[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 3, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45895-45900]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18832]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-1012; Product Identifier 2018-NM-132-AD; Amendment
39-19708; AD 2019-16-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports
of uncommanded fore/aft movements of the Captain's and First Officer's
seats. This AD requires an identification of the part number, and if
applicable the serial number, of the Captain's and First Officer's
seats, and applicable on-condition actions for affected seats. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 8, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 8,
2019.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
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 service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
1012.

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-2018-
1012; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandon Lucero, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Section, FAA, Seattle ACO
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-
231-3569; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 777 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
December 26, 2018 (83 FR 66178). The NPRM was prompted by reports of
uncommanded fore/aft movements of the Captain's and First Officer's
seats. The NPRM proposed to require an identification of the part
number, and if applicable the serial number, of the Captain's and First
Officer's seats, and applicable on-condition actions for affected
seats.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address uncommanded fore/aft movement
of the Captain's and First Officer's seats. An uncommanded fore/aft
seat movement during a critical part of a flight, such as takeoff or
landing, could cause a flight control obstruction or unintended flight
control input, which could result in the loss of the ability to control
the airplane.

Comments

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

Support for the NPRM

    Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), supported the
intent of the NPRM. FedEx had no objection to the NPRM. United Airlines
agreed with the NPRM.

Request for Clarification of Service Information

    United Airlines asked for clarification regarding what is
considered a finding for the determination of Condition 3 (no findings)
in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0619, Revision 1,
dated August 8, 2018 (``BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1''). The commenter
wanted to know that if the horizontal actuator is found to have part
number (P/N) AD8650502 or AD8650503 at Amendment A or Amendment B, is
that considered a finding for the determination of Condition 3 (no
findings).
    The FAA agrees to provide clarification regarding Condition 3 in
BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1. According to BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision
1, following the procedures in Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions can result in Condition 3 (no findings) or Condition 4
(any findings). If the horizontal actuator is found to have P/N
AD8650502 or AD8650503 at Amendment A or Amendment B it is considered a
finding

and meets Condition 4 of BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1. If the
horizontal actuator is found to have a part number other than P/N
AD8650502 or AD8650503 at Amendment A or Amendment B, it is consider a
no finding and meets Condition 3 of BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1. The
FAA has not revised this AD in regard to this issue.

Request for Clarification Regarding Removal of the Nameplate

    Air New Zealand asked if the work instructions in Part 3.B. of
Ipeco Service Bulletin 258-25-14, Issue 4, dated January 29, 2018
(``Ipeco SB 258-25-14, Issue 4'') are compliant with the regulations
because the instructions are to remove the original nameplate, which
would appear to also be the data plate. Air New Zealand stated that
because the data plate should only be created and installed by the
original equipment manufacturer these instructions appear to create a
bogus part.
    The FAA infers the commenter is referring to 14 CFR 21.616, which
requires the holder of a technical standard order (TSO) to mark each
TSO article in accordance with 14 CFR part 45. FAA Advisory Circular AC
21-25B, Section 8.2.4, provides an acceptable means of compliance for
marking modified seating systems.

    Seat modifications accomplished under [14 CFR] part 43 or under
the applicable airworthiness regulations must mark the modified
article with sufficient data to identify that it has been modified.
This may be accomplished by providing a reference to a design
approval (e.g., STC number), the modifier's name and address, or
reference to other documentation describing the modification. If the
modifier cannot substantiate that the article continues to meet the
applicable TSO(s), the modifier must permanently obliterate the TSO
marking while retaining all other identifying data.

    In this case, since the modifier has no access to the
substantiation information, he or she cannot substantiate that the
article continues to meet the requirements of the applicable TSO.
However, the seat has been modified with a design approval (i.e., Ipeco
SB 258-25-14, Issue 4) mandated by this AD. Therefore, the instructions
provided by the Ipeco SB 258-25-14, Issue 4, are appropriate and do not
conflict with FAA regulations or guidance. The FAA has not revised this
AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Revise Estimated Costs

    Martha Viner requested that the estimated costs in the NPRM be
revised to include statistical evidence from the harms of the defective
parts. The commenter stated that the NPRM does not address the
psychological costs of the unsafe condition including, but not limited
to, injuries sustained from the defective parts and how many
individuals have been harmed as a result. The commenter did not provide
justification for her request. The FAA does not agree with the
commenter's request. Because the scope of FAA ADs are limited and
technical in nature, the FAA can only provide the actual known costs
(labor and materials) for compliance with the requirements of the AD.
The FAA has not revised this AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Revise Estimated Part Costs

    Boeing requested that the parts cost for the replacement of the
horizontal actuator be changed from $205 to $7,936.79. The commenter
stated that the part manufacturer, Ipeco, provided the parts cost via
email.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request because Boeing has
confirmed the part cost with Ipeco, the part supplier. The FAA has
revised the Costs of Compliance section of this final rule accordingly.

Request To Revise ``Uncommanded Movement'' Wording

    Boeing requested that in all places where ``uncommanded movement''
is used in the NPRM that the wording be changed to ``uncommanded
horizontal movement.'' The commenter stated that the Captain's and
First Officer's seats have both horizontal and vertical powered
movement and the service information specified in the proposed AD
addresses only the horizontal movement.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's observation that Captain's and
First Officer's seats have both horizontal and vertical powered
movement. The FAA does not agree with the commenter's request to change
the wording to ``uncommanded horizontal movement'' because ``horizontal
movement'' could also mean movement anywhere in the horizontal plane of
the airplane on which the seat is installed. The FAA has revised this
final rule to replace all instance of the term ``uncommanded movement''
with ``uncommanded fore/aft movement.''

Request To Revise Applicability

    Gary Chan asked if the FAA is planning to revise the applicability
of the proposed AD to include Model 747 airplanes. The commenter noted
that Ipeco seat part number 3A258 is rotable between Model 747 and
Model 777 airplanes. The commenter also pointed out that Boeing has
released service information for Model 747 airplanes to address flight
deck seat issues.
    The FAA does not agree with the commenter's request to revise the
applicability of this AD. The FAA has already issued an NPRM (84 FR
13840, April 8, 2019) to address the identified unsafe condition and
parts rotability concern for Boeing Company Model 747-200B, 747-200C,
747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747-8F, and 747-8
series airplanes. The FAA has not revised this AD in regard to this
issue.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

    Air New Zealand expressed concern that replacement parts for the
horizontal actuator would not be available in time for operators to
comply with the 36-month compliance time specified in the proposed AD.
The commenter noted that replacing the horizontal actuator with Artus
P/N AD8650503 at Amendment C or later was terminating action for the
repetitive checks of the horizontal movement system. The commenter
stated it contacted Ipeco regarding pricing and parts availability and
was advised that there is a 7-month lead time for the parts. The
commenter related that Ipeco may not be able to meet the demand for
parts when the AD is released.
    The FAA infers that the commenter is requesting the compliance time
be extended due to a perceived parts availability issue. The FAA does
not agree with the commenter's request. The 36-month compliance time
for the required actions was determined taking into consideration the
urgency associated with the subject unsafe condition as well as the
availability of required parts. The FAA notes that the commenter is
considering parts availability for an optional terminating action,
which can be done at any time, and does not have to be done within 36
months after the effective date of this AD. However, the FAA will
consider requests for approval of an extension of the compliance time
if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the new
compliance time would provide an acceptable level of safety. The
operator can submit a request for an alternative means of compliance
(AMOC) using the provisions in paragraph (k) of this AD. The FAA has
not revised this AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Includes Records Review

    Delta Air Lines requested that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD
include a provision to allow operators to do a records review to
determine which airplanes have the affected seat part numbers
installed. The commenter also

requested that paragraph (h) of the proposed AD be revised to include
the statements ``. . . do an inspection to determine the part number,
and serial number as applicable, of the Captain's and First Officer's
seats . . .'' and ``A review of the airplane maintenance records may be
used for the seat inspection if the part number can be conclusively
determined from that review.''
    The commenter stated that the requested changes are in agreement
with the language found in BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1, which allows
maintenance records to be used to determine the part number of the
actuator; and the NOTE following step 3.B.2. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0607,
Revision 1, dated July 17, 2018 (``BSASB 777-25-0607, Revision 1'').
The commenter stated these added statements would provide an equivalent
level of safety for operators that do have affected components
installed on airplanes affected by this AD but listed outside of the
effectivity specified in the Boeing service information.
    The FAA agrees with the commenters' statement that a records review
will provide an acceptable means for operators to identify the part
numbers of the Captain's and First Officer's seats installed on an
airplane. As noted by the commenter, the service information already
allows a record review. For clarity, in paragraph (g) of this AD where
we specify to do an inspection, the FAA has included the following
statement: ``A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in
lieu of this inspection if the part number and serial number of the
Captain's and First Officer's seats can be conclusively determined from
that review.''
    However, paragraph (h) of this AD has not been revised. While
paragraph (g) of this AD requires an inspection to determine the part
number and serial number, as applicable, of the Captain's and First
Officer's seats, paragraph (h) of this AD specifies accomplishing
applicable actions in accordance with the service information, which
includes both inspection and records review language. The records
review provided in the service information referenced in pargraph (h)
of this AD is applicable to all airplanes identified in the
applicability of this AD. Therefore, a statement clarifying that a
records review is acceptable in lieu of an inspection is not necessary
for paragraph (h) of this AD.

Request To Clarify Procedures in Certain Service Information

    Lufthansa stated that it is not possible for its mechanics to do
the maintenance log review that is included in Part A, paragraph 1.c.,
of the Accomplishment Instructions of Ipeco SB 258-25-14, Issue 4.
    The FAA infers that the commenter is requesting that we clarify the
procedures in Ipeco SB 258-25-14, Issue 4. Operators only need to do a
review of the maintenance logs if the maintenance logs are available.
If maintenance logs are not available then operators do the actions in
Part A, paragraph 1.b., of Ipeco SB 258-25-14, Issue 4. Also, Part A,
paragraph 1.b. and paragraph 1.c. of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Ipeco SB 258-25-14, Issue 4, direct maintenance personnel to do the
actions in Part E of the Accomplishment Instructions if the horizontal
actuator has P/N AD8650503 at Amendment A or Amendment B. The FAA has
not revised this AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Require Alternative Actions

    Lufthansa remarked that Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
777-25-0619, Revision 1, does not include procedures that provide a
permanent and acceptable level of safety. The commenter stated that it
would have expected a redesign of the horizontal shaft actuator
(including the shaft), which would be required to withstand and limit
the maximum loads to the horizontal output shaft, and would prevent
shafts from failure at any phase of seat operation. The commenter
stated that the repetitive inspections would not be effective because
shaft failures could occur at any time between inspections.
    The commenter recommended that a more effective solution would be a
crew procedure (e.g., a pre-flight inspection of the seat tracks).
Furthermore the commenter stated that it would have expected a
termination action for modified/compliant airplanes, for example
required maintenance documentation amendments. The commenter asked if
any maintenance planning document item is being prepared that would
require repetitive checks for the part number of the horizontal
actuator.
    The FAA infers that the commenter is requesting that we require
alternative actions to address the unsafe condition than what is
proposed in the NPRM. The FAA does not agree with the commenter's
request. The FAA has identified the unsafe condition in this final rule
as uncommanded fore/aft movement of the Captain's and First Officer's
seats. The FAA has determined that the actions required by this AD
adequately address the identified unsafe condition, and that the
creation of a maintenance planning document item or other service
information is not needed. In addition, the FAA notes that a
terminating action is detailed in paragraph (j) of this AD. Paragraph
(j) of this AD states ``Installation of a serviceable Captain's or
First Officer's seat as specified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1,
terminates the repetitive checks required by paragraph (h) of this AD
for that seat only.''
    A serviceable Captain's or First Officer's seat is defined in
Paragraph 3.A of BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1. The horizontal actuator
with Artus P/N AD8650503 at Amendment C or later is the redesigned
horizontal actuator that is designed to withstand the required limit
loads. Additionally, according to the BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1, in
the case that the horizontal actuator part number is not AD8650503 at
Amendment C or later, upon inspection and before further flight, the
operator has the option to install a power deactivated seat in lieu of
the terminating action or until such a time that the horizontal
actuator can be serviced in accordance with the appropriate service
information. The FAA has not revised this AD in regard to this issue.
However, under the provisions of paragraph (k) of this AD, the FAA will
consider requests for approval of alternative actions if sufficient
data are submitted to substantiate that alternative actions provide an
acceptable level of safety.
    Regarding the commenter's statement that shaft failures could occur
at any time, the FAA infers that the commenter is referring to the 36-
month compliance time and the chance that a shaft failure might occur
during this time. The FAA notes that in developing an appropriate
compliance time, the FAA considered the urgency associated with the
subject unsafe condition, the availability of required parts, and the
practical aspect of accomplishing the required actions within a period
of time that corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for most
affected operators. In consideration of all of these factors, the FAA
has determined that the compliance time, as proposed, represents an
appropriate interval. The FAA further notes that the repetitive checks
required by this AD adequately address the unsafe condition, though
operators also have the option of installing a serviceable seat to
terminate

those repetitive checks, as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

Request To Provide Credit for Previous Actions

    American Airlines requested that a provision be included in the
proposed AD to allow operators to receive credit for actions completed
prior to the effective date using the procedures in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0607, dated January 9, 2014.
    The FAA does not agree with the commenter's request. This AD
requires operators to use BSASB 777-25-0607, Revision 1, because it
includes seat part numbers that were not included in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0607, dated January 9, 2014. The
Ipeco service information was revised in support of BSASB 777-25-0607,
Revision 1, by updating information included in the Accomplishment
Instructions. The FAA has not revised this AD in regard to this issue.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor
changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    The FAA also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-
0607, Revision 1, dated July 17, 2018 (``BSASB 777-25-0607, Revision
1''). The service information describes procedures for identification
of the part number, and if applicable the serial number, of the
Captain's and First Officer's seats, and for applicable on-condition
actions for affected seats. The on-condition actions include an
inspection of each seat's fore/aft and vertical manual control levers
for looseness, installation of serviceable seats, and a seat functional
test after any cable adjustment.
    The FAA also reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
777-25-0619, Revision 1, dated August 8, 2018 (``BSASB 777-25-0619,
Revision 1''). The service information describes procedures for a
detailed inspection and repetitive checks of the horizontal movement
system for the Captain's and First Officer's seats for findings (e.g.,
evidence of cracks, scores, corrosion, dents, deformation or visible
wear; and incorrectly assembled microswitch assemblies, actuators, and
limit switches), and applicable on-condition actions. The on-condition
actions include clearing the seat tracks of foreign object debris
(FOD), overhaul of the horizontal movement system and replacement of
the horizontal actuator. The service information also describes
procedures for an optional terminating action for the repetitive checks
by installing a serviceable Captain's or First Officer's seat.
    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.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 190 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions per Seat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost                Cost per product                       Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identification, seat............  1 work-hour x $85                $0  $85.....................................  $16,150.
                                   per hour = $85.
Detailed inspection, horizontal   1 work-hour x $85                 0  $85.....................................  $16,150.
 movement system.                  per hour = $85.
Checks, horizontal movement       2 work-hour x $85                 0  $170 per check cycle....................  $32,300 per check cycle.
 system.                           per hour = $170
                                   per check 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 per Seat *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                         Labor cost                         Parts cost                               Cost per product
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment, control lever cable.......  1 work-hour x $85 per     $0........................................  $85.
                                         hour = $85.
Overhaul, horizontal movement system..  11 work-hours x $85 per   Up to $5,824..............................  Up to $6,759.
                                         hour = $935.
Inspection of each seat's fore/aft and  1 work-hour x $85 per     $0........................................  $85.
 vertical manual control levers.         hour = $85.
Installation of serviceable seats.....  1 work-hour x $85 per     $0........................................  $85.
                                         hour = $85.
Clearing FOD..........................  1 work-hour x $85 per     $0........................................  $85.
                                         hour = $85.
Replacement of the horizontal actuator  1 work-hour x $85 per     $7,937 per actuator.......................  $8,022 per actuator.
                                         hour = $85, per
                                         actuator.
Functional test, adjusted control       1 work-hour x $85 per     $0........................................  $85.
 lever cable.                            hour = $85.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The estimated cost for tooling to align an affected seat for adjustment of the control lever cable is up to $46,064.

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the optional terminating action
for the repetitive checks specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2019-16-05 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19708; Docket No. FAA-
2018-1012; Product Identifier 2018-NM-132-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 8, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR,
-300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/
Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded fore/aft movement
of the Captain's and First Officer's seats. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address uncommanded fore/aft movement of the Captain's and
First Officer's seats. An uncommanded fore/aft seat movement during
a critical part of a flight, such as takeoff or landing, could cause
a flight control obstruction or unintended flight control input,
which could result in the loss of the ability to control the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Seat Part Number Identification and On-Condition Actions

    Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, do an
inspection to determine the part number, and serial number as
applicable, of the Captain's and First Officer's seats, and do all
applicable on-condition actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777-25-0607, Revision 1, dated July 17, 2018. A review of
airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this
inspection if the part number and serial number of the Captain's and
First Officer's seats can be conclusively determined from that
review.

(h) Detailed Inspection and Repetitive Checks of Horizontal Movement
System and On-Condition Actions

    Except as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0619, Revision 1,
dated August 8, 2018 (``BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1''), do all
applicable actions identified as ``RC'' (required for compliance)
in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of BSASB
777-25-0619, Revision 1.

(i) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of
this AD: Where BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1, uses the phrase ``the
original issue date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
using ``the effective date of this AD.''

(j) Optional Terminating Action for Repetitive Checks

    Installation of a serviceable Captain's or First Officer's seat
as specified in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment
Instructions of BSASB 777-25-0619, Revision 1, terminates the
repetitive checks required by paragraph (h) of this AD for that seat
only.

(k) 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 (l) 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.
    (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs
(k)(4)(i) and (ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can

still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an
airworthy condition.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Brandon Lucero,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Section,
FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0607,
Revision 1, dated July 17, 2018.
    (ii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-25-0619,
Revision 1, dated August 8, 2018.
    (3) 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.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on August 9, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-18832 Filed 8-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 137)]
[Notices]
[Page 39412-39413]
[DOCID:fr18jy07-64]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8440-9]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby given
of a proposed consent decree, to address a lawsuit filed by American
Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago, Citizens Against Ruining the
Environment, Environment Illinois, Environmental Law & Policy Center,
Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, and the Sierra Club
(collectively ``Plaintiffs'') in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois: American Lung Association of
Metropolitan Chicago, et al. v. Johnson, No. 06-6933 (N.D. IL).
Plaintiffs filed a deadline suit to compel the Administrator to respond
to an administrative petition dated November 25, 2005 seeking EPA's
objection to CAA Title V operating permits for two (2) electrical
generating stations in the State of Illinois known as the Fisk
Generating Station and the Crawford Generating Station. Under the terms
of the proposed consent decree, EPA has agreed to respond to the
Plaintiffs' petition within five (5) business days after the entry of
this decree, and the Plaintiffs have agreed to dismiss the suit with
prejudice. In addition, EPA has agreed to pay the Plaintiffs a
specified amount in settlement for attorneys' fees and litigation cost
in this matter. EPA responded to the petition on June 14, 2007.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by August 17, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2007-0551, online at http://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method); by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>mailed to EPA Docket Center,

Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Versace, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    This proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit seeking a
response to an administrative petition dated November 25, 2005 to
object to CAA Title V permits for two (2) electrical generating
stations in the State of Illinois known as the Fisk Generating Station
and the Crawford Generating Station. Under the proposed consent decree,
EPA has agreed to respond to the Plaintiffs' petition within five (5)
business days after the entry of this decree and to pay a specified
amount in settlement of the Plaintiffs' claims for attorneys' fees and
other litigation costs. The consent decree becomes an order of the
Court upon entry, and, consistent with the terms of the consent decree,
the case shall be dismissed with prejudice after EPA takes final action
on Plaintiffs' petition and resolves Plaintiffs' claims for litigation
costs. On June 14, 2007, EPA took final action on the Plaintiffs' CAA
Title V petition regarding permits for two (2) electrical generating
stations in the State of Illinois known as the Fisk Generating Station
and the Crawford Generating Station.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to
the proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties
or intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines, based on any comment which may be submitted, that
consent to the consent decree should be withdrawn, the terms of the
decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How Can I Get a Copy of the Consent Decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2007-0551) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at
the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
http://www.regulations.gov. You may use the www.regulations.gov to submit or

view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and to access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select
``search,'' then key in the appropriate docket identification number.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov without change, unless

the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not
included in the official public docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including
copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed
in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket

materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of
the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center.

B. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
    Use of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA

electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(e-mail) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going through
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address is automatically captured and

included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: July 11, 2007.
Richard B. Ossias,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E7-13902 Filed 7-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on April 6, 2005

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-20320

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

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

Joint Application of   Delta Air Lines, Inc. (Delta), and Aerovias de
Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (Aeromexico) filed 2/3/05, and supplemented 3/18/05
for:

XX  Statement of authorization for Delta, for indefinite duration under
CFR Part 212 to:

Display Aeromexico’s “AM” designator code on flights operated by
Delta between: (1) the terminal point Atlanta, Georgia, and the terminal
point Cozumel, Mexico; and (2) the terminal point Salt Lake City, Utah,
and the terminal point San Jose del Cabo, Mexico.

XX  Exemption for Aeromexico for one year under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to
provide the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point Salt Lake City, Utah, and the terminal point
San Jose del Cabo, Mexico.   Aeromexico intends to provide this service
by placing its code on flights operated by Delta.

Applicant reps: Alexander Van der Bellen,<PHONE_NUMBER> (Delta)  DOT
Analyst: Thuy H. Cooper,

           John R. Mietus,<PHONE_NUMBER> (Aeromexico)
<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX	Granted statement of authorization to Delta for Atlanta-Cozumel
market (subject to                  conditions, see below)

XX	Deferred on request for exemption authority to Aeromexico and
statement of authorization  to Delta for Salt Lake City-San Jose del
Cabo market (see footnote 2, below)

The above action granting a statement of authorization to Delta was
effective when taken: April 6, 2005, and will remain in effect
indefinitely, subject to the conditions below.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

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

Conditions:

The Statement of Authorization granted to Delta is subject to the
following conditions:

(a) The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long as
Delta and Aeromexico continue to hold the underlying authority to
operate the code-share services at issue, and the code-share agreement
providing for the code-share operations remains in effect.

(b) Delta and/or Aeromexico must promptly notify the Department (Office
of International Aviation) if the code-share agreement is no longer
effective or if the carriers decide to cease operating all or a portion
of the approved code-share services. (Such notice should be filed in
Docket OST-2005-20320.)

(c) The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendment to the Department’s
regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.
Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our
approval here is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the
subject foreign air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier
holding out such service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere;
that the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in its contract of carriage with
the passenger; and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier
be unaffected.

(d) The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither Delta nor Aeromexico shall give any force or effect to any
contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to these
conditions.

(e) We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this Notice
at any time without hearing at our discretion.

________________________________________________________________________
______

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

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

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

 Aeromexico already holds the underlying exemption authority to provide
air transportation of persons, property, and mail in the Atlanta-Cozumel
market (see Notice of Action Taken dated November 24, 2004, in Docket
OST-1999-6366), and has been designated by the Government of Mexico to
provide such services.  Delta also holds the underlying exemption
authority to provide air transportation of persons, property, and mail
in the Atlanta-Cozumel market (see Notice of Action Taken dated October
6, 2004, in Docket OST-2004-19231).

 In their March 18, 2005 supplement, the joint applicants requested that
the Department grant Delta a Statement of Authorization to carry
Aeromexico’s code on Delta’s flights on the Atlanta-Cozumel route,
and defer action on the Salt Lake City-San Jose del Cabo portion of the
application until the requisite Salt Lake City-San Jose del Cabo
designation documents for Aeromexico have been received.

 See note 2, supra.

 We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of such
non-effectiveness or of such decision.


Eligibility:	Brand Owner of ENERGY STAR certified products. Service providers (e.g., cable, satellite, and telecommunications providers) that label and distribute ENERGY STAR certified products should apply for recognition using this application.

            Please note that the prerequisite for any product brand owner award is compliance with the requirements outlined in the applicable ENERGY STAR Partner Commitments, Product Specification, and Brand Book requirements. Applications will be screened for such compliance, including proper logo and label use. Additionally, please read the separate General Instructions for all applicants.

Description:	This award recognizes organizations that have demonstrated leadership in the energy efficiency of products directly leveraging ENERGY STAR to further market uptake and advance energy efficiency and related greenhouse gas emission reduction objectives. Recipients of awards in this category distinguish themselves through their innovation in designing and promoting products with superior energy efficiency, training employees, and educating their customers about the benefit of energy efficiency using the ENERGY STAR brand, tools, strategies and resources to do so.
            ENERGY STAR recognizes that each organization excels in specific areas. Partners may describe specific activities beyond the scope of the criteria listed below but should not omit any data or information required by the application.

            For organizations that have been recognized with ENERGY STAR Awards in past years, the award evaluation committee will assess applicants not only on their ability to sustain successful strategies from prior years, but also new achievements in 2019. Applicants are encouraged to respond accordingly in their narratives.

Criteria:	Criteria for evaluating applications for this award are listed below. Cumulative accomplishment statements may be included in the Accomplishments Narrative, but data specific to 2019 activities must also be provided. When highlighting cumulative accomplishments, please ensure that you include a timeframe (e.g., saved $300,000 in electricity costs in 2019 and more than $3 million since 2001).

                                    BEGIN APPLICATION

                         PART 2:
Award Accomplishments Document
                (use the following information to create a Word or PDF file)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accomplishments Narrative

Our goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by helping consumers identify and select products that have earned the ENERGY STAR because of their superior energy efficiency. How are you helping to achieve that goal? Please write a narrative describing your company's activities and accomplishments specific to supporting ENERGY STAR's objective. Your narrative should:

       Be no more than five pages but may be accompanied by electronic samples of specific promotions, advertisements, or other activities your organization led in 2019.
       Use at least size 11 font.
       Provide a detailed description of your 2019 activities and accomplishments, demonstrating how you have met the required criteria.
       Be consistent with the outline below, to the extent the activities are relevant to your organization.
       Include all provided tables and their requested data points.
       Provide year-to-date figures for all requested data points. Figures requested for previous year should cover the same time period.
       Provide timeframes for any supplemental data on cumulative outcomes.
       Provide supporting materials that demonstrate your efforts and accomplishments in a single PDF.
Please organize supporting material with hyperlinks or in a single PDF file with references to section or page numbers so that it can be referenced easily in the application narrative.  Each applicant must submit at least one item in PART 3: Supporting Materials. (required)

NOTE: To receive credit for efforts, applicants must supply all requested data points and descriptions in the Accomplishments Narrative.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Award Evaluation Criteria:

Reviewers will look for the following, as appropriate to your business:

 Effort to Further Energy Efficiency in Products

Please provide a detailed description of your efforts and accomplishments to further energy-efficiency in your products during 2019 that includes the following:
 Information concerning new ENERGY STAR models/option packages developed/certified in 2019, including a brief description of innovation in product design for energy efficiency. Provide specific examples, design drawings or diagrams, and savings delivered, where possible
 Description of engagement and leadership regarding the ENERGY STAR program, including participation in ENERGY STAR product specification development effort(s) and conduct/sharing of research and/or data that support specification development
 Activities that go above and beyond minimum labeling requirements (e.g., unique or highly prominent use of the logo on product or packaging in terms of size, location, etc. while still meeting the ENERGY STAR Brand Book requirements: www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=logos.pt_guidelines, inclusion of program messaging, digital graphics with widgets, and links back to energystar.gov with ENERGY STAR certification mark and on high profile pages on company website (see for program messaging and graphics:  https://www.energystar.gov/products/marketing_materials) Please provide examples.)
 Please provide the table with the requested data points below:
 (Note: Cut and paste this table into your Accomplishments document for editing)

Number of ENERGY STAR certified models (for windows, number of option packages also acceptable) * available in 2019

   Number of ENERGY STAR certified models (for windows number of option packages also acceptable) available in 2018

   Percentage change over previous year
                                   [Formula]
Percentage of eligible 2019 models that are ENERGY STAR certified

For window, door, or skylight manufacturers:

   Percentage of models ENERGY STAR qualified in standard version

   Percentage of models that can be upgraded to ENERGY STAR

Percentage of total sales (dollars) from ENERGY STAR certified models in 2019

   Percentage of total sales (dollars) from ENERGY STAR certified models in 2018

   Percentage change over previous year**
                                   [Formula]
  *Please provide a definition of "model" and/or "option packages"
  **If you are unable to provide specific sales information, please indicate general year-over-year improvements, if applicable

   2. Training Efforts
Please provide a detailed description of your efforts and accomplishments related to training during 2018 that includes the following:
 Integration of ENERGY STAR into your organization's sales force and employee training. Provide scope, description of efforts, measures of impact, and examples (e.g., training manuals, new employee packets, presentations, etc.).
 Cooperation with distributors, retailers, or utility/state/regional partners to increase ENERGY STAR information in retail/distributor product knowledge training. Provide scope, description of efforts, measures of impact and examples (e.g., collateral, e-mails, screen shots of web-based, video, manuals, newsletters, presentations, ENERGY STAR specification summary sheets, etc.).
 Collaboration with EPA in the development of training activities.
 Note: Please make sure the examples include training materials that feature ENERGY STAR certified equipment and explicitly mention ENERGY STAR and offer additional information about the ENERGY STAR program.
(Cut and paste this table into your Accomplishments document for editing)
Number of existing employees reached through internal training

   Percentage of existing employees reached

Number of new employees reached through internal training

   Percentage of new employees reached

Number of distributor or retailer locations trained

   Percentage of distributor or retailer locations trained

   Number of distributor or retailer employees trained (total)

   Average percentage of distributor or retailer employees trained at each location

3. Marketing and Communications Efforts

 Please provide a detailed description of your product marketing and communications efforts and accomplishments in 2019.

For the relevant product categories these could include participation in one or more of EPA's ENERGY STAR 2019 relevant product promotions or other consumer outreach initiatives / campaigns listed below: (for product categories not covered by EPA's product promotions- e.g. commercial products, please describe your general marketing efforts in the sections below).

       Flip Your Fridge
       Earth Day
       Pool Pumps
       Cooling / heating
       Room Air Conditioners
       Laundry
       ENERGY STAR Most Efficient
       Water Heaters
       Light the Moment / lighting
       Smart Thermostats
       ENERGY STAR Day
       Holiday

 For each effort, provide the following:

 Description of the effort, such as training, product promotion / sales, Web, media outreach, events, etc.
 Specific tactics used, such as online / digital media, in-store activities (signage / events), advertising, public relations, social media, direct mail, etc.
 Intended audience for the marketing/communications effort, such as internal or external and demographics
 Dates and location of activity(ies)
 Data on the impact of the effort, such as:
 Quantity of materials/efforts
 Frequency of efforts
 Reach/Impressions
 Web data - such as number of views, unique visitors, or average view times
 Brief description of any partnering or cooperative aspects
 Graphic examples of materials to demonstrate the integration of ENERGY STAR graphics and messaging. These may be included as part of the PDF of supporting materials described above.

To be considered, marketing and communications materials must include the correct use of the ENERGY STAR brand (and marks) and association with energy efficiency and environmental protection. (Messaging that focuses on energy efficiency alone will not be considered.) Also, materials must include links to energystar.gov through reference in materials or links from promotional landing pages.
 Special consideration will be given to partners that integrate the Ways to Save Tips web service into their websites for general ENERGY STAR education purposes. See the Ways to Save Tips web service one-pager for more information.

Note:  In addition to the three priority areas outlined above, EPA will also consider cross-cutting efforts that have been incorporated into company practices, such as:

    Participation in additional ENERGY STAR and EPA programs, including:
 ENERGY STAR Buildings
 ENERGY STAR Industrial Partnership
 EPA's Green Power Partnership
 EPA's SmartWay
 EPA's Responsible Appliance Disposal (RAD) Program
 EPA's WaterSense
    Commitment to organization-wide facility energy efficiency improvements
    Organizational procurement practices of energy efficient and/or ENERGY STAR certified products
    Outline company efforts to reduce GHG emissions on site (e.g., recycling programs, solar, Bike to Work initiatives, electric vehicle charging stations, etc.)
    Outline company efforts to reduce GHG emissions in the value chain of its products (i.e., manufacturing processes for products)
    Offering recycling of products and/or packaging or developing in-house recycling programs
    Participation in the development of data tools, such as QPX and Product Finder. (Where applicable for your product category)
    Commitment to protecting the integrity of the ENERGY STAR brand through continuous improvement, enhanced quality assurance, reporting logo violations, or other practices.

                 Prepare/Gather Remaining Documents for Upload

PART 3: Supporting Materials (at least one required, as described in the Application Instructions above)

ENERGY STAR[(R)] is the simple choice for energy efficiency. For 25 years, EPA's ENERGY STAR program has been America's resource for saving energy and protecting the environment. Join the millions already making a difference at energystar.gov.

PART 4: Organization's High-Resolution Logo (required)


Executive Summary ° Seagrass ecosystems are protected under the federal " no net loss" policy for wetlands and form one of the most productive plant communities on the planet, performing important ecological functions.

° Seagrass beds have been recognized as a valuable resource critical to the health and function of coastal waters. Greater awareness and public education, however is essential for conservation of this resource.

° Tremendous losses of this habitat have occurred as a result of development within the coastal zone. Disturbances usually kill seagrasses rapidly, and recovery is often comparatively slow.

° Mitigation to compensate for destruction of existing habitat usually follows when the agent of loss and responsible party are known. Compensation assumes that ecosystems can be made to order and, in essence, trades existing functional habitat for the promise of replacement habitat.

° While planting seagrass is not technically complex, there is no easy way to meet the goal of maintaining or increasing seagrass acreage. Rather, the entire process of planning, planting and monitoring requires attention to detail and does not lend itself to oversimplification.

ix ° The success rate of permit linked mitigation projects remains low overall, but this appears to result from failures in the planning process as much as any other cause. To prevent continued loss of habitat under compensatory mitigation, decisive action must be taken by placing emphasis on improving site selection, compliance, generating desired acreage, and maintaining a true baseline.

° Seagrass planting is no longer experimental, but planting will not succeed unless managers appreciate and emphasize the extreme importance of site selection, care in planting, and incorporation of plant demography into the planning and planting processes.

° Seagrass beds can be restored, but preservation is the most cost effective course of action to sustain seagrass resources. Although techniques and protocols exist that produce persistent seagrass beds, they are often applied inconsistently, which has resulted in large scale failures.

° A logical and ecologically defensible goal is to attain replacement of the lost seagrass species with an area of bottom coverage that compensates for interim lost resource services and a comparable shoot density. Seagrass plantings that persist and generate the target acreage have been shown to quickly provide many of the functional attributes of natural beds.

° When destruction of the impact site requires planting in another location ( i. e., offsite it is often difficult to find a site elsewhere with suitable biological and physical parameters required for seagrass growth and persistence.

° As more information is made available to managers regarding the function of seagrass ecosystems and the difficulties involved in mitigating for their loss, fewer permitted impacts are occurring with more emphasis placed on impact avoidance and minimization. x ° Guidelines for the Conservation and Restoration of Seagrasses


[Federal Register: May 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 88)]
[Notices]
[Page 24965-24966]
[DOCID:fr06my08-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

April 30, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP96-389-089.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company submits negotiated
rate agreement re FTS-1 Service Agreement 01116 between Columbia Gulf
Transmission Company and National Fuel Marketing, LLC dated 04/24/2008.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0255.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP00-305-036.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation submits an amended negotiated rate agreement between MRT
and CenterPoint Energy Services, Inc.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0253.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP00-305-037.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation submits an amended negotiated rate agreement between MRT
and Laclede Energy Resources, Inc.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0254.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP02-361-070.
    Applicants: Gulf Stream Natural Gas System, LLC.
    Description: Gulfstream Natural Gas System LLC submits Original
Sheet 8.021, to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, reflecting an
effective date of May 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0250.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-221-001.
    Applicants: Crossroads Pipeline Company.
    Description: Crossroads Pipeline Company submits response to 3/27/
08 letter re Crossroads to provide additional information by April 28,
2008.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0251.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-223-001.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Equitrans, LP submits responses to Data Requests
issued by the Commission's Letter Order of 3/27/08.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080430-0001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-247-001.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Ozark Gas Transmission, LLC submits Substitute Seventh
Revised Sheet 13, Substitute Original Sheet 14A and 39A to FERC Gas
Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be effective 4/1/08.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0257.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-328-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company submits First
Revised Sheet 500C to its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1
effective date of April 4, 2008.
    Filed Date: 04/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080429-0256.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-329-000.
    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC submits Section 27
Revenue Credit Report for 2007.
    Filed Date: 04/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080430-5039.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-330-000.

    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC submits its Imbalance
Cash-out Activity Report for the year ended December 31, 2007 pursuant
to the Terms and Conditions in Discovery's FERC Gas Tariff.
    Filed Date: 04/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080430-5040.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-333-000.
    Applicants: Black Marlin Pipeline Company.
    Description: Annual Cash Out Report of Black Marlin Pipeline
Company.
    Filed Date: 04/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080430-5041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-9965 Filed 5-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 5, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 233)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68504-68506]
[DOCID:fr05de07-10]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. CGD01-07-150]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Wantagh Parkway 3 Bridge over the Sloop Channel,
Town of Hempstead, New York

AGENCY:  Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending the effective period of a
temporary safety zone previously established on the waters surrounding
the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge across the Sloop Channel in Town of
Hempstead, New York. The extended effective period of this zone is
necessary to protect vessels transiting in the area from hazards
imposed by construction barges and equipment that are being utilized to
construct a new bascule bridge over the Sloop Channel. Entry into this
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Long
Island Sound, New Haven, Connecticut.

DATES:  This rule is effective from January 4, 2008 until 11:59 p.m.
June 30, 2008.

ADDRESSES:  Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket CGD01-07-150 and will be available for
inspection or copying at Sector Long Island Sound, New Haven, CT,
between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Lieutenant D. Miller, Assistant
Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Long Island
Sound at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

    We did not publish notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553 (b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Any delay encountered in this
regulation's effective date would be impracticable and contrary to
public interest since immediate action to restrict and control maritime
traffic transiting in the vicinity of the Sloop Channel under the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge in the Town of Hempstead, Nassau
County, Long Island, New York is needed to ensure the safety of vessels
transiting the area.
    In 2003, the Coast Guard approved bridge construction and issued a
permit for bridge construction for the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge
over the Sloop Channel. Contractors began work constructing the two
bascule piers for the new bridge in early June 2004. A safety zone was
not deemed necessary at the inception of the construction, as this
channel is primarily used by smaller recreational vessels, which could
maneuver outside of the channel. However, bridge construction equipment
that remains under the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge poses a
potential hazard greater than originally anticipated. A safety zone was
deemed necessary and was established on October 9, 2004 through
December 31, 2004, the date when construction impacting the navigable
channel was estimated to be complete. A second safety zone was
implemented on January 1, 2005 and extended until December 31, 2005 due
to delays in construction, requiring equipment to be in the channel in
a manner that would leave the waterway unsafe to marine traffic. Due to
continued significant delays in bridge construction, the safety zone
was extended until December 31, 2006. Construction delays continued and
the safety zone extended again to December 31, 2007. The contractor for
this project continues to experience significant delays in bridge
construction. In order to continue construction in a more rapid and
safe manner, barges will need to continuously block the channel under
the bridge. Accordingly, the New York State Department of
Transportation (NYSDOT) has requested that a safety zone be put in
place through June 30, 2008. At that time, the construction progress
will allow the contractors to remove the equipment from the channel.
    As the construction equipment is presently obstructing the
navigable channel, immediate action is needed to prevent accidents by
limiting vessel movement in the area with the construction equipment.
Traffic exists in this area year round and increases significantly in
the summer months with the return of recreational traffic.

Background and Purpose

    Currently, there is a fixed bridge over the Wantagh Parkway Number
3 Bridge over the Sloop Channel in the Town of Hempstead, New York. New
York Department of Transportation determined that a moveable bridge
would benefit the boating community. In 2003, the Coast Guard approved
bridge construction and issued a permit for bridge construction for the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge over the Sloop Channel. Contractors
began work constructing the two-bascule piers for the new bridge in
early June 2004. The equipment necessary for the construction of the
bridge occupies the entire navigable channel. While there are side
channels, which can be navigated, the equipment in the channel is
extensive and poses a hazard to recreational vessels attempting to
transit the waterway via the side channels under the bridge.
Construction, requiring equipment in the navigable

channel, was originally scheduled to end on December 31, 2004. Numerous
delays in the construction have required construction equipment to
continue to occupy the navigable channel and have required three
subsequent extensions of the established safety zone through December
31, 2005 and then through December 31, 2006 and most recently through
December 31, 2007 when the contractor continued to experience
significant delays. Due to continued construction delays, the NYSDOT
has requested that a safety zone be in place through June 30, 2008. To
ensure the continued safety of the boating community, the Coast Guard
is extending the effective period of the safety zone that is currently
in place in all waters of the Sloop Channel within 300-yards of the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge. This safety zone is necessary to
protect the safety of the boating community who wish to utilize the
Sloop Channel. Vessels may utilize the Goose Neck Channel as an
alternative route to using the Sloop Channel, adding minimal additional
transit time. Marine traffic may also transit safely outside of the
safety zone during the effective dates of the safety zone, allowing
navigation in the Sloop Channel, except the portion delineated by this
rule.

Discussion of Rule

    This regulation extends the effective period of a temporary safety
zone on the waters of the Sloop Channel within 300-yards of the Wantagh
Parkway Bridge. This action is intended to prohibit vessel traffic in a
portion of the Sloop Channel in the Town of Hempstead, New York to
provide for the safety of the boating community due to the hazards
posed by significant construction equipment and barges located in the
waterway for the construction of a new bascule bridge. The effective
period of this safety zone is continued to 11:59 p.m. on June 30, 2008.
Marine traffic may continue to transit safely outside of the safety
zone during the effective dates of the safety zone, allowing navigation
in the Sloop Channel, except the portion delineated by this rule. Entry
into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port, Long Island Sound.
    Any violation of the safety zone described herein is punishable by,
among other things, civil and criminal penalties, in rem liability
against the offending vessel, and the initiation of suspension or
revocation proceedings against Coast Guard-issued merchant mariner
credentials.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    This regulation may have some impact on the public, but the
potential impact will be minimized for the following reasons: vessels
may transit in all areas of the Sloop Channel other than the area of
the safety zone, and may utilize other routes with minimal increased
transit time.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in those portions of the Sloop Channel in the Town of
Hempstead, New York covered by the safety zone. For the reasons
outlined in the Regulatory Evaluation section above, this rule will not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under subsection 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104-121], the Coast Guard
wants to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they
can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the
rulemaking. If this rule will affect your small business, organization,
or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please call Lieutenant D. Miller
Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Safety Office
Long Island Sound at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action fo the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

    This 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.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and will not concern an
environmental risk

to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect
children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it will 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    The Coast Guard analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental
documentation. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph
(34)(g), as it establishes a safety zone. An final ``Environmental
Analysis Check List'' and a final ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' will be available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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. 1225 and 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
0
2. Amend Sec.  165.T01-132 by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  165.T01-132  Safety Zone: Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge over
the Sloop Channel, Town of Hempstead, NY.

* * * * *
    (b) Effective date: This rule is effective from 11:59 p.m. on
January 22, 2007 until 11:59 p.m. June 30, 2008.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 20, 2007.
D.A. Ronan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound.
 [FR Doc. E7-23569 Filed 12-4-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P