[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 97 (Tuesday, May 20, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28876-28879]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11568]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0253]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Bullhead City River Regatta; Bullhead City, AZ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
on the navigable waters of the Colorado River in Bullhead City,
Arizona. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
Bullhead City River Regatta marine event participants. The safety zone
will temporarily restrict vessel movement and public waterway use
within the designated area. During the annual one-day event, held on
August 9, 2014, non-authorized event persons and vessels would be
prohibited from entering into, transiting through or anchoring within
the enforced period of the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port or his designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 19, 2014.
    Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 4, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander John Bannon, Waterways Management,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as

having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2014-0253] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0253) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The request for a waterway safety zone was submitted by the
organizer of the annual event, Bullhead City, Arizona. The safety zone
will provide a safety buffer from vessel traffic for the estimated
25,000 participants floating down a six mile portion of the Colorado
River during the annual marine event.
    The Bullhead City River Regatta is a reoccurring marine event
listed in 33 CFR 100.1102 Table 1, Item number 16.
    The Bullhead City River Regatta is held on the navigable waters of
the Colorado River adjacent to Bullhead City, Arizona and Laughlin,
Nevada. The waterway is under federal jurisdiction due to the division
of two states. The proposed safety zone is deemed necessary by Coast
Guard Sector San Diego Captain of the Port to provide for the safety of
the event participants and to support the state-led waterway safety
efforts. This popular event involves a high number of people, with paid
event permits, floating down a six mile portion of the Colorado River
on inflatable rafts, inner tubes and floating platforms. This is the
only event on this portion of the waterway that restricts public access
for a defined period of time during one day of the year.
    Because of the high amount of participants, narrow and treacherous
portions of the waterway, public access for this small portion of the
waterway is limited at the request of local law enforcement and city
officials. The sponsor provides adequate notice and the annual event
occurs each year on the same approximate date and time, as well as the
same portion of the waterway. The small part of the waterway impacted
will be reopened as soon as the waterway is deemed safe by the Coast
Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative. The sponsor
will provide over 35 patrol and rescue vessels to help facilitate the
event and ensure public safety.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed temporary safety zone will encompass a six mile
portion of the Colorado River, directly adjacent to Bullhead City,
Arizona and Laughlin, Nevada. Specifically, the closed portion of the
Colorado River includes the waters between Davis Camp and Rotary Park
in Bullhead City, Arizona. In the interest of public and event
participant safety, general navigation within the safety zone by non-
event participants will be restricted. Except for vessels authorized by
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his representative, working
closely with Bullhead City event command staff, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in the regulated area for the safety of event
participants. This zone will be in effect from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on
August 9, 2014. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will
publish a Local Notice to Mariners (LNM) and marine information
broadcasts on the day of the event. Should the safety zone no longer be
required, the waterway will be reopened as soon as possible for full
public use.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This determination is
based on the size and location of the safety zone. Although the safety
zone would apply to the entire width of the river for a six mile
stretch, traffic would be allowed to pass through the zone before and
immediately after the marine event. In addition, with the permission of
the Captain of the Port or his designated representative, limited
traffic may be authorized on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, before
the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish a Local Notice to
Mariners (LNM).

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might

be small entities: The owners or operators of private or commercial
vessels intending to transit or anchor in that portion of the Colorado
River between Davis Camp and Rotary Park between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. on
August 9, 2014.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone would apply to the entire width of the river
for a six mile portion and a majority of the day, traffic may be
allowed to pass through the zone on a case-by-case basis with the
permission of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated
representative, working closely with marine event law enforcement
leadership. In addition, early morning and late afternoon traffic can
pass through prior to and immediately after the event. The reopening of
the waterway will occur as soon as the waterway is deemed safe. A
phased reopening will occur from north to south as the last
participants are allowed to enter the waterway on their six mile
floating transit. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard and
Bullhead City, Arizona will issue maritime and local advisories widely
available to the users of the waterway.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category
of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves
establishing a temporary safety zone. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination
are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek
any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-632 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-632  Safety Zone; Bullhead City River Regatta; Bullhead
City, AZ.

    (a) Regulated area. The following area is a temporary safety zone:
This zone includes six miles of the Colorado River, from Davis Camp,
Bullhead City, Arizona to Rotary Park, Bullhead City, Arizona.
    (b) Regulations. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will
publish a Local Notice to Mariners (LNM). If the event concludes prior
to the scheduled termination time, the Captain of the Port will cease
enforcement of this safety zone and will announce the reopening of
portions or entire waterway via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. In
addition, the following regulations apply:
    (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port of San
Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) Mariners can request permission to transit through the safety
zone from the Patrol Commander. The Patrol Commander can be contacted
on VHF-FM channels 16 and 23.
    (3) The operator of any vessel within or in the immediate vicinity
of this safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on board a vessel displaying a
Coast Guard Ensign, and
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign
    (iii) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
    (1) Captain of the Port San Diego means the Commander, Coast Guard
Sector San Diego.
    (2) Designated representative means any commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, and local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels who
have been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal,
State and local agencies in the patrol and notification of the safety
zone.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6 a.m.
to 6 p.m. on August 9, 2014 unless cancelled earlier by the Captain of
the Port.

    Dated: April 15, 2014.
S.M. Mahoney,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2014-11568 Filed 5-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20785-20786]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08263]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2021-2069]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Airlines
for America

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

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

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

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before May 11, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-0492
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deana Stedman, AIR-612, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198,
phone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 16, 2021.
Daniel J. Elgas,
Manager, Strategic Policy Management Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.

Petition For Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2020-0492.
    Petitioner: Airlines for America.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  91.9(a) and (b),
121.153(a), 121.337(b)(9)(iii).
    Description of Relief Sought: Airlines for America petitions for a
one-year extension of FAA Exemption No. 18584 that is set to terminate
on July 10, 2021. That exemption permits relief from 14 CFR 91.9(a) and
121.153(a)(2) and allows member airlines to transport cargo, subject to
the FAA's conditions, on the main deck of transport category airplanes
(secured to seats or secured to seat tracks) when no revenue passengers
are being transported. Due to the ongoing reduction in demand,
passenger carriers continue to have the capacity to carry cargo,
including critical medical cargo, in cabin. Approval of the petition
would allow operators of passenger airplanes to support COVID-19
response efforts by continuing to carry cargo in-cabin, including
critical medical cargo.

[FR Doc. 2021-08263 Filed 4-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58076-58078]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23154]

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

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0611; FRL-9730-2]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern lead emissions from
large lead-acid battery recycling facilities. We are approving a local
rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow
with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 19, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number R09-OAR-2012-
0611, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.

www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3576<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action.
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule.
    D. Public Comment and Final Action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Rule                  Rule title              Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD..................................       1420.1  Emissions Standard For Lead          11/5/10      9/27/11
                                                        From Large Lead-Acid Battery
                                                        Recycling Facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 24, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SCAQMD
Rule 1420.1 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rules 1420.1 in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Lead is classified as a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air
Act (CAA) Section 112 (b). On November 12, 2008, The EPA published the
final rule on the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
The revisions to the primary and secondary Lead NAAQS were to provide
increased protection for children and other at-risk populations against
an array of health effects. Such health effects most notably include
neurological effects in children, including neurocognitive and
neurobehavioral effects. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to
submit regulations that control lead emissions. SCAQMD Rule 1420.1
imposes these revised emission standards for large lead-acid battery
recycling facilities. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more
information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action.

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). A SIP, outlining the strategy to demonstrate attainment with the
lead NAAQS, must be submitted within 18 months of the final designation
date. In addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)). The SCAQMD
regulates a lead nonattainment (see 40 CFR part 81), so SCAQMD must
implement RACM/RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and RACM/RACT requirements consistently include the
following:
    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    3. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    4. ``Implementation of the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality
Standards Guide to Developing Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) for Controlling Lead Emissions,'' EPA 457/R-12-001, March 2012.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACM/RACT, and SIP relaxations. The
TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve The Rule

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rule but are not currently
the basis for rule disapproval.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP

submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that they
meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely
approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, these rules do not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: September 5, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-23154 Filed 9-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24940-24941]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11746]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0484; FRL-9978-56--Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements for Municipal
Waste Combustors

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a revision to the State of Maryland's Clean Air Act
(CAA) sections 111(d) and 129 State Plan for municipal waste combustors
(MWCs). The revision reflects amendments to Code of Maryland
Regulations (COMAR) <IP_ADDRESS>, which update the MWC opacity
compliance provisions. The Maryland Department of the Environment
(MDE)'s revised regulations provide that quality assurance (QA) and
quality control (QC) requirements for continuous opacity monitors
(COMs) are found in COMAR 26.11.31, rather than the now discontinued
Technical Memorandum (TM 90-01). EPA is approving this revision to
Maryland's CAA sections 111(d) and 129 State Plan in accordance with
the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 2, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0484. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Emily Linn,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On May 10, 2016, the State of Maryland submitted a formal revision
(MD Submittal #16-05) to its CAA sections 111(d) and 129 State Plan for
MWCs. The revision contains Maryland's amendments to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>,
``Requirements for an Existing Large MWC with a Capacity Greater Than
250 Tons Per Day.'' Among other minor changes,\1\ these amendments
update the references for opacity compliance which previously
referenced a discontinued technical memorandum, TM 90-01, that
addressed QA/QC procedures for COMs. COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> now refers to
COMAR 26.11.31, which contains QA and QC procedures for COMs, similar
to those previously found in the no longer effective TM 90-01.\2\ EPA
is approving this revision to Maryland's 111(d) and 129 State Plan for
MWCs in accordance with the requirements of the CAA for sections 111(d)
and 129 state plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Other changes made by Maryland to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> include
(1) changing the ``Emission Standards for a Large MWC'' to read ``10
percent opacity with COMS,'' rather than ``10 percent opacity with
CEMS,'' and (2) changing the ``Performance and Compliance Test
Requirements'' to include the following statement: ``. . . the
Department may determine compliance and non-compliance with the
visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9
observations based on a 6 minute block average'' (formerly, it
included the following statement: ``In case of inconsistencies in
data or conflicting data Method 9 results will determine
compliance'').
    \2\ EPA previously approved Maryland's State Plan for large MWCs
on April 8, 2008 (see 73 FR 18968). EPA also approved, as a revision
to the Maryland state implementation plan, the regulatory
requirements for QA/QC controls for COMs in COMAR 26.11.31 on
November 7, 2016 (see 81 FR 78048).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the same state rulemaking action, MDE also revised the title of
COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>, from ``Requirements for Certain Municipal Waste
Combustors'' to ``Requirements for Municipal Waste Combustors with a
Capacity of 35 tons or greater per day and less than or equal to 250
Tons Per Day,'' to clarify that the state regulation applies to small
MWCs. The text of <IP_ADDRESS> remains unchanged, and thus the
requirements for MWCs remain unchanged. This clarification to the title
of COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> is a minor administrative change and is not part
of this action.
    On November 6, 2017 (82 FR 51380 and 82 FR 51350), EPA
simultaneously published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) and a
direct final rule (DFR) for the State of Maryland approving revisions
to its CAA sections 111(d) and 129 State Plan for MWCs. EPA received an
adverse comment on the rulemaking and withdrew the DFR prior to the
effective date on December 26, 2017 (82 FR 60872). In this rulemaking,
EPA is responding to the comment submitted on the proposed approval of
the State Plan revisions and is approving the revisions to Maryland's
State Plan for MWCs.

II. State Submittal and EPA Analysis

    EPA has reviewed Maryland's submittal to revise its State Plan for
MWCs in the context of the requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subparts Cb
and Eb. In this action, EPA is finalizing its determination that the
submitted revision meets the above-cited requirements. EPA is amending
40 CFR part 62, subpart V (40 CFR 62.5110 and 62.5112), to reflect this
approval.

III. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA received one adverse comment on the proposed approval of the
revisions to the State of Maryland's CAA sections 111(d) and 129 State
Plan for MWCs. All other comments received were either supportive of or
not specific to this action and thus are not addressed here.
    Comment: The commenter asserts that EPA should not be involved in
matters of the state's choosing. Additionally, the commenter asserts
that if the changes to the plan are largely administrative in nature,
EPA should let the state go without making them spend resources to make
that administrative change.
    Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertions. EPA did
not specifically direct Maryland to make these amendments. Instead,
Maryland submitted to EPA this revision to its State Plan for MWCs and
requested that EPA amend the appropriate sections of 40 CFR part 62,
subpart V, to reflect approval of this Plan revision. EPA is required
to act on State Plan revisions submitted by states. In response to the
commenter's assertion, while these changes are largely administrative
in

nature, they are needed to update Maryland's State Plan for COMs
requirements. EPA is responding to MDE's request and finalizing the
revisions to Maryland's State Plan for MWCs in this action, as they are
consistent with CAA sections 111(d) and 129.

IV. Final Action

    In this final action, EPA is amending 40 CFR part 62, subpart V, to
reflect the receipt and approval of the revisions to Maryland's State
Plan for MWCs in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). This
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it
approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 provides, in part, that Federal agencies shall use
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
(March 7, 1996). Agencies are not required to use such standards if
doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Public Law 104-113 (section 12(d)). EPA is not, in this
action, using technical standards, as contemplated by the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act. Rather, EPA is reviewing and
responding to Maryland's Section 111(d)/129 plan submission, and, in
such case, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they
meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Moreover, in such context, EPA
has no authority to disapprove a Section 111(d)/129 plan submission for
failure to use voluntary consensus standards, and it would be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a Section
111(d)/129 plan submission, to require use of such standards in place
of a Section 111(d)/129 plan submission that otherwise satisfies the
provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act does not require, here, the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 30, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action 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 approving Maryland's revisions to their 111(d) and
129 State Plan for MWCs may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: May 15, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40 CFR part 62 is
amended as follows:

PART 62--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF STATE PLANS FOR DESIGNATED
FACILITIES AND POLLUTANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. Section 62.5110 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  62.5110   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) On May 10, 2016, Maryland submitted a revised State Plan and
related COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> amendments.

0
3. Section 62.5112 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  62.5112   Effective date.

* * * * *
    (c) The plan revision is effective July 30, 2018.

[FR Doc. 2018-11746 Filed 5-30-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 116 (Tuesday, June 16, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36352-36355]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12869]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0465; Product Identifier 2020-NM-074-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes powered
by Rolls Royce Trent 1000 engines. This proposed AD was prompted by
reports

of damage to the inner fixed structure (IFS) forward upper fire seal
and damage to thermal insulation blankets in the forward upper area of
the thrust reverser (TR). This proposed AD would require repetitive
inspections of the IFS forward upper fire seal and thermal insulation
blankets in the forward upper area of the TR for damage and applicable
on-condition actions. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 31,
2020.

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 https://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 NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0465.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0465; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tak Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites 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-2020-0465;
Product Identifier 2020-NM-074-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The FAA has received reports of damage to the IFS forward upper
fire seal and damage to thermal insulation blankets in the forward
upper area of the TR. Investigation revealed that structural gapping
could occur at the interface between the leading edge of the IFS and
the engine splitter structure during flight. This gapping condition
exposes the IFS forward upper fire seal to excessive airflow pressure
and also allows airflow to pass between the engine splitter structure
and the IFS forward upper fire seal, resulting in damage to the IFS
forward upper fire seal and thermal blanket. Failure of the IFS forward
upper fire seal could cause the loss of seal pressurization and degrade
the ability to detect and extinguish an engine fire, resulting in an
uncontrolled fire. Damage to the TR insulation blanket could result in
thermal damage to the TR inner wall, the subsequent release of engine
exhaust components, and consequent damage to critical areas of the
airplane.

Relationship Between This Proposed AD and AD 2018-15-03

    This proposed AD does not supersede or terminate any requirement of
AD 2018-15-03, Amendment 39-19335 (83 FR 34753, July 23, 2018) (``AD
2018-15-03''). AD 2018-15-03 requires an inspection to determine the
part number of the IFS forward upper fire seals, and applicable on-
condition actions. The on-condition actions include replacement of any
IFS forward upper fire seal having part number (P/N) 725Z3171-127 or P/
N 725Z3171-128 with a fire seal having P/N 725Z3171-151 or P/N
725Z3171-152, as applicable. After any IFS forward upper fire seal
replacement, AD 2018-15-03 requires updating the part number of the
thrust reverser half (two thrust reverser halves per engine). AD 2018-
15-03 also prohibits the installation of IFS forward upper fire seals
having P/N 725Z3171-127 or P/N 725Z3171-128, as of August 27, 2018 (the
effective date of AD 2018-15-03).
    This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the IFS
forward upper fire seal and thermal insulation blankets in the forward
upper area of the TR for damage, and applicable on-condition actions.
During the inspections specified in this proposed AD, if damage is
found on any IFS forward upper fire seal, and that fire seal has P/N
725Z3171-127 or P/N 725Z3171-128, that damaged fire seal must be
replaced with a fire seal having P/N 725Z3171-151 or P/N 725Z3171-152,
as applicable. After the IFS forward upper fire seal replacement,
operators may update the part number of the thrust reverser half to get
credit for compliance with the requirements of AD 2018-15-03, provided
that action is accomplished within the compliance time of AD 2018-15-
03, which is 36 months after August 27, 2018 (the effective date of AD
2018-15-03).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-
SB780041-00 RB, Issue 001, dated March 31, 2020. The service
information describes procedures for repetitive inspections of the IFS
forward upper fire seal and thermal insulation blankets of the TR for
damage and applicable on-condition actions. Damage to a forward upper
fire seal includes cuts, splits, nicks, punctures, and missing
sections. Damage to an upper thermal blanket includes tears, cuts,
missing metal skin, missing insulation, and over-temperature conditions
shown by discoloration or scorching. The on-condition actions include
replacing any damaged forward upper fire seal with a new fire seal
having an appropriate part number, and replacing any damaged forward
upper thermal blanket with a new thermal blanket.
    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.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions
identified in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00
RB, Issue 001, dated March 31, 2020, described previously, except as
discussed under ``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service
Information,'' and except for any differences identified as exceptions
in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0465.

Explanation of Requirements Bulletin

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for
annotating which steps in the service information are ``required for
compliance'' (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept
into Boeing service bulletins.
    In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related
Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was
worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the
development of a new process in which the service information more
clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition
in the ``Accomplishment Instructions.'' The new process results in a
Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to
address the unsafe condition (i.e., only the RC actions).

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00, Issue 001,
dated March 31, 2020, which is referred to in Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00 RB, Issue 001, dated March 31, 2020,
specifies 0.5 task hours for replacing the fire seal and 0.5 task hours
for replacing the thermal blanket. Boeing notified the FAA that these
estimates are not accurate and the correct estimated task hours are 2
work-hours per TR half for replacing the fire seal and 1 work-hour per
TR half for replacing the thermal blanket. The Costs of Compliance
section in this proposed AD reflects the corrected estimated costs.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this proposed AD interim action. If final action
is later identified, the FAA might consider further rulemaking at that
time.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 14 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost           Parts cost     Cost per product       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.....................  4 work-hours x $85 per               $0   $340 per            $4,760 per
                                  hour = $340 per                           inspection cycle.   inspection cycle
                                  inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required. The FAA has no way of
determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition
actions:

                                     Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Action                       Labor cost                Parts cost             Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire seal replacement............  2 work-hours x $85 per     $1,365 per TR half......  $1,535 per TR half (4 TR
                                    hour = $170 per TR half.                             halves per airplane)
Thermal blanket replacement......  1 work-hour x $85 per      $17,855 per TR half.....  $17,940 per TR half (4
                                    hour = $85 per TR half.                              TR halves per airplane)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty by Goodrich, thereby reducing
the cost impact on affected operators. The FAA does not control
warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has
included all known 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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA 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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The 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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2020-0465; Product Identifier
2020-NM-074-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by July 31, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and
787-10 airplanes, certificated in any category, powered by Rolls
Royce Trent 1000 engines.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 78, Engine
Exhaust System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of damage to the inner fixed
structure (IFS) forward upper fire seal and damage to thermal
insulation blankets in the forward upper area of the thrust reverser
(TR). The FAA is issuing this AD to address the damage to the IFS
forward upper fire seal and the thermal insulation blankets of the
TR due to airflow through structural gapping that could occur at the
interface between the leading edge of the IFS and the engine
splitter structure during flight. Failure of the IFS forward upper
fire seal could cause the loss of seal pressurization and degrade
the ability to detect and extinguish an engine fire, resulting in an
uncontrolled fire. Damage to the TR insulation blanket could result
in thermal damage to the TR inner wall, the subsequent release of
engine exhaust components, and consequent damage to critical areas
of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00 RB, Issue 001,
dated March 31, 2020, do all applicable actions identified in, and
in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00 RB, Issue 001, dated
March 31, 2020.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
B787-81205-SB780041-00, Issue 001, dated March 31, 2020, which is
referred to in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-
SB780041-00 RB, Issue 001, dated March 31, 2020.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00
RB, Issue 001, dated March 31, 2020, uses the phrase ``the Issue 001
date of Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB780041-00 RB'' this AD
requires using ``the effective date of this AD.''

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j)(1) 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, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation 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 Tak Kobayashi,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on June 3, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-12869 Filed 6-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P