[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 126 (Tuesday, July 1, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37239-37243]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15416]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0475; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-199-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and
-300 series airplanes. The NPRM proposed to require, for certain
airplanes, installing new relays adjacent to two of the spoiler control
modules. For certain other airplanes, the NPRM proposed to require
torquing the bracket assembly installation nuts and ground stud nuts,
and doing bond resistance tests between the bracket assemblies and the
terminal lugs on the ground studs. The NPRM was prompted by numerous
reports of unintended lateral oscillations during final approach, just
before landing. This action revises the NPRM by adding actions that are
necessary to address the identified unsafe condition. We are proposing
this supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) to reduce the chance of unintended
lateral oscillations near touchdown, which could result in loss of
lateral control of the airplane, and consequent airplane damage or
injury to flight crew and passengers. Since these actions impose an
additional burden over that proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the
comment period to allow the public the chance to comment on these
proposed changes.

DATES: We must receive comments on this SNPRM by August 15, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2011-
0475; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marie Hogestad, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:
425-917-6418; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0475;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-199-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that
would apply to certain The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -
200CB, and -300 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on May 24, 2011 (76 FR 30043). The NPRM proposed to require,
for certain airplanes, installing new relays adjacent to two of the
spoiler control modules that would prevent the deployment of certain
spoiler pairs when landing flaps are selected. For certain other
airplanes, the NPRM proposed to require torquing the bracket assembly
installation nuts and ground stud nuts, and doing bond resistance tests
between the bracket assemblies and the terminal lugs on the ground
studs.

Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that additional
actions are necessary to address the identified unsafe condition. The
actions include installing three new relays on the opposite side of the
same relay bracket assembly; and for certain airplanes, doing an
additional inspection to ensure that the three new relays do not
contact adjacent wire bundles, and related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM (76 FR
30043, May 24, 2011). The following presents the comments received on
the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011) and the FAA's response to each
comment.

Support for the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011)

    The Airline Pilots Association, International (ALPA) stated that it
supports the intent of the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011).

Request To Withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011)

    FedEx requested that we withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24,
2011). FedEx stated that since implementation of AD 2006-23-15,
Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 2006), there have been no
reports of lateral pilot-induced oscillation (PIO) or unintended
lateral oscillations during landing from the operators of Model 757
airplanes. (AD 2006-23-15 requires, among other actions, installing a
control wheel damper assembly and vortex generators (vortilons) on the
leading edge of the outboard main flap.) FedEx also stated that the
proposed modifications to the lateral control system are very costly,
do not improve the lateral handling characteristics, and will make the
airplane less responsive and less maneuverable in the landing
environment, resulting in the potential for an unsafe condition.
    We disagree with the request to withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May
24, 2011). AD 2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16,
2006), is considered interim action. The manufacturer has identified an
additional modification that is needed to correct the unsafe condition
identified in AD 2006-23-15. This design change was made to reduce the
lateral power to take out excessive airplane roll authority during
landing operations. This is done by making the airplane lateral
response to control wheel inputs more linear. It should be noted that
this will make Model 757 handling characteristics more consistent with
those of the other Boeing airplane models during landing operations.
Also, even though there have only been 12 reports of unintended lateral
oscillations near touchdown, there could have been other events that
have been unrecognized and/or unreported. We have determined that it is
necessary to proceed with this AD action.

Request To Shorten Compliance Time

    ALPA requested the compliance time be shortened from the 60 months
proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011). ALPA stated that a
shortened compliance time is justified given the serious consequences
of unintended roll oscillations near the ground.
    We disagree with the request to shorten the compliance time. In
developing the compliance time for this AD action, we considered not
only the safety implications of the identified unsafe condition, but
also the average utilization rate of the affected fleet, the practical
aspects of an orderly modification of the fleet, the availability of
required parts, and the time necessary for the rulemaking process. The
60-month compliance time following the effective date of the final rule
was

determined to be appropriate given the interim actions that have
already been mandated by AD 2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR
66657, November 16, 2006). We have not changed the SNPRM in this
regard.

