Panel Members for the Meeting of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP)

to consider and review

Field Volatilization and Conventional Pesticides

December 1-3, 2009

Docket no. EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0687			OPP Docket Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>

FIFRA SAP Chair

Steven G. Heeringa, Ph.D.

Research Scientist & Director for Statistical Design

University of Michigan Institute for Social Research

Ann Arbor, MI

FIFRA SAP Session Chair

Kenneth M. Portier, Ph.D.

Program Director, Statistics

American Cancer Society

National Home Office

Atlanta, GA

Designated Federal Official

Sharlene R. Matten, Ph.D.

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Science Coordination & Policy

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

EPA East Building, MC 7201M

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC  20460

Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>,   HYPERLINK <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel Members

John R. Bucher, Ph.D., DABT

Associate Director

Environmental Toxicology Program

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Research Triangle Park, NC

Janice E. Chambers, Ph.D., DABT, Fellow ATS

William L. Giles Distinguished Professor

Director, Center for Environmental Health Sciences

College of Veterinary Medicine

Mississippi State University

Mississippi State, MS

Carey N. Pope, Ph.D.

Professor, Head & Sitlington Chair of Toxicology

Department of Physiological Sciences

Oklahoma State University College of Veterinary Medicine

Stillwater, OK

FQPA Science Review Board Members

Brian Buckley, Ph.D.

Adjunct Associate Professor

Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute

Rutgers University and the University of Medicine and

  Dentistry of New Jersey

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

Piscataway, NJ

Kenneth J. Davis, Ph.D.

Professor

Department of Meteorology

The Pennsylvania State University

University Park, PA

Roberta Grant, Ph.D.

Senior Toxicologist

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Austin, TX

Paul Hamey, M.S.

Principal Scientist

Human Exposure Assessment

Chemicals Regulation Directorate

York

United Kingdom

Martha Harnly, MPH

Research Scientist

California Department of Public Health

Environmental Health Investigations Branch

Richmond, CA

Michael S. Majewski, Ph.D.

Research Chemist

U.S. Geological Survey

Sacramento, CA

Laura L. McConnell, Ph.D.

Research Chemist

Acting Research Leader

Environmental Management and Byproduct Utilization Laboratory

USDA-ARS

Beltsville, MD

Jacob D. McDonald, Ph.D.

Director

Chemistry & Inhalation Exposure Program

Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute

Albuquerque, NM

Frederick J. Miller, Ph.D., Fellow ATS

Consultant & Adjunct Professor, Duke University

Fred J. Miller & Associates LLC

Cary, NC

William Popendorf, Ph.D.

Professor

Department of Biology

Utah State University

Logan, UT

Richard Schlesinger, Ph.D., Fellow ATS

Associate Dean

Chair and Professor

Department of Biology and Health Sciences

Pace University

Pleasantville, NY

James N. Seiber, Ph.D.

Chair

Department of Food Science and Technology

University of California, Davis

Davis, CA

Michael Yost Ph.D.

Professor, Department of Exposure and Occupational Health Sciences

Director, Exposure Sciences Program

University of Washington

Seattle, WA

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register: May 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 86)]
[Notices]
[Page 24719-24720]
[DOCID:fr05my10-105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002]

Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications;
Coumaphos; Novobiocin; Buquinolate and Lincomycin

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval
of three new animal drug applications (NADAs). In a final rule
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is
amending the animal drug regulations to remove portions reflecting
approval of the single NADA of the three that is codified.

DATES:  Withdrawal of approval is effective May 17, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  John Bartkowiak, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration, 7519
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following sponsors have requested that
FDA withdraw approval of the three NADAs listed in Table 1:

                                Table 1.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             NADA No./Product           21 CFR Cite
        Sponsor            (Established Name of       (Sponsor's Drug
                                  Drug)                Labeler Code)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmacia & Upjohn      NADA 13-467/ALBAMIX        Not codified
 Co., a Division of      Susceptibility Disks
 Pfizer, Inc., 235      (novobiocin)
 East 42d St., New
 York, NY 10017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmacia & Upjohn      NADA 45-738/LINCOMIX/      Not codified
 Co., a Division of      BONAID
 Pfizer, Inc., 235      (lincomycin/buquinolate)
 East 42d St., New
 York, NY 10017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purina Mills, Inc.,     NADA 42-117/Purina 6 Day   558.185 (017800)
 P.O. Box 66812, St.     Worm-Kill Concentrate
 Louis, MO 63166-6812   (coumaphos)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs and redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, and in
accordance with Sec.  514.116 Notice of withdrawal of approval of
application (21 CFR 514.116), notice is given that approval of NADAs
13-467, 42-117, and 45-738, and all supplements and amendments thereto,
is hereby withdrawn, effective May 17, 2010.
    In a final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register, FDA is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect the
withdrawal of approval of NADA 42-117.

    Dated: April 30, 2010.
Bernadette Dunham,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 2010-10567 Filed 5-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 72 (Friday, April 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 20141]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07826]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER21-1632-000]

EcoPlus Power, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
EcoPlus Power, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 29, 2021.
    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 may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 9, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-07826 Filed 4-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83414-83415]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2022-E-0396; FDA-2022-E-0397; FDA-2022-E-0398; and
FDA-2022-E-0428]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; Tukysa

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has
determined the regulatory review period for Tukysa and is publishing
this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the
determination because of the submission of applications to the Director
of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of
Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug
product.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) are incorrect may submit either electronic
or written comments and ask for a redetermination by January 29, 2024.
Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination
regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence
during the regulatory review period by May 28, 2024. See ``Petitions''
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of January 29, 2024. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions)
will be considered timely if they are received on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket Nos.
FDA-2022-E-0396; FDA-2022-E-0397; FDA-2022-E-0398; FDA-2022-E-0428 for
``Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; TUKYSA.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely manner
(see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with Sec.  10.20 (21 CFR 10.20) and
other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's
posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18,
2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug or biologic product, animal drug

product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject
to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these
acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for
determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: a
testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the
approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the human drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award
(for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any
time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product, Tukysa
(tucatinib) indicated in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine
for treatment of adult patients with advanced unresectable or
metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, including patients with brain
metastases, who have received one or more prior anti-HER2-based
regimens in the metastatic setting. Subsequent to this approval, the
USPTO received patent term restoration applications for Tukysa (U.S.
Patent Nos. 7,452,895; 8,648,087; 9,457,093; and 9,693,989) from Array
BioPharma Inc. and Seattle Genetics, Inc. (Agent of Array BioPharma
Inc.) and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining the
patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated
September 28, 2022, FDA advised the USPTO that this human drug product
had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of
Tukysa represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of
the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the
product's regulatory review period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
Tukysa is 4,653 days. Of this time, 4,533 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 120 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective:
July 24, 2007. FDA has verified the applicant's claims that the date
the investigational new drug application became effective was on July
24, 2007.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human drug product under section 505 of the FD&C Act: December 20,
2019. FDA has verified the applicant's claims that the new drug
application (NDA) for Tukysa (NDA 213411) was initially submitted on
December 20, 2019.
    3. The date the application was approved: April 17, 2020. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NDA 213411 was approved on April
17, 2020.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 552 days, 570 days, 1,101 days or 1,826 days of
patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under
21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, as
specified in Sec.  60.30 (21 CFR 60.30), any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must comply with all the requirements
of Sec.  60.30, including but not limited to: must be timely (see
DATES), must be filed in accordance with Sec.  10.20, must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation, and must certify that a
true and complete copy of the petition has been served upon the patent
applicant. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42,
1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: November 24, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-26256 Filed 11-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 151 (Thursday, August 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46979-46981]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19292]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM14-2-002]

Coordination of the Scheduling Processes of Interstate Natural
Gas Pipelines and Public Utilities

Before Commissioners: Norman C. Bay, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller,
Cheryl A. LaFleur, Tony Clark, and Colette D. Honorable.

Order on Request for Clarification and Notice of Comment Procedures

    1. Order No. 809 revised the Commission's regulations relating to
the scheduling of transportation service on interstate natural gas
pipelines to better coordinate the scheduling practices of the
wholesale natural gas and electric industries, as well as to provide
additional scheduling flexibility to all shippers on interstate natural
gas pipelines.\1\ Among other things, Order No. 809 expanded the number
of intraday nomination cycles from the current two to three and
incorporated by reference into the Commission's regulations certain
modified standards developed and filed by the North American Energy
Standards Board (NAESB) that revised the standard nomination timeline
for interstate natural gas pipelines. Order No. 809 established an
implementation date of April 1, 2016. On May 28, 2015 the American Gas
Association, the American Public Gas Association, and the Interstate
Natural Gas Association of America (collectively, Associations) filed a
request for the Commission to clarify the manner in which all pipelines
should implement the standards on April 1, 2016, and a request for
clarification relating to interpretations of recall rights under
existing capacity release contracts in light of the transition from two
to three intraday nomination cycles. As discussed below, we grant the
request with respect to the manner in which the pipelines should
implement the standards and request comment on their default proposal
regarding transitioning capacity release contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Coordination of the Scheduling Processes of Interstate
Natural Gas Pipelines and Public Utilities, Order No. 809, 80 FR
23197 (Apr. 24, 2015), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,368 (cross-
referenced at 151 FERC ] 61,049 (2015)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. On April 16, 2015, the Commission issued Order No. 809, which
revised the Commission's regulations relating to the scheduling of
transportation service on interstate natural gas pipelines to better
coordinate the scheduling practices of the wholesale natural gas and
electric industries, as well as to provide additional scheduling
flexibility to all shippers on interstate natural gas pipelines. Among
other things, the Commission revised its regulations to incorporate by
reference the modified NAESB Wholesale Gas Quadrant (WGQ) Business
Practice Standards, which revised the standard nomination timeline for
interstate natural gas pipelines. The current and revised nomination
timelines are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
All times Central Clock Time      Current NAESB         Revised NAESB
            (CCT)                   standards             standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timely:
    Nomination Deadline.....  11:30 AM............  1:00 PM.
    Confirmations...........  ....................  4:30 PM.
    Schedule Issued.........  4:30 PM.............  5:00 PM.
    Start of Gas Flow.......  9:00 AM.............  9:00 AM.
Evening:
    Nomination Deadline.....  6:00 PM.............  6:00 PM.
    Confirmations...........  9:00 PM.............  8:30 PM.
    Schedule Issued.........  10:00 PM............  9:00 PM.
    Start of Gas Flow.......  9:00 AM.............  9:00 AM.
Intraday 1:
    Nomination Deadline.....  10:00 AM............  10:00 AM.
    Confirmations...........  1:00 PM.............  12:30 PM.
    Schedule Issued.........  2:00 PM.............  1:00 PM.
    Start of Gas Flow.......  5:00 PM.............  2:00 PM.
    IT Bump Rights..........  bumpable............  bumpable.
Intraday 2:
    Nomination Deadline.....  5:00 PM.............  2:30 PM.
    Confirmations...........  8:00 PM.............  5:00 PM.
    Schedule Issued.........  9:00 PM.............  5:30 PM.
    Start of Gas Flow.......  9:00 PM.............  6:00 PM.
    IT Bump Rights..........  no bump.............  bumpable.
Intraday 3:
    Nomination Deadline.....  ....................  7:00 PM.
    Confirmations...........  ....................  9:30 PM.
    Schedule Issued.........  ....................  10:00 PM.

    Start of Gas Flow.......  ....................  10:00 PM.
    IT Bump Rights..........  ....................  no bump.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. In conjunction with moving the Timely Nomination Cycle
nomination deadline to 1:00 p.m. CCT, the modified NAESB standards
adopted in Order No. 809 included revised capacity release standards
that allow shippers to acquire released capacity in time to be
nominated in the Timely Nomination Cycle on the same day the shipper
receives the capacity release.\2\ For example, the modified standards
require that pipelines post awards for biddable capacity no later than
12:00 p.m. CCT, instead of 3:00 p.m. CCT as under the previous
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission's current capacity release program allows a
firm shipper to sell (or release) its capacity to another entity
when it is not using it. The pipeline contracts with, and receives
payment from, the replacement shipper and then issues a credit to
the releasing shipper. The results of all releases are posted by the
pipeline on its Internet Web site and made available through
standardized, downloadable files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The Commission required interstate natural gas pipelines to
implement the revised NAESB standards beginning on April 1, 2016.

II. Request for Clarification

    5. On May 28, 2015, as supplemented on June 26, 2015, the
Associations filed a request to clarify the date interstate natural gas
pipelines must implement the modified NAESB standards as required by
Order No. 809. The Associations ask the Commission to act expeditiously
on the clarifications, which are discussed below.
    6. The Associations state that the April 1, 2016 implementation
date does not explicitly define whether the implementation date refers
to the date for which the nominations are effective or the date on
which the day-ahead nominations (Timely and Evening Nomination Cycles)
are to be made. For example, if the effective date of the nominations
is April 1, 2016, should the new day-ahead nomination schedules be used
on March 31, 2016? The Associations believe it is essential that the
entire industry implement the same scenario and propose that the
Commission clarify that implementation will become effective for the
Gas Day that begins at 9:00 a.m. CCT on April 1, 2016. Under that
scenario, the Timely and Evening Nomination Cycle deadlines on March
31, 2016, for the April 1, 2016 Gas Day will be 1:00 p.m. CCT and 6:00
p.m. CCT, respectively, and the new nomination deadlines for the
intraday cycles will become effective on April 1, 2016. The
Associations also propose that, for transition purposes, the new
timeline for biddable capacity releases will be utilized for all
biddable releases effective on March 31, 2016 or thereafter.\3\ The
Associations include in their initial request for clarification
Appendices A and B explaining how their proposal will be implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Associations' Request for Clarification at Appendix B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. The Associations also propose that the Commission establish
default provisions for capacity release transactions with the right to
recall capacity into which the parties entered prior to April 1, 2016
and that extend through April 1, 2016. In the absence of mutual
agreement to the contrary, the Associations propose such transactions
shall have the default rights set forth below. In their supplemental
filing, the Associations explain their proposal in more detail, stating
that it is not unduly speculative to presume that long-term capacity
releases consummated before April 1, 2016 will contain recall
provisions based on the obsolete scheduling timeline and may not
function as intended after the new scheduling standards are
implemented. The Associations state that, currently, releasing shippers
can specify whether releases are recallable and select which cycles are
subject to recall rights. The Associations recognize that capacity
release transactions with recall rights may vary, and that the parties
to the transactions may want to come to an agreement as to the capacity
release recall rights that will be available for the Intraday 3
Nomination Cycle beginning April 1, 2016. They believe that specifying
default outcomes in the absence of the parties' agreement would assist
the parties to these transactions in defining the capacity release
recall rights that will be available on April 1, 2016 and thereafter,
and smooth the transition to the new nomination timeline.
    8. Accordingly, the Associations request that for capacity release
transactions with the right to recall capacity entered into prior to
April 1, 2016, for periods that include April 1, 2016, and terminate
thereafter, the Commission establish default rights as follows: \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Associations state that for all other transactions, the
capacity release recall rights will not change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [ssquf] If the transaction only specifies that recalls are
permitted at the Intraday 1 Nomination Cycle, then for periods that
include April 1, 2016, and thereafter, recalls only will be permitted
at the Intraday 1 Nomination Cycle.
    [ssquf] If the transaction only specifies that recalls are
permitted at the Intraday 2 Cycle, then for periods that include April
1, 2016, and thereafter, recalls will be permitted at the Intraday 2
Nomination Cycle and Intraday 3 Nomination Cycle.
    [ssquf] If the transaction specifies that recalls are permitted at
the Intraday 1 Nomination Cycle and the Intraday 2 Nomination Cycle,
then for periods that include April 1, 2016, and thereafter recalls
will be permitted at the Intraday 1 Nomination Cycle, Intraday 2
Nomination Cycle and Intraday 3 Nomination Cycle.
    9. The Associations state that shippers releasing capacity for
periods that straddle April 1, 2016, should notify the pipeline by way
of a letter in advance of that date if they do not want the default
rights specified above to apply to the transaction. They state that the
letter should memorialize that the default recall rights do not apply
and indicate the mutual agreement of the releasing and replacement
shippers.\5\ They state that, in the absence of such a letter provided
to the pipeline by a shipper in advance of April 1, 2016, recall rights
will transition according to the default rights specified above as an
administrative transition matter without any further action. The
Associations state that the transition of recall rights for these types
of capacity release transactions, whether by default or through mutual
agreement, should be administrative and should not impact other
attributes of the capacity release, e.g., prices or quantities, and as
such, implementation of the transition of such recall rights would not
require posting or allow or require re-bidding. Finally, the
Associations state that the releasing shipper should have the ability
to recall

capacity under a transaction's existing provisions if it wishes to
terminate the transaction, even if the releasing shipper and the
replacement shipper are unable to reach agreement on a non-default
recall transition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Associations note that, as a supplement to the letter,
the releasing shipper can memorialize in the special terms and
conditions that the default rights do not apply to prospective
releases, consistent with the letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Commission Determination

A. Implementation Date

    10. As requested, the Commission finds the timing proposed by the
Associations to effectuate a reasonable implementation of Order No.
809. We agree that having all pipelines follow the same schedule will
provide for a smoother transition and help shippers by ensuring that
they can conduct transactions on all pipelines under the same
timetable.
    11. We accept the schedules proposed by the Associations as
described in full in Appendices A and B to their request for
clarification. In general, the new day-ahead nomination timelines will
apply as of March 31, 2016 for those nominations that will become
effective April 1, 2016. Specifically, the Timely and Evening
Nomination Cycle deadlines on March 31, 2016 for the April 1, 2016 Gas
Day will be 1:00 p.m. CCT and 6:00 p.m. CCT, respectively. Otherwise,
the intraday nomination timelines on March 31, 2016 will follow the
existing timeline.
    12. With respect to capacity releases, the new biddable release
schedule will start at 9:00 a.m. CCT on March 31, 2016, for all
releases with contracts to be effective on March 31, 2016, April 1,
2016, or thereafter. Non-biddable releases effective on March 31, 2016
will follow the existing posting schedule for the Intraday 1 and
Intraday 2 Nomination Cycles, and will follow the new day-ahead
nomination schedule for the Timely and Evening Nomination Cycles.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For example, a non-biddable release for the Timely
Nomination Cycle on March 31, 2016 (to become effective April 1,
2016) must submit its notice by 12 a.m. CCT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Default Capacity Release Recall Rights

    13. The Commission sees value in establishing a default
interpretation of capacity release contractual recall provisions to
assist parties in effectuating the transition between the two intraday
and three intraday nomination schedules. While parties may vary such a
default interpretation by agreement, a default may reduce the burden of
negotiation on those parties satisfied with the default interpretation.
    14. Such a request, however, goes beyond merely clarifying the
implementation date adopted in Order No. 809 and should be subject to
notice and comment to establish that the default interpretation is
reasonable. In particular, the Commission seeks comment on a number of
aspects of the proposal. Commenters should address the merits of
establishing a default approach or propose an alternative approach.
Commenters should address whether the default should apply to all
agreements into which the parties have entered before April 1, 2016 (as
proposed by the Associations), or should only apply to releases entered
into by an earlier date, such as the date of issuance of Order No. 809,
which put the parties on notice that the nomination schedule would
change as of April 1, 2016, and therefore permitted negotiations as to
the applicability of recall conditions for releases that are still in
effect on April 1, 2016 or thereafter. They also should address whether
the default that should apply when the transaction specifies that
recalls are permitted only at the Intraday 2 Nomination Cycle is to
permit recalls at Intraday 2 and 3 (as proposed by the Associations) or
only Intraday 3. Finally, commenters should address the proposal that
``the releasing shipper should have the ability to recall capacity
under a transaction's existing provisions if it wishes to terminate the
transaction, even if the releasing shipper and the replacement shipper
are unable to reach agreement on a non-default recall transition.'' \7\
Comments should address how this provision would operate and why the
general default provisions should not apply to a contract in dispute if
the parties are unable to reach agreement (and have not sought
Commission resolution of the dispute).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Associations' Supplemental Filing at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. Initial comments will be due 20 days from the date of this
order and reply comments will be due 30 days from the date of this
order.
The Commission orders:
    (A) The Commission grants the Associations' requested clarification
as to the implementation date of Order No. 809, as discussed in the
body of this order.
    (B) Initial comments on the Associations' proposed default recall
rights for capacity release transactions are due 20 days from the date
of this order with reply comments due 10 days thereafter.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: July 31, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19292 Filed 8-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on June 21, 2002

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2002-12502

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).

Application of COMPANIA MEXICANA DE AVIACION, S.A. de C.V. (MEXICANA),
and UNITED AIR LINES, INC. (UNITED), filed  6/13/02, for:

XX Exemption for United for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide
the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between (1) Sacramento, California, and Guadalajara, Mexico; and (2)
Denver, Colorado, and Mexico City, Mexico.  United intends to operate
this service under a code-share arrangement with Mexicana on flights
operated by Mexicana.

XX Statement of Authorization for Mexicana under Part 212 of the
Department’s Regulations to:

Display United’s “UA” designator code on flights operated by
Mexicana between Sacramento and Guadalajara, and between Denver and
Mexico City.

Applicant reps: Jeffrey Manley (United)<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst:
Linda Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

                         Robert Papkin (Mexicana)<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions and remarks, see below)

The above action, granting exemption authority to United was effective
when taken:  _June 20, 2002, through _June 20, 2004.

The above action, granting a statement of authorization to Mexicana was
effective when taken: June 20, 2002, 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.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

	XX   United’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX   Mexicana’s foreign air carrier permit

                      XX   Standard Exemption Condtions for United
(attached)

(See next page)

												2

Conditions/Remarks:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted to
United is subject to the dormancy notice requirements set forth in
condition 7 of Appendix A of Order 88-10-2.  The exemption authority
granted to United to serve the Sacramento-Guadalajara and Denver-Mexico
City markets is limited to operations conducted on a code-share basis
only.

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

 The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long as
United and Mexicana 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.

 United and Mexicana 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 of a portion
of the approved code-share services. (Such notice should be filed in
Docket OST-2002-12502.)

 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.
 Further, the operating carrier shall not permit the code of its U.S.
code-sharing carrier to be carried on any flight that enters, departs,
or transits the airspace of any area for whose airspace the Federal
Aviation Administration has issued a flight prohibition.

 The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that neither
United nor Mexicana shall give any force or effect to any contractual
provisions between themselves that are contrary to these conditions.

 We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted at any time
without hearing, at our discretion.

We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of the 15-day
answer period with the consent of all parties served.

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the

referenced Docket.  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:

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

										APPENDIX A

U.S. CARRIER

Standard Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of operations authorized by the attached notice, the
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Regulations, and with all U.S. Government
requirements concerning security; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

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


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65670-65673]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23716]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0980; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00448-P;
Amendment 39-22212; AD 2022-21-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG Propellers

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2021-23-17
for all Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG (Hoffmann) model HO-V 72 propellers. AD
2021-23-17 required amending the existing aircraft flight manual (AFM)
by inserting abnormal propeller vibration instructions, visual
inspection and non-destructive test (NDT) inspection of the propeller
hub and, depending on the results of the inspections, replacement of
the propeller hub with a part eligible for installation. Since the FAA
issued AD 2021-23-17, further investigation by the manufacturer
revealed that cracks found on propeller hubs likely resulted from
propeller blade retention nuts that were not tightened using published
service information during blade installation. This AD is prompted by
reports of cracks at different positions on two affected propeller
hubs. This AD retains the required actions of AD 2021-23-17. This AD
also requires a maintenance records review and, depending on the
results of the maintenance records review, tightening of each propeller
blade retention nut to specific torque values. Depending on the results
of the maintenance records review, this AD requires physically
inspecting the propeller blade for shake. If any axial play is detected
during the performance of the inspection, this AD requires the removal
of the propeller from service and the performance of an NDT inspection
of the propeller hub, and depending on the NDT inspection results,
replacement of the propeller hub with a part eligible for installation.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective December 6, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 6,
2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of
January 10, 2022 (86 FR 68905, December 6, 2021).

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0980; 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 mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), 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.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For Hoffmann service information identified in this final
rule, contact Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG, K[uuml]pferlingstrasse 9, 83022,
Rosenheim, Germany; phone: +49 0 8031 1878 0; email: prop.com">hoffmann-prop.com">[email protected]prop.com">hoffmann-prop.com; website: prop.com">hoffmann-prop.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is
also available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-0980.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Schwetz, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2021-23-17, Amendment 39-21815 (86 FR
68905, December 6, 2021) (AD 2021-23-17). AD 2021-23-17 applied to all
Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG model HO-V 72 propellers. AD 2021-23-17 required
amending the existing AFM by inserting abnormal propeller vibration
instructions, visual inspection and NDT inspection of the propeller hub
and, depending on the results of the inspections, replacement of the
propeller hub with a part eligible for installation. The FAA issued AD
2021-23-17 to prevent failure of the propeller hub.
    The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 01, 2022 (87
FR 46903). The NPRM was prompted by EASA AD 2022-0061, dated April 4,
2022 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), issued by the European
Union

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the
Member States of the European Union. The MCAI states:

    Cracks have been reported at different positions on two affected
parts, both installed on Slingsby T67 ``Firefly'' aeroplanes. One
crack was found during scheduled inspection, the other crack during
an unscheduled inspection after abnormal vibrations occurred.
Subsequent investigation determined that improper tightening of
blade nuts has caused or contributed to those events.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to in-
flight propeller detachment, possibly resulting in damage to the
aeroplane and/or injury to persons on the ground.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Hoffmann Propeller
issued the SB, providing applicable instructions, and EASA issued
Emergency AD 2020-0226-E (later revised [to EASA AD 2020-0226R1]) to
require inspections of affected parts and, depending on findings,
replacement. That AD also required, for certain aeroplanes,
amendment of the applicable Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM).
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, further investigation revealed
that not all propeller blade nuts were tightened in accordance with
the Hoffman Propeller blade nut tightening procedure B2.23 which
requires a certain over-torquing and loosening of the blade nut to
limit a preload reduction due to material settlement. Prompted by
this development, Hoffmann Propeller issued SB057 (incorporating
blade nut tightening procedure B2.23) providing torquing
instructions, and SB58 providing instructions for setting correct
counterweight angles. Additionally, Hoffmann Propeller issued the
torque tightening SB (referencing SB57 and SB58) providing
inspections and corrective action instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2020-0226R1, which is superseded, and
requires additional blade checks, inspections, and re-tightening of
the propeller blade nuts

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0980.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to retain all of the requirements of
AD 2021-23-17. In the NPRM, the FAA also proposed to require a
maintenance records review and, depending on the results of the
maintenance records review, tightening of each propeller blade
retention nut to specified torque values. Depending on the results of
the maintenance records review, the NPRM also proposed to require
physically inspecting the propeller blade for shake. If any axial play
is detected during inspection, the NPRM proposed to require the removal
of the propeller from service and the performance of an NDT inspection
of the propeller hub, and depending on the NDT inspection results,
replacement of the propeller hub with a part eligible for installation.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the costs.

Conclusion

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design
Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data and
determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed.
Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, and the removal
of the reference to Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB059 B, dated
February 23, 2022, from paragraph (j)(2), this AD is adopted as
proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed the following service information:
     Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB057 C, dated
February 22, 2022. This service bulletin (SB) specifies procedures for
tightening the propeller blade retention nut.
     Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB059 B, dated
February 23, 2022. This SB specifies procedures for tightening the
propeller blade retention nut with the correct torque and inspecting
the propeller blade for shake.
     Hoffmann Propeller GmbH & Co. KG Service Bulletin SB E53
Rev. D, dated February 18, 2021, which was previously approved by the
Director of the Federal Register for incorporation by reference on
January 10, 2022 (86 FR 68905, December 6, 2021). This SB describes
procedures for visual and NDT inspections of the propeller hub for
cracks.
    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 ADDRESSES.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA also reviewed the following service information:
     Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB058 A, dated
February 2, 2022. This SB specifies the updated definition of the
counterweight angle.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 35 propellers installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amend AFM.............................  1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85          $2,975
                                         hour = $85.
Visually inspect propeller hub........  1 work-hour x $85 per                  0              85           2,975
                                         hour = $85.
NDT inspect propeller hub.............  8 work-hours x $85 per                 0             680          23,800
                                         hour = $680.
Review maintenance records............  0.5 work-hours x $85 per               0           42.50        1,487.50
                                         hour = $42.50.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary actions
that are required based on the results of the inspections. The agency
has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace propeller hub.........................  5 work-hours x $85 per hour =             $1,600          $2,025
                                                 $425.
Inspect propeller blade for shake.............  0.25 work-hours x $85 per hour =               0           21.25
                                                 $21.25.
Tighten propeller blade retention nuts........  2 work-hours x $85 per hour =                  0             170
                                                 $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has determined that 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.

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:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 2021-23-17, Amendment 39-21815 (86
FR 68905, December 6, 2021); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

2022-21-13 Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG: Amendment 39-22212; Docket No.
FAA-2022-0980; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00448-P.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective December 6, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2021-23-17, Amendment 39-21815 (86 FR 68905,
December 6, 2021) (AD 2021-23-17).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG (Hoffmann) model HO-V
72 propellers.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 6114, Propeller Hub
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks at different positions
on two affected propeller hubs. The FAA is issuing this AD to
prevent failure of the propeller hub. The unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in release of the propeller, damage to the
airplane, and injury to persons on the ground.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Before the next flight after December 22, 2020 (the
effective date of AD 2020-25-05, Amendment 39-21347 (85 FR 78702,
December 7, 2020)), amend the emergency or abnormal procedures
section of the existing aircraft flight manual by inserting this
text: ``Abnormal propeller vibrations: As applicable, reduce engine
RPM.''
    (2) Before the next flight after January 10, 2022 (the effective
date of AD 2021-23-17), and thereafter, before the next flight after
any flight where abnormal propeller vibrations have been
experienced, visually inspect propeller hub HO-V 72 ( ) ( )-( )-( )
for cracks using paragraph 2.1 of Hoffmann Propeller GