage
regulations were last revised in November 2016 to eliminate unusable
anchorage grounds and provide additional usable grounds to support port
demands and enhance navigation safety. See Final Rule published in the
Federal Register on November 25, 2016 (81 FR 85157).
    In 2016, the Coast Guard published a notice of its Atlantic Coast
Port Access Route Study (ACPARS) (81 FR 13307, March 14, 2016) that
analyzed the Atlantic Coast waters seaward of existing port approaches
within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and announced the report as
final in 2017 (82 FR 16510, April 5, 2017). This multiyear study began
in 2011, included public participation, and identified the navigation
routes customarily followed by ships engaged in commerce between
international and domestic U.S. ports. See https://navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=PARSReports. During the study, the Coast Guard received
comments from interested stakeholders addressing cumulative impacts of
wind energy areas and potential conflicts with traditional navigation
routes and uses of the waters. As wind energy areas are developed and
distribution cables installed, vessel traffic may be displaced or
funneled into smaller areas, and available anchorage areas may be
decreased. This increased vessel density may cause the mixing of vessel
types and speeds while also changing the geometry of interactions as
vessels come within close range of each other. These changes may
increase the risk of collision, loss of property, loss of life, and
environmental damage. In the vicinity of the entrance to the Delaware
Bay and River, the Coast Guard received requests from a Federal pilot
and the Mariners' Advisory Committee for the Delaware Bay and River to
establish two new regulated anchorages in the Atlantic Ocean as
potential wind energy leases would remove traditional unregulated
anchorage areas from use.
    In 2018, the Coast Guard held meetings with maritime stakeholders
to discuss global shipping trends, wind energy areas and potential
conflicts with traditional uses of the waters in the vicinity of the
entrance to the Delaware Bay and River. Attendance included the Pilots'
Association for the Bay and River Delaware, the Mariners' Advisory
Committee for the Bay and River

Delaware, Interport Pilots Association, and port and terminal
representatives. These meetings provided valued insight toward the need
for additional anchorage grounds to accommodate current and future
vessel traffic, improve navigation safety, and facilitate continued
growth of Delaware River ports and associated economic activity.
    Potential anchorage grounds discussed included the two anchorage
areas requested during the ACPARS study as well as a third in the lower
bay. Following the naming convention in 33 CFR 110.157, these
anchorages were notionally referred to as Anchorage B--Breakwater,
Anchorage C--Cape Henlopen, and Anchorage D--Indian River.
    Anchorage B--Breakwater is notionally located in the Delaware Bay
beginning approximately 2.5 miles north of Cape Henlopen, DE, includes
areas traditionally used by vessels for anchoring, and is in naturally
deep water with charted depths between 50 and 77 feet. The anchorage
grounds as contemplated include the waters bounded by a line connecting
the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                            Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38[deg]52'44.43'' N                  75[deg]06'43.93'' W
38[deg]52'06.27'' N                  75[deg]05'46.69'' W
38[deg]51'19.83'' N                  75[deg]5'42.73'' W
38[deg]50'45.99'' N                  75[deg]06'15.49'' W
38[deg]52'44.43'' N                  75[deg]08'40.57'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(DATUM: WGS84)

    Anchorage C--Cape Henlopen is notionally located in the Atlantic
Ocean approximately 9.4 miles east of the Delaware coast and is in
naturally deep water with charted depths between 41 and 85 feet. The
anchorage ground includes areas anticipated to be used by vessels for
anchoring once offshore wind energy areas are developed. The anchorage
grounds as contemplated include the waters bounded by a line connecting
the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                            Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38[deg]40'54.03'' N                  74[deg]52'00.01'' W
38[deg]40'56.11'' N                  74[deg]48'51.35'' W
38[deg]37'36.03'' N                  74[deg]48'30.01'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(DATUM: WGS84)

    Anchorage D--Indian River is notionally located in the Atlantic
Ocean beginning approximately 6 miles east of the Delaware coast,
includes areas traditionally used by vessels for anchoring, and is in
naturally deep water with charted depths between 40 and 85 feet. The
frequency of vessels using the anchorage grounds is anticipated to
increase once offshore wind energy areas are developed. These anchorage
grounds as contemplated include the waters bounded by a line connecting
the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                            Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38[deg]34'56.28'' N                  74[deg]52'19.13'' W
38[deg]33'40.94'' N                  74[deg]54'41.51'' W
38[deg]31'31.11'' N                  74[deg]55'27.97'' W
38[deg]29'07.38'' N                  74[deg]53'29.26'' W
38[deg]28'56.90'' N                  74[deg]50'28.70'' W
38[deg]30'07.40'' N                  74[deg]48'08.39'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(DATUM: WGS84)

    We are considering amending our regulations to establish these
three notional anchorages. You may find illustrations of these notional
anchorages in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Additionally,
the notional anchorages are available for viewing on the Mid-Atlantic
Ocean Data Portal at http://portal.midatlanticocean.org/visualize/. See
the ``Maritime'' portion of the Data Layers section.