Request To Use Revised Service Bulletin

    American Airlines requested that we delay release of the final rule
until after release of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 2,
so it can be incorporated into the AD. American Airlines stated that
the pending Revision 2 of this service bulletin was expected to address
many of the concerns it had regarding the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24,
2011) and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 1, dated
June 30, 2010. American Airlines outlined its concerns in its comments.
    We have revised this SNPRM to refer to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as operators need to have
comprehensive, clear, and concise instructions to accomplish the
requirements of this AD.
    Also, we reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 2,
dated May 25, 2012; and Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. Revision 2
was issued to add procedures for installing three new relays on the
opposite side of the same relay bracket assembly to improve wire
routing and maintenance access to the relays, and to prevent wire
chafing on adjacent wire bundles. For certain airplanes, a general
visual inspection was added to ensure the three new relays do not
contact adjacent wire bundles and, if necessary, related investigative
and corrective actions.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28,
2013, was subsequently issued to make further improvements and
corrections to illustrations.
    We have changed the service information references in paragraphs
(c) and (g) of this SNPRM to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152,
Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013; and added new paragraph (h) to this
SNPRM to provide credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of
this SNPRM, if those actions were performed before the effective date
of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 2, dated
May 25, 2012.

Request To Clarify the Terms ``Refer to'' and ``In Accordance With''

    UPS asked if we agree with the terms ``refer to'' and ``in
accordance with'' as defined in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010.
    We agree with the definition of the terms ``refer to'' and ``in
accordance with'' as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010; Boeing Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 2, dated May 25, 2012; and Boeing Service Bulletin
757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. When the words ``refer
to'' are used and the operator has an accepted alternative procedure,
the accepted alternative procedure may be used. When the words ``in
accordance with'' are included in the instruction, the procedure
specified must be used. No change to the SNPRM is needed.

Request To Change Wording

    Boeing requested that we revise the SUMMARY and Discussion sections
and paragraph (e) of the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011) to change
``numerous'' to ``several'' when describing the number of reports of
unintended lateral oscillations during final approach. Boeing stated
that this wording change would make the wording in the NPRM consistent
with that used in AD 2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657,
November 16, 2006), which also addresses the issue of unintended
lateral oscillations near touchdown for Model 757 airplanes.
    We disagree to change the wording. Although the wording is not
consistent with AD 2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657,
November 16, 2006), it is accurate because there have been 12 confirmed
PIO events in Model 757 history. And there were three other events for
which a PIO was suspected, but without time history data, they could
not be confirmed. We have not changed the SNPRM in this regard.

Request To Allow Use of New Parts

    American Airlines requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 30043,
May 24, 2011) to authorize, without mandating, installation of new
parts in place of lost or damaged hardware. American Airlines stated
that it finds several areas in which Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010, states to ``Install (Kept)''
parts. American Airlines stated that no authority is given to replace
the kept parts with new parts of the same part number and that, during
the course of the modification, parts may become damaged or lost,
therefore rendering the kept hardware unserviceable or unavailable for
installation.
    We agree with the commenter's request. As stated previously, we
have changed this SNPRM to refer to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as the appropriate source
of service information. Note 11 of paragraph 3.A. (General Information)
of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-
27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, states that, where the
work instructions include installation of a kept part, a new or
serviceable part with the same part number can be installed as an
alternative to the kept part.

Request To Evaluate Lateral Control Landing Characteristics

    ALPA requested that we evaluate whether the maximum demonstrated
crosswind characteristics are affected by the lateral control
modifications proposed by the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011). FedEx
stated that the current simulator data are based on the original Boeing
flight test data, which will not accurately represent the lateral
control characteristics if modified by the proposed AD.
    We have determined that, at the most conservative crosswind case of
a trim on approach in the maximum demonstrated crosswind (30 knots)
with zero degree crab angle, the additional wheel required to trim is
small (six degrees or less); and that the total magnitude of the
lateral control required to trim is not limiting. The manufacturer has
stated that it has no plans to make any updates to the airplane flight
manual, nor a plan to release an updated simulator data package
regarding crosswind characteristics. We have not changed the SNPRM in
this regard.

Request for Clarification of Spoiler/Speedbrake Test

    UPS requested clarification of the spoiler/speedbrake control
system operational test. UPS stated that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
757-27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010, referenced in the NPRM
(76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011), does not provide an aircraft maintenance
manual (AMM) reference for the test.
    We agree to provide clarification. No reference to the AMM is
needed, because the spoiler/speedbrake control system operational test
is included in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013; in a separate
section titled ``Operational test of the spoiler/speedbrake control
system.'' We have not changed the SNPRM in this regard.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this SNPRM because we 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.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM (76 FR
30043, May 24, 2011). As a result, we have determined that it is
necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional
opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28,
2013.
    The phrase ``related investigative actions'' is used in this
proposed AD. ``Related investigative actions'' are follow-on actions
that (1) are related to the primary actions, and (2) further
investigate the nature of any condition found. Related investigative
actions in an AD could include, for example, inspections.
    The phrase ``corrective actions'' is used in this proposed AD.
``Corrective actions'' correct or address any condition found.
Corrective actions in an AD could include, for example, repairs.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this will affect 676 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per    Cost on U.S.
                  Action                            Labor cost           Parts cost      product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation Group 1, Configuration 1 (48  36 work-hours x $85 per            $4,691        $7,751      $372,048
 airplanes).                                hour = $3,060.
Installation Group 2, Configuration 1      33 work-hours x $85 per             4,610         7,415     4,360,020
 (588 airplanes).                           hour = $2,805.
Installation Group 3, Configuration 1 (12  33 work-hours x 85 per hour         4,619         7,424        89,088
 airplanes).                                = $2,805.
Installation Group 4, Configuration 1 (24  33 work-hours x $85 per             4,610         7,415       177,960
 airplanes).                                hour = $2,805.
Installation Group 5, Configuration 1 (4   36 work-hours x $85 per             4,701         7,761        31,044
 airplanes).                                hour = $3,060.
Torque Bracket Assembly and Bond Tests     12 work-hours x $85 per                 0         1,020       689,520
 Groups 1-5, Configuration 2.               hour = $1,020.
General Visual Inspection Groups 1-5,      7 work-hours x $85 per hour             0           595       402,220
 Configuration 3.                           = $595.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                           On-Condition Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Cost per
            Action                Labor cost     Parts cost    product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjust Wire Bundle and         1 work-hour x             $0          $85
 Install Sleeve, Group 1-5,     $85 per hour =
 Configuration 1.               $85.
Inspection, Repair, and        1 work-hour x              0           85
 Installation Change, Group 1-  $85 per hour =
 5, Configuration 2.            $85.
Inspection, Repair,            5 work-hours x             0          425
 Installation Change, and       $85 per hour =
 Test, Group 1-5,               $425.
 Configuration 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition parts specified in this SNPRM.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator,

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2011-0475; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-199-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by August 15, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -
200CB, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated
October 28, 2013.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
Controls.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by numerous reports of unintended lateral
oscillations during the final approach, just before landing. We are
issuing this AD to reduce the chance of unintended lateral
oscillations near touchdown, which could result in loss of lateral
control of the airplane, and consequent airplane damage or injury to
flight crew and passengers.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Installation and Inspection

    Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
applicable actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and
(g)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For Configuration 1 airplanes as defined in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013: Install
three bracket assemblies and three new relays, and make changes to
the wire bundles, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October
28, 2013.
    (2) For Configuration 2 airplanes as defined in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013: Torque the
bracket assembly nuts and ground stud nuts, do bond resistance tests
to verify that bonding requirements are met, do a general visual
inspection to ensure that the three new relays do not touch the
adjacent wire bundles, and do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3,
dated October 28, 2013. Do all applicable related investigative and
corrective actions before further flight.
    (3) For Configuration 3 airplanes as defined in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013: Do a
general visual inspection to ensure that the three new relays do not
touch the adjacent wire bundles, and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152,
Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. Do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions before further flight.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision
2, dated May 25, 2012.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.

 (j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Marie Hogestad,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For information about AMOCs for this AD, contact Jen Pei,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-
627-5210; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 24, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-15416 Filed 6-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 62 (Monday, April 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16270-16271]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06505]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Surplus Property
Release at the Huntsville Executive Airport Tom Sharp, Jr. Field,
Huntsville, Alabama

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on land release request.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is considering a request from the Madison County
Executive Airport Authority to waive the requirement that 3.19 acres of airport property located at the Huntsville Executive
Airport Tom Sharp, Jr. Field in Huntsville, Alabama, be used for
aeronautical purposes.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 3, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice may be mailed or delivered in
triplicate to the FAA at the following address:

Jackson Airports District Office, Attn: Wesley E. Mittlesteadt, Program
Manager, 100 West Cross Street, Suite B, Jackson, MS 39208-2307.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be
mailed or delivered to Tom Sharp, Jr., Chairman, Madison County
Executive Airport Authority at the following address: 3403 Governors
Drive, Huntsville, AL 35805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wesley E. Mittlesteadt, Program
Manager, Jackson Airports District Office, 100 West Cross Street, Suite
B, Jackson, MS 39208-2307,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The land release request may
be reviewed in person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA is reviewing a request by Madison
County Executive Airport Authority to release 3.19 acres of
airport property at the Huntsville Executive Airport Tom Sharp, Jr.
Field (MDQ). The property will be purchased by Donna Meyer and Ray
Meyer, Jr. for residential purposes. The property is adjacent to
residential property on southeast quadrant of airport property just off
Meridianville Bottom Road. The net proceeds from the sale of this
property will be used for eligible airport improvement projects for
general aviation facilities at the Huntsville Executive Airport Tom
Sharp, Jr. Field.
    Any person may inspect the request in person at the FAA office
listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the request,
notice and other documents germane to the request in person at the
Huntsville Executive Airport Tom Sharp, Jr. Field, (MDQ).

    Issued in Jackson, Mississippi on March 27, 2017.
Rans D. Black,
Manager, Jackson Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-06505 Filed 3-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


NOTE

DATE:  March 5, 2012

TO:  Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0660

FROM:  Mary Johnson

SUBJECT:  Summary of Early Outreach to Small Entities

Standards of Performance for GHG Emissions for New Stationary Sources:
EGUs:  Proposed Rule

The EPA’s outreach to small entities regarded planned actions for new
and existing sources, but only new sources would be affected by the
currently proposed action.  At that time, the EPA believed it likely
that proposed regulations for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from
electric utility generating units (EGUs) (new sources as well as
existing sources) would not result in a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities (SISNOSE).  However, because the
EPA believes that outreach to small entities is an important element in
the development of these regulations, the EPA requested that a Small
Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel be convened to allow that outreach
to occur.

It has since been determined that new source performance standards
(NSPS) for emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) for new affected
fossil-fuel-fired EGUs will be proposed at this time.  At a future date,
the EPA intends to promulgate emission guidelines for states to develop
plans reducing CO2 emissions from existing fossil-fuel-fired EGUs.

Summary of April 6, 2011 Call with Small Entities

When conducted, this conference call with small entity representatives
was referred to as Pre-Panel Outreach (i.e., informal outreach prior to
beginning the formal SBAR Panel process).  The purpose of the meeting
was to provide small entity representatives with an overview of recent
EPA proposals impacting the power sector.  Specifically, overviews of
the Transport Rule, the Toxics Rule, and the 316(b) Rule proposals were
presented.  A list of conference call participants is attached to this
note.  Copies of the three presentations are included as attachments to
the docket entry Conference Call with Small Entities_04-2011_email.

Summary of February and March 2011 Listening Sessions

The EPA also engaged in outreach with entities that would potentially be
affected by GHG standards for EGUs.  Small entities and organizations
that represent and include small entities were included in the outreach.
 The outreach consisted of the Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office
of Air and Radiation holding four listening sessions with various types
of stakeholders during February and March 2011.  Specifically, listening
sessions were held with (1) the electric power industry, (2)
environmental and environmental justice groups, (3) State and Tribal
representatives, and (4) coalition groups.  Stakeholder input received
during the listening sessions and as part of the public comment process
associated with the proposed settlement agreement requiring that the EPA
establish NSPS and emission guidelines for fossil fuel-fired EGUs is
located in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0090.

Attachment