[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 179 (Friday, September 16, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56920-56921]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20080]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0325; FRL-10118-03-R3]

Air Plan Approval; Maryland; Clean Data Determination and
Approval of Select Attainment Plan Elements for the Anne Arundel County
and Baltimore County, Maryland Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area;
Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: On August 19, 2022, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) published a proposed rule determining that the Anne Arundel
County and Baltimore County, Maryland sulfur dioxide (SO2)
nonattainment area attained the 2010 primary SO2 national
ambient air quality standard (2010 SO2 NAAQS) under EPA's
Clean Data Policy using a clean data determination (CDD). EPA
simultaneously proposed to approve certain elements of the attainment
plan contained in Maryland's state implementation plan (SIP) revision
for the Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County SO2
nonattainment area, submitted to EPA on January 31, 2020. Additionally,
EPA proposed to approve as SIP strengthening measures certain emission
limit requirements on large SO2 emission sources that were
submitted as part of Maryland's attainment plan for the nonattainment
area. EPA inadvertently failed to upload the supporting and related
materials in the docket simultaneously with the publication of the
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on August 19, 2022 (87 FR 51006).
The supporting and related materials were added to the docket on August
29, 2022. To ensure that the public has adequate time and information
to submit comments, EPA is extending the comment period for ten days to
September 29, 2022. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act
(CAA).

DATES: The public comment period for the proposal published in the
Federal Register on August 19, 2022 (87 FR 51006) is extended from
September 19, 2022 to September 29, 2022. Written comments must be
received on or before September 29, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2020-0325 at www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, Four Penn Center, 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2176. Mr. Rehn can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    On August 19, 2022, the EPA published a proposed rule taking
several actions (87 FR 51006). First, the EPA proposed under its Clean
Data Policy to determine that the Anne Arundel County and Baltimore
County, Maryland SO2 nonattainment area has

attained the 2010 SO2 NAAQS through a CDD. If finalized,
this proposed CDD would suspend the obligation to submit certain
attainment planning requirements for the nonattainment area for as long
as the area continues to attain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Second,
the EPA proposed to approve certain elements of the attainment plan
contained in Maryland's SIP revision for the Anne Arundel County and
Baltimore County SO2 nonattainment area, submitted to EPA on
January 31, 2020. The requirement to submit the elements that EPA is
proposing to approve would not be suspended under this proposed CDD, as
set forth in EPA's Clean Data Policy, because EPA considers them to be
independent of attaining the NAAQS under the CAA. Finally, EPA is
approving as SIP strengthening measures certain emission limit
requirements on large SO2 emission sources that were
submitted as part of Maryland's attainment plan for the nonattainment
area. This determination of attainment and approval of certain elements
and emissions limitations into the SIP does not redesignate the Area to
attainment or constitute a full approval of the submitted attainment
plan or of a maintenance plan.
    The NPRM was published on August 19, 2022, and specified that the
comment period would end on September 19, 2022. However, the supporting
materials were not made available in the docket until August 29, 2022
(ten days after publication).
    To ensure the public and interested parties have sufficient time to
review the associated docket materials and submit comment on the NPRM,
the EPA is extending the comment period an additional 10 days to
September 29, 2022 to account for the delay in posting the supporting
and related materials.

Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2022-20080 Filed 9-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44238-44240]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15871]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-8160; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-019-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Embraer S.A. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Embraer S.A. Models EMB-500 and EMB-505 airplanes. This proposed AD
results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and
correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes
the unsafe condition as incorrect installation of passenger seat
attachment fittings. We are issuing this proposed AD to require actions
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 22, 2016.

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
Embraer--S.A., Phenom Maintenance Support, Avenida Brigadeiro Faria
Lima, 2170, S[atilde]o Jos[eacute] dos Campos--SP--12227-901, P.O. Box
36/2, Brasil; phone: +55 12 3927 1000; fax: +55 12 3927-2619; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.embraer.com.br/en-US/Pages/home.aspx. You may review this referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
8160; 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: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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-2016-8160;
Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-019-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://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

    The Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC),
which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued AD No.: 2016-05-
01, dated May 27, 2016 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for Embraer S.A. Models EMB-500 and EMB-505
airplanes and was based on mandatory continuing airworthiness
information originated by an aviation authority of another country. The
MCAI states:

    There is the possibility that certain attachment fittings of
passenger seats have been incorrectly installed. This AD results
from a determination that the passenger seat on which the attachment
fittings were improperly installed may not meet certain static
strength, and dynamic strength criteria. Failure to meet static and
dynamic strength criteria could result in injuries to the occupants
during an emergency landing condition.
    This AD requires the inspection of each passenger seat for the
correct installation of the attachment fittings and correction, if
necessary.

You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-8160.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Embraer S.A. has issued Service Bulletin (SB) No.: 500-25-0016; and
Embraer S.A. SB No.: 505-25-0020, both dated December 8, 2015. The
service information describes procedures for inspection of the
passenger seat attachment fittings and correction to the fittings if
necessary. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this
NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 203 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 4 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $69,020, or $340 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 6 work-hours for a cost of $510 per product. We have no way
of determining the number of products that may need these actions.
    According to the manufacturer, all of the costs of this proposed AD
may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

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 Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Embraer S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2016-8160; Directorate Identifier 2016-
CE-019-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by August 22, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to Embraer S.A. Model EMB-500 airplanes,
serial numbers 50000322, 50000324 through 50000328, 50000330 through
50000344, 50000346 through 50000350, and 50000353, certificated in
any category; and Embraer S.A. Model EMB-505 airplanes, serial
numbers 50500004 through 50500215, 50500217 through 50500245,
50500247 through 50500255, 50500257 through 50500259, 50500261
through 50500263, 50500265, and 50500267, certificated in any
category.
    (2) The airplanes identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD had
passenger seats installed at manufacturer as listed in Embraer S.A.
Service Bulletin (SB) No.: 500-25-0016, dated December 8, 2015; or
Embraer S.A. SB No.: 505-25-0020, dated December 8, 2015. Since
these are line replaceable units and the unsafe condition of this AD
was originated during manufacturing, any passenger seat replaced
during routine maintenance is not affected by the actions of this
AD.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 25: Equipment/
Furnishing.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as incorrect
installation of passenger seat attachment fittings. We are issuing
this proposed AD to detect and correct improperly installed seat
attachment fittings, which could result in seat damage causing
injury to occupants during an emergency landing condition.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions in paragraphs
(f)(1) and (2) of this AD following the Accomplishment Instructions
in Embraer S.A. Service Bulletin (SB) No.: 500-25-0016, dated
December 8, 2015; or Embraer S.A. SB No.: 505-25-0020, dated
December 8, 2015, as applicable:
    (1) Within the next 30 months after the effective date of this
AD, inspect each applicable passenger seat for the correct
installation of attachment fittings.
    (2) If any discrepancy is found during the inspection required
in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further flight, correct the
discrepancy.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

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

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o
Civil (ANAC) AD No.: 2016-05-01, dated May 27, 2016, for related
information. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2016-8160. For service information related to this AD, contact
Embraer--S.A., Phenom Maintenance Support, Avenida Brigadeiro Faria
Lima, 2170, S[atilde]o Jos[eacute] dos Campos--SP--12227-901, P.O.
Box 36/2, Brasil; phone: +55 12 3927 1000; fax: +55 12 3927-2619;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.embraer.com.br/en-US/Pages/home.aspx. You may review this
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 28, 2016.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15871 Filed 7-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Because this action will finalize
approval of a source-specific portion of the Arizona SIP and a Regional
Haze FIP for units at only three facilities in Arizona, the Paperwork
Reduction Act does not apply. See 5 CFR 1320.3(c). An 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 Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control numbers
for our regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small
Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a
small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county,
town, school district or special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. This action finalizes approval of a source-
specific portion of the Arizona SIP and a Regional Haze FIP for units
at three electric generating facilities in Arizona. Firms primarily
engaged in the generation, transmission, and/or distribution of
electric energy for sale are small if, including affiliates, the total
electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million
megawatt hours. Only one of the three facilities affected by this
action is a small entity: AEPCO sold under 3 million megawatt hours in
2011.
    Although a regulatory flexibility analysis as specified by the RFA
is not required when a rule has impact on only one small entity, EPA
estimated the potential impact to AEPCO of our proposal to require SCR
in AEPCO's Units 1 and 2. EPA also requested information from AEPCO on
the economics of operating Apache Generating Station and what impact
the installation of SCR may have on the economics of operating Apache
Generating Station. A summary of the comments regarding the impact of
this action on AEPCO, and EPA's response to those concerns, is provided
in section I.V. of this preamble. After considering the economic
impacts of this action on small entities, I certify that this action
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small

entities. The FIP for the three Arizona facilities being issued today
does not impose new requirements on a substantial number of small
entities because one significantly impacted small entity is not a
``substantial'' number. Finalizing approval of a source-specific
portion of the Arizona Regional Haze SIP merely approves state law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. See Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative,
Inc. v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985).

 D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104-4,
establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and
the private sector. Under section 202 of UMRA, EPA generally must
prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for
proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in
expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted for
inflation) in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, section 205 of UMRA generally requires EPA
to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and to adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 of UMRA do not apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205 of UMRA allows EPA to adopt an
alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, including Tribal governments, it
must have developed under section 203 of UMRA a small government agency
plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small
governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have
meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
    Under Title II of UMRA, EPA has determined that this rule does not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures that exceed
the inflation-adjusted UMRA threshold of $100 million (in 1996 dollars)
by State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector in any 1
year. In addition, this rule does not contain a significant Federal
intergovernmental mandate as described by section 203 of UMRA nor does
it contain any regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, because it addresses the State not
fully meeting its obligation to protect visibility established in the
CAA and this final action will reduce the emissions of NOX
from three facilities in Arizona. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this action. Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this action, a summary of the concerns raised by State and
local officials, and EPA's response to those concerns is provided in
section I.V. of this preamble.

 F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    Subject to the Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) EPA may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications, that
imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required
by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary
to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or
EPA consults with tribal officials early in the process of developing
the proposed regulation and develops a tribal summary impact statement.
We believe this rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, and will not have substantial direct effects on
tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
rule. However, in our proposal we requested comment on our proposed
rule from tribal officials. The Navajo Nation Environmental Protection
Agency provided comments on our proposed rule, both orally at a public
hearing and by letter, which EPA considered in developing this final
rule. EPA's summary of these comments and our response to Navajo Nation
is provided in section I.V. of this preamble.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as
defined under Executive Order 12866; and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. EPA interprets EO 13045 as
applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO
has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not
subject to EO 13045 because it implements specific standards
established by Congress in statutes. Also, because this action only
applies to three sources and is not a rule of general applicability, it
is not economically significant as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and the rule also does not have a disproportionate effect on children.
However, to the extent this action will limit emissions of
NOX, SO2, and PM10, the rule will have
a beneficial effect on children's health by reducing air pollution that
causes or exacerbates childhood asthma and other respiratory issues.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12 (10) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by the VCS bodies.
The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to
OMB, with explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable VCS. The

rulemaking involves technical standards. Therefore, the Agency
conducted a search to identify potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards. However, we identified no such standards, and none
were brought to our attention in comments. Therefore, EPA has decided
to use 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A Method 5, 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix M
Methods 201A/202, 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A Method 19, and 40 CFR Part
75.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. EPA has determined that this final
rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it
increases the level of environmental protection for all affected
populations without having any disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on any population, including any
minority or low-income population. This rule requires emissions
reductions of NOX from three facilities in Arizona. The
partial approval of the SIP merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law.

 K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types
of rules (1) rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required
to submit a rule report regarding today's action under section 801
because this is a rule of particular applicability and only applies to
three facilities.

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 4, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Sulfur
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Visibility, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 15, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart D--Arizona

0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(154) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (154) The following plan was submitted February 28, 2011, by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
    (1) Arizona State Implementation Plan, Regional Haze Under Section
308 of the Federal Regional Haze Rule: Appendix D, Arizona BART--
Supplemental Information:
    (i) Table 1.1--NOX BART, entry for AEPCO [Apache], ST1
[Unit 1] only.
    (ii) Table 1.2--PM10 BART, entries for AEPCO [Apache],
APS Cholla Power Plant and SRP Coronado Generating Station.
    (iii) Table 1.3--SO2 BART, entries for AEPCO, APS Cholla
Power Plant and SRP Coronado Generating Station.

0
3. Section 52.145 is amended by adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.145  Visibility protection.

* * * * *
    (e) Approval. On February 28, 2011, the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality submitted the ``Arizona State Implementation
Plan, Regional Haze Under Section 308 of the Federal Regional Haze
Rule'' (``Arizona Regional Haze SIP'').
    (1) With the exception of the NOX BART determinations
for Units ST2 and ST3 at AEPCO Apache Generating Station; Units 2, 3,
and 4 at APS Cholla Power Plant; and Units 1 and 2 at SRP Coronado
Generating Station, and the BART compliance provisions for all BART
emissions limits at the eight units at the three power plants, the BART
determinations for AEPCO Apache Generating Station, APS Cholla Power
Plant, and SRP Coronado Generating Station in the Arizona Regional Haze
SIP meet the applicable requirements of Clean Air Act sections 169A and
169B and the Regional Haze Rule in 40 CFR 51.301 through 51.308.
    (f) Source-specific federal implementation plan for regional haze
at Apache Generating Station, Cholla Power Plant, and Coronado
Generating Station -- (1) Applicability. This paragraph (f) applies to
each owner/operator of the following coal-fired electricity generating
units (EGUs) in the state of Arizona: Apache Generating Station, Units
2 and 3; Cholla Power Plant, Units 2, 3, and 4; and Coronado Generating
Station, Units 1 and 2. This paragraph (f) also applies to each owner/
operator of the following natural gas-fired EGUs in the state of
Arizona: Apache Generating Station Unit 1. The provisions of this
paragraph (f) are severable, and if any provision of this paragraph
(f), or the application of any provision of this paragraph (f) to any
owner/operator or circumstance, is held invalid, the application of
such provision to other owner/operators and other circumstances, and
the remainder of this paragraph (f), shall not be affected thereby.
    (2) Definitions. Terms not defined below shall have the meaning
given to them in the Clean Air Act or EPA's

regulations implementing the Clean Air Act. For purposes of this
paragraph (f):
    ADEQ means the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
    Boiler-operating day means a 24-hour period between 12 midnight and
the following midnight during which any fuel is combusted at any time
in the unit.
    Coal-fired unit means any of the EGUs identified in paragraph
(f)(1) of this section, except for Apache Generating Station, Unit 1.
    Continuous emission monitoring system or CEMS means the equipment
required by 40 CFR Part 75 and this paragraph (f).
    Emissions limitation or emissions limit means any of the Federal
Emission Limitations required by this paragraph (f) or any of the
applicable PM10 and SO2 emissions limits for
Apache Generating Station, Cholla Power Plant, and Coronado Generating
Station submitted to EPA as part of the Arizona Regional Haze SIP in a
letter dated February 28, 2011, and approved into the Arizona State
Implementation Plan on December 5, 2012.
    Flue Gas Desulfurization System or FGD means a pollution control
device that employs flue gas desulfurization technology, including an
absorber utilizing lime, fly ash, or limestone slurry, for the
reduction of sulfur dioxide emissions.
    Group of coal-fired units mean Units 1 and 2 for Coronado
Generating Station; Units 2 and 3 for Apache Generating Station; and
Units 2, 3, and 4 for Cholla Power Plant.
    lb means pound(s).
    NOX means nitrogen oxides expressed as nitrogen dioxide
(NO2).
    Owner(s)/operator(s) means any person(s) who own(s) or who
operate(s), control(s), or supervise(s) one or more of the units
identified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
    MMBtu means million British thermal unit(s).
    Operating hour means any hour that fossil fuel is fired in the
unit.
    PM10 means filterable total particulate matter less than 10 microns
and the condensable material in the impingers as measured by Methods
201A and 202.
    Regional Administrator means the Regional Administrator of EPA
Region IX or his/her authorized representative.
    SO2 means sulfur dioxide.
    SO4 removal efficiency means the quantity of
SO2 removed as calculated by the procedure in paragraph
(f)(5)(iii)(B) of this section.
    Unit means any of the EGUs identified in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section.
    Valid data means data recorded when the CEMS is not out-of-control
as defined by Part 75.
    (3) Federal emission limitations.--(i) NOX emission limitations.
The owner/operator of each coal-fired unit subject to this paragraph
(f) shall not emit or cause to be emitted NOX in excess of
the following limitations, in pounds per million British thermal units
(lb/MMBtu) from any group of coal-fired units. Each emission limit
shall be based on a rolling 30-boiler-operating-day average, unless
otherwise indicated in specific paragraphs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Federal
                Group of coal-fired units                    emission
                                                            limitation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Generating Station Units 2 and 3.................           0.070
Cholla Power Plant Units 2, 3, and 4....................           0.055
Coronado Generating Station Units 1and 2................           0.065
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (ii) SO2 removal efficiency requirement. The owners/operators of
Cholla Power Plant Units 2, 3, and 4 shall achieve and maintain a 30-
day rolling average SO2 removal efficiency of 95 percent at
each unit.
    (4) Compliance dates. (i) The owners/operators of each unit subject
to this paragraph (f) shall comply with the NOX emissions
limitations and other NOX-related requirements of this
paragraph (f) no later than December 5, 2017.
    (ii) The owners/operators of each unit subject to this paragraph
(f) shall comply with the applicable PM10 and SO2
emissions limits submitted to EPA as part of the Arizona Regional Haze
SIP in a letter dated February 28, 2011, and approved into the Arizona
State Implementation Plan on December 5, 2012, as well as the related
compliance, recordkeeping and reporting of this paragraph (f) no later
than the following dates:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Compliance date
                   Unit                   ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       PM10                                SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Generating Station, Unit 1........  June 3, 2013................  June 3, 2013.
Apache Generating Station, Unit 2........  December 5, 2016............  December 5, 2016.
Apache Generating Station, Unit 3........  December 5, 2016............  December 5, 2016.
Cholla Power Plant, Unit 2...............  April 1, 2016...............  April 1, 2016.
Cholla Power Plant, Unit 3...............  June 3, 2013................  June 3, 2013.
Cholla Power Plant, Unit 4...............  June 3, 2013................  June 3, 2013.
Coronado Generating Station, Unit 1......  June 3, 2013................  June 3, 2013.
Coronado Generating Station, Unit 2......  June 3, 2013................  June 3, 2013.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (iii) The owners/operators of Cholla Power Plant Units 2, 3 and 4
shall comply with the SO2 removal efficiency requirement in
paragraph (f)(5)(iii)(B) of this section all related compliance,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements no later than the following
dates:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cholla Power Plant, Unit 2...........  April 1, 2016.
Cholla Power Plant, Unit 3...........  December 5, 2013.
Cholla Power Plant, Unit 4...........  December 5, 2013.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (5) Compliance determinations for NOX and SO4--(i) Continuous
emission monitoring system.
    (A) At all times after the compliance date specified in paragraph
(f)(4) of this section, the owner/operator of each coal-fired unit
shall maintain, calibrate, and operate a CEMS, in full compliance with
the requirements found at 40 CFR Part 75, to accurately measure
SO2, NOX, diluent, and stack gas volumetric flow
rate from each unit. In addition, the owner/operator of Cholla Units 2,
3, and 4 shall calibrate, maintain, and operate a CEMS, in full
compliance with the requirements found at 40 CFR Part 75, to accurately
measure SO2 emissions and diluent at the inlet of the sulfur
dioxide control device. Apache Unit 1 NOX and diluent CEMs
shall be operated to meet the requirements of Part 75. All valid CEMS
hourly data shall be used to determine compliance with the emission
limitations for NOX and SO2 in paragraph (f)(3)
of this section for each unit. When the CEMS is out-of-control as
defined by Part 75, that CEMs data shall be treated as missing data and
not used to calculate the emission average. Each required

CEMS must obtain valid data for at least 90 percent of the unit
operating hours, on an annual basis.
    (B) The owner/operator of each unit shall comply with the quality
assurance procedures for CEMS found in 40 CFR Part 75. In addition to
these Part 75 requirements, relative accuracy test audits shall be
calculated for both the NOX and SO2 pounds per
hour measurement and the heat input measurement. The CEMs monitoring
data shall not be bias adjusted. The inlet SO2 and diluent
monitors required by this rule shall also meet the Quality Assurance/
Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements of Part 75. The testing and
evaluation of the inlet monitors and the calculations of relative
accuracy for lb/hr of NOX, SO2 and heat input
shall be performed each time the Part 75 CEMS undergo relative accuracy
testing. In addition, relative accuracy test audits shall be performed
in the units of lb/MMBtu for the inlet and outlet SO2
monitors at Cholla Units 2, 3, and 4. Heat input for Apache Unit 1
shall be measured in accordance with Part 75 fuel gas measurement
procedures found in 40 CFR Part 75, Appendix D.
    (ii) Compliance determinations for NOX. (A) The 30-day rolling
average NOX emission rate for each group of coal-fired units
shall be calculated for each calendar day, even if a unit is not in
operation on that calendar day, in accordance with the following
procedure: step one, for each unit, sum the hourly pounds of
NOX emitted during the current boiler-operating day (or most
recent boiler-operating day if the unit is not in operation), and the
preceding twenty-nine (29) boiler-operating days, to calculate the
total pounds of NOX emitted over the most recent thirty (30)
boiler-operating day period for each coal-fired unit; step two, for
each unit, sum the hourly heat input, in MMBtu, during the current
boiler-operating day (or most recent boiler-operating day if the unit
is not in operation), and the preceding twenty-nine (29) boiler-
operating days, to calculate the total heat input, in MMBtu, over the
most recent thirty (30) boiler-operating day period for each coal-fired
unit; step 3, sum together the total pounds of NOX emitted
from the group of coal-fired units over each unit's most recent thirty
(30) boiler-operating day period (the most recent 30 boiler-operating
day periods for different units may be different); step four, sum
together the total heat input from the group of coal-fired units over
each unit's most recent thirty (30) boiler-operating day period; and
step five, divide the total pounds of NOX emitted from step
three by the total heat input from step four for each group of coal-
fired units, to calculate the 30-day rolling average NOX
emission rate for each group of coal-fired units, in pounds of
NOX per MMBtu, for each calendar day. Each 30-day rolling
average NOX emission rate shall include all emissions and
all heat input that occur during all periods within any boiler-
operating day, including emissions from startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
    (B) The 30-day rolling average NOX emission rate for
Apache Unit 1 shall be calculated in accordance with the following
procedure: step one, sum the total pounds of NOX emitted
from the unit during the current boiler-operating day and the previous
twenty-nine (29) boiler-operating days; step two, sum the total heat
input to the unit in MMBtu during the current boiler-operating day and
the previous twenty-nine (29) boiler-operating days; and step three,
divide the total number of pounds of NOX emitted during the
thirty (30) boiler-operating days by the total heat input during the
thirty (30) boiler-operating days. A new 30-day rolling average
NOX emission rate shall be calculated for each new boiler-
operating day. Each 30-day rolling average NOX emission rate
shall include all emissions and all heat input that occur during all
periods within any boiler-operating day, including emissions from
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
    (C) If a valid NOX pounds per hour or heat input is not
available for any hour for a unit, that heat input and NOX
pounds per hour shall not be used in the calculation of the 30-day
rolling average.
    (iii) Compliance determinations for SO2. (A) The 30-day rolling
average SO2 emission rate for each coal-fired unit shall be
calculated in accordance with the following procedure: Step one, sum
the total pounds of SO2 emitted from the unit during the
current boiler-operating day and the previous twenty-nine (29) boiler-
operating days; step two, sum the total heat input to the unit in MMBtu
during the current boiler-operating day and the previous twenty-nine
(29) boiler-operating day; and step three, divide the total number of
pounds of SO2 emitted during the thirty (30) boiler-
operating days by the total heat input during the thirty (30) boiler-
operating days. A new 30-day rolling average SO2 emission
rate shall be calculated for each new boiler-operating day. Each 30-day
rolling average SO2 emission rate shall include all
emissions and all heat input that occur during all periods within any
boiler-operating day, including emissions from startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
    (B) The 30-day rolling average SO2 removal efficiency
for Cholla Units 2, 3, and 4 shall be calculated as follows: Step one,
sum the total pounds of SO2 emitted as measured at the
outlet of the FGD system for the unit during the current boiler-
operating day and the previous twenty-nine (29) boiler-operating days
as measured at the outlet of the FGD system for that unit; step two,
sum the total pounds of SO2 delivered to the inlet of the
FGD system for the unit during the current boiler-operating day and the
previous twenty-nine (29) boiler-operating days as measured at the
inlet to the FGD system for that unit (for each hour, the total pounds
of SO2 delivered to the inlet of the FGD system for a unit
shall be calculated by measuring the ratio of the lb/MMBtu
SO2 inlet to the lb/MMBtu SO2 outlet and
multiplying the outlet pounds of SO2 by that ratio); step
three, subtract the outlet SO2 emissions calculated in step
one from the inlet SO2 emissions calculated in step two;
step four, divide the remainder calculated in step three by the inlet
SO2 emissions calculated in step two; and step five,
multiply the quotient calculated in step four by 100 to express as a
percentage removal efficiency. A new 30-day rolling average
SO2 removal efficiency shall be calculated for each new
boiler-operating day, and shall include all emissions that occur during
all periods within each boiler-operating day, including emissions from
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
    (C) If a valid SO2 pounds per hour at the outlet of the
FGD system or heat input is not available for any hour for a unit, that
heat input and SO2 pounds per hour shall not be used in the
calculation of the 30-day rolling average.
    (D) If both a valid inlet and outlet SO2 lb/MMBtu and an
outlet value of lb/hr of SO2 are not available for any hour,
that hour shall not be included in the efficiency calculation.
    (6) Compliance determinations for particulate matter. Compliance
with the particulate matter emission limitation for each coal-fired
unit shall be determined from annual performance stack tests. Within
sixty (60) days of the compliance deadline specified in paragraph
(f)(4) of this section, and on at least an annual basis thereafter, the
owner/operator of each unit shall conduct a stack test on each unit to
measure PM10 using EPA Method 5, in 40 CFR part 60, Appendix
A, or Method 201A/202 in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix M. A test protocol
shall be submitted to EPA and ADEQ a minimum of 30 days prior to the
scheduled testing. The protocol shall identify which method(s)

will be used to demonstrate compliance. Each test shall consist of
three runs, with each run at least 120 minutes in duration and each run
collecting a minimum sample of 60 dry standard cubic feet. Results
shall be reported in lb/MMBtu using the calculation in 40 CFR Part 60
Appendix A Method 19. In addition to annual stack tests, the owner/
operator shall monitor particulate emissions for compliance with the
emission limitations in accordance with the applicable Compliance
Assurance Monitoring (CAM) plan developed and approved in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 64. The averaging time for any other demonstration of
the PM10 compliance or exceedance shall be based on a 6-hour
average.
    (7) Recordkeeping. The owner or operator of each unit shall
maintain the following records for at least five (5) years:
    (i) All CEMS data, including the date, place, and time of sampling
or measurement; parameters sampled or measured; and results.
    (ii) Daily 30-day rolling emission rates for NOX and
SO2 and SO2 removal efficiency, when applicable,
for each unit, calculated in accordance with paragraph (f)(5) of this
section.
    (iii) Records of quality assurance and quality control activities
for emissions measuring systems including, but not limited to, any
records required by 40 CFR Part 75.
    (iv) Records of the relative accuracy test for hourly
NOX and SO2 lb/hr measurement and hourly heat
input measurement.
    (v) Records of all major maintenance activities conducted on
emission units, air pollution control equipment, and CEMS.
    (vi) Any other records required by 40 CFR Part 75.
    (8) Reporting. All reports and notifications under this paragraph
(f) shall be submitted to the Director of Enforcement Division, U.S.
EPA Region IX, at 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    (i) The owner/operator shall notify EPA within two weeks after
completion of installation of combustion controls or Selective
Catalytic Reactors on any of the units subject to this section.
    (ii) Within 30 days after the applicable compliance date(s) in
paragraph (f)(4) of this section and within 30 days of every second
calendar quarter thereafter (i.e., semi-annually), the owner/operator
of each unit shall submit a report that lists the daily 30-day rolling
emission rates for NOX and SO2 for each unit and,
for Cholla Units 2, 3, and 4, the SO2 removal efficiency,
calculated in accordance with paragraph (f)(5) of this section.
Included in this report shall be the results of any relative accuracy
test audit performed during the two preceding calendar quarters.
    (9) Enforcement. Notwithstanding any other provision in this
implementation plan, any credible evidence or information relevant as
to whether the unit would have been in compliance with applicable
requirements if the appropriate performance or compliance test had been
performed, can be used to establish whether or not the owner or
operator has violated or is in violation of any standard or applicable
emission limit in the plan.
    (10) Equipment operations. At all times, including periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction, the owner or operator shall, to the
extent practicable, maintain and operate the unit including associated
air pollution control equipment in a manner consistent with good air
pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Pollution control
equipment shall be designed and capable of operating properly to
minimize emissions during all expected operating conditions.
Determination of whether acceptable operating and maintenance
procedures are being used will be based on information available to the
Regional Administrator which may include, but is not limited to,
monitoring results, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and
inspection of the unit.
    (11) Affirmative defense for malfunctions. The following
regulations are incorporated by reference and made part of this federal
implementation plan:
    (i) R-18-2-101, paragraph 65;
    (ii) R18-2-310, sections (A), (B), (D) and (E) only; and
    (iii) R18-2-310.01.

[FR Doc. 2012-28565 Filed 12-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 218 (Friday, November 9, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67309-67313]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27372]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1199; Notice No. 25-12-06-SC]

Special Conditions: Embraer S.A., Model EMB-550 Airplanes; Flight
Envelope Protection: Performance Credit for Automatic Takeoff Thrust
Control System (ATTCS) During Go-Around

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Embraer S.A.
Model

EMB-550 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual design
feature(s) associated with the use of an Automatic Takeoff Thrust
Control System (ATTCS) during go-around. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for
this design feature. These proposed 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: Send your comments on or before December 24, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2012-1199
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 8 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: Joe Jacobsen, FAA, Airplane and Flight
Crew Interface Branch, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington, 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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 on or before the closing
date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the
comments we receive.

Background

    On May 14, 2009, Embraer S.A. applied for a type certificate for
their new Model EMB-550 airplane. The Model EMB-550 airplane is the
first of a new family of jet airplanes designed for corporate flight,
fractional, charter, and private owner operations. The aircraft has a
conventional configuration with low wing and T-tail empennage. The
primary structure is metal with composite empennage and control
surfaces. The Model EMB-550 airplane is designed for 8 passengers, with
a maximum of 12 passengers. It is equipped with two Honeywell HTF7500-E
medium bypass ratio turbofan engines mounted on aft fuselage pylons.
Each engine produces approximately 6,540 pounds of thrust for normal
takeoff. The primary flight controls consist of hydraulically powered
fly-by-wire elevators, ailerons and rudder, controlled by the pilot or
copilot sidestick.
    Embraer S.A. has incorporated an ATTCS function into the engine of
the Model EMB-550 airplane. It has a full authority digital electronic
control system architecture. Embraer S.A. proposed allowing performance
credit for this function during go-arounds to show compliance with the
requirements of Sec.  25.121(d) for approach climb performance. Since
the airworthiness requirements do not contain appropriate safety
standards for approach climb performance using ATTCS, special
conditions are required to establish a level of safety equivalent to
that of the regulations.
    Part 25 appendix I contains standards for use of ATTCS during
takeoff. These special conditions establish standards to extend the use
of ATTCS to the go-around phase.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.17, Embraer S.A. must show that the Model EMB-550 airplane
meets the applicable provisions of part 25, as amended by Amendments
25-1 through 25-127 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 Model EMB-550 airplane 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 under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Model EMB-550 airplane 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 Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplane has an ATTCS that is used
for both takeoff and go-around functions.
    Section 25.904 and part 25 appendix I refer to operations of ATTCS
only during takeoff. The Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplane also
provides for use of ATTCS for go-arounds. As a result, if an engine
failure occurs during a go-around, the remaining engine automatically
applies maximum go-around thrust. In addition, in the case of an
approach with one engine already inoperative, if it is necessary to
perform a go-around, the operating engine automatically applies maximum
go-around thrust.
    These special conditions are intended to ensure that the ATTCS
functions correctly and meets expected performance requirements during
go-arounds when the airplane is limited by weight, altitude, and/or
temperature during an approach.

Discussion

    Since current airworthiness requirements do not contain safety
standards to allow credit for ATTCS in determining approach climb
performance, these special conditions are required to establish a level
of safety equivalent to that of the regulations. The definition of a
critical time interval for the approach climb case similar to the
critical time interval for takeoff defined in part 25 appendix I is of
primary importance. During an approach climb, it must be extremely
improbable to violate a flight path based on the climb gradient
requirement of Sec.  25.121(d). This climb gradient requirement implies
a minimum one-engine-inoperative flight path capability with the
airplane in the approach configuration. The engine may have been
inoperative before initiating the go-around, or it may become
inoperative during the go-around. The definition of the critical time
interval must consider both possibilities.
    The propulsive thrust used to determine compliance with the
approach climb requirements of Sec.  25.121(d) is limited to the lesser
of:
     The thrust provided by the ATTCS, or
     111% of the thrust resulting from the initial thrust
setting with the ATTCS failing to perform its uptrim function and
without action by the flightcrew to reset thrust.

This requirement serves to limit the adverse performance effects of a
combined engine and ATTCS failure, and ensures adequate performance of
an all-engines-operating go-around.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplane. Should Embraer S.A. 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 one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability.

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 Proposed Special Conditions

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplanes.
    1. The Model EMB-550 airplane must comply with the requirements of
14 CFR 25.904 and appendix I to 14 CFR part 25 and the following
requirements pertaining to the go-around phase of flight:
    2. Definitions
    a. Takeoff/go-around (TOGA): throttle lever in takeoff or go-around
position.
    b. Automatic takeoff thrust control system (ATTCS): the ATTCS in
Model EMB-550 airplanes is defined as the entire automatic system
available during takeoff and in go-around mode, including all devices,
both mechanical and electrical, that sense engine failure, transmit
signals, actuate fuel controls or power levers (or increase engine
power by other means on operating engines to achieve scheduled thrust
or power increase), and furnish cockpit information on system
operation.
    c. Critical time interval: the definition of the critical time
interval in 14 CFR appendix I 25.2(b) must be expanded to include the
following:
    i. When conducting an approach for landing using ATTCS, the
critical time interval is defined as follows:
    a. The critical time interval begins at a point on a 2.5 degree
approach glide path from which, assuming a simultaneous engine and
ATTCS failure, the resulting approach climb flight path intersects a
flight path originating at a later point on the same approach path
corresponding that corresponds to the 14 CFR part 25 one-engine-
inoperative approach climb gradient. The period of time from the point
of simultaneous engine and ATTCS failure to the intersection of these
flight paths must be no shorter than the time interval used in
evaluating the critical time interval for takeoff beginning from the
point of simultaneous engine and ATTCS failure and ending upon reaching
a height of 400 feet.
    b. The critical time interval ends at the point on a minimum
performance, all-engines-operating go-around flight path from which,
assuming a simultaneous engine and ATTCS failure, the resulting minimum
approach climb flight path intersects a flight path corresponding to
the 14 CFR part 25 minimum one-engine-inoperative approach climb
gradient. The all-engines-operating go-around flight path and the 14
CFR part 25 one-engine-inoperative approach climb gradient flight path
originate from a common point on a 2.5 degree approach path. The period
of time from the point of simultaneous engine and ATTCS failure to the
intersection of these flight paths must be no shorter than the time
interval used in evaluating the critical time interval for the takeoff
beginning from the point of simultaneous engine and ATTCS failure and
ending upon reaching a height of 400 feet.
    ii. The critical time interval must be determined at the altitude
resulting in the longest critical time interval for which one-engine-
inoperative approach climb performance data are presented in the
airplane flight manual (AFM).
    iii. The critical time interval is illustrated in the following
figure:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09NO12.018

    3. Performance and system reliability requirements: The applicant
must comply with the performance and ATTCS reliability requirements as
follows:
    a. An ATTCS failure or a combination of failures in the ATTCS
during the critical time interval:
    i. Must not prevent the insertion of the maximum approved go-around
thrust or power, or must be shown to be a remote event.
    ii. Must not result in a significant loss or reduction in thrust or
power, or must be shown to be an extremely improbable event.
    b. The concurrent existence of an ATTCS failure and an engine
failure during the critical time interval must be shown to be extremely
improbable.
    c. All applicable performance requirements of 14 CFR part 25 must
be met with an engine failure occurring at the most critical point
during go-around with the ATTCS functioning.
    d. The probability analysis must include consideration of ATTCS
failure occurring after the time at which the flightcrew last verifies
that the ATTCS is in a condition to operate until the beginning of the
critical time interval.
    e. The propulsive thrust obtained from the operating engine after
failure of the critical engine during a go-around used to show
compliance with the one-engine-inoperative climb requirements of Sec.
25.121(d) may not be greater than the lesser of:
    i. The actual propulsive thrust resulting from the initial setting
of power or thrust controls with the ATTCS functioning; or
    ii. 111% of the propulsive thrust resulting from the initial
setting of power or thrust controls with the ATTCS failing to reset
thrust or power and without any action by the flightcrew to reset
thrust or power.
    4. Thrust setting
    a. The initial go-around thrust setting on each engine at the
beginning of the go-around phase may not be less than any of the
following:
    i. That required to permit normal operation of all safety-related
systems and equipment dependent upon engine thrust or power lever
position; or
    ii. That shown to be free of hazardous engine response
characteristics and not to result in any unsafe aircraft operating or
handling characteristics when thrust or power is advanced from the
initial go-around position to the maximum approved power setting.
    b. For approval to use an ATTCS for go-arounds, the thrust setting
procedure must be the same for go-arounds initiated with all engines
operating as for go-around initiated with one engine inoperative.
    5. Powerplant controls
    a. In addition to the requirements of Sec.  25.1141, no single
failure or malfunction, or probable combination thereof, of the ATTCS,
including associated systems, may cause the failure of any powerplant
function necessary for safety.
    b. The ATTCS must be designed to:
    i. Apply thrust or power on the operating engine(s), following any
one-engine failure during a go-around, to achieve the maximum approved
go-around thrust without exceeding the engine operating limits;
    ii. Permit manual decrease or increase in thrust or power up to the
maximum go-around thrust approved for the airplane under the existing
conditions through the use of the power lever. For airplanes equipped
with limiters that automatically prevent the engine operating limits
from being exceeded under existing ambient conditions, other means may
be used to increase the thrust in the event of an ATTCS failure,
provided that the means:
    1. Is located on or forward of the power levers;
    2. Is easily identified and operated under all operating conditions
by a single action of either pilot with the hand that is normally used
to actuate the power levers; and
    3. Meets the requirements of Sec.  25.777(a), (b), and (c).
    iii. Provide a means to verify to the flightcrew before beginning
an approach for landing that the ATTCS is in a condition to operate
(unless it can be demonstrated that an ATTCS failure combined with an
engine failure during an entire flight is extremely improbable); and
    iv. Provide a means for the flightcrew to deactivate the automatic
function. This means must be designed to prevent inadvertent
deactivation.
    6. Powerplant instruments: In addition to the requirements of Sec.
25.1305:
    a. A means must be provided to indicate when the ATTCS is in the
armed or ready condition; and
    b. If the inherent flight characteristics of the airplane do not
provide adequate warning that an engine has failed, a warning system
that is independent of the ATTCS must be provided to give the pilot a
clear warning of any engine failure during a go-around.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 5, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-27372 Filed 11-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P