III. Information Requested

    We seek your comments on whether we should consider a proposed
rulemaking to establish additional regulated anchorage grounds in the
Delaware Bay and Atlantic Ocean. In particular, the Coast Guard
requests your input to determine to what extent the notional
anchorages, Anchorage B--Breakwater, Anchorage C--Cape Henlopen, and
Anchorage D--Indian River would accommodate current and future vessel
traffic, improve navigation safety, and facilitate continued growth of
Delaware River ports, offshore renewable energy and associated economic
activity; or if the status quo should be maintained, or other actions
should be considered.

IV. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using
https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. In your submission, please include the docket number for
this notice of inquiry and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
    Documents mentioned in this notice of inquiry as being available in
the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that
website's instructions.

    Dated: November 22, 2019.
Keith M. Smith,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2019-25854 Filed 11-27-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR

OSHA’S DRAFT BERYLLIUM STANDARD

μg/m3) and includes several program requirements for establishments
where beryllium is used or workers are otherwise exposed to airborne or
surface beryllium contamination. These program elements include
requirements for exposure assessment, hazard control plans, respiratory
protection, regulated areas, protective clothing and equipment, hygiene
areas and practices, housekeeping, medical surveillance, and hazard
communication.

Based on the companion technological feasibility analysis, Eastern
Research Group (ERG) identified ten sectors where beryllium exposures
might occur:

Beryllium Production

Beryllium Oxide

Copper and Aluminum Foundries

Copper and Aluminum Smelting, Refining, and Alloying

Precision Machining

Copper Rolling and Drawing

Stamping and Spring and Connector Manufacturing

Dental Laboratories

Welding

Abrasive Blasting .

For each sector, ERG first established a profile of establishments and
employees were beryllium exposures might occur. Based on the
technological feasibility analysis, ERG then estimated the numbers of
workers employed in each of the affected job categories identified in
the feasibility  analysis. Next, for each job, ERG estimated the costs
of engineering and other controls necessary to achieve the PEL option
levels specified in the draft standard. Finally, ERG estimated the costs
of complying with the standard’s program requirements. Table ES-1
shows the number of beryllium establishments and associated employment
levels by sector.

Table ES-1. Profile of Beryllium Establishments, by Sector

Sector	Number of Establishments	Total Employment	Production Employment

Beryllium Production	1	824	NA

Beryllium Oxide	102	8,552	5.736

Copper and Aluminum Foundries	97	4,547	3,694

Copper and Aluminum Smelting, Refining, and Alloying	48	2,239	1,321

Precision Machining	289	7,739	6,016

Copper Rolling and Drawing	74	8,147	5,959

Stamping and Spring and Connector Manufacturing	885	57,488	44,943

Dental Laboratories	4,020	NA	19,375 [a]

Welding	500	NA	2,000 [b]

Abrasive Blasting	NA	NA	29,101 [c]

Source: See text.

[a] Dental laboratory technicians.

[b] Welders.

[c] Abrasive blasters.

	Employers are required to implement engineering or work practice
controls whenever exposures exceed OSHA’s PEL. ERG estimated the costs
of such controls for each affected job category whose median exposure
level, as reported in the technological feasibility analysis, exceeded
the PEL option under consideration,. Table ES-2 shows the estimated
median exposures and associated exposure profile used in this costs
analysis. Table ES-3 shows the estimated control costs, by sector, to
achieve compliance with each of the PEL options contained in the draft
standard, while Table ES-4 show the costs for compliance with the
program requirements. Total compliance costs are shown in Table ES-5.

	At the most stringent PEL option (0.1μg/m3), costs for engineering
costs total $85.9 million, while program costs are estimated at $58.3
million. At the least stringent PEL option (1.0μg/m3), estimated
compliance costs for engineering controls and program requirements are
$59.0 and $53.4 million, respectively. The abrasive blasting and foundry
sectors account for the largest share of compliance costs.

Table ES-6 shows compliance costs disaggregated by the standard’s
provisions for each PEL option. Among program costs, requirements for
housekeeping and employee showering account for about half of the total.

ERG DRAFT, MAY 2005		DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

 PAGE

ES- PAGE   1

ERG DRAFT, MAY 2005		DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

ERG DRAFT, MAY 2005	DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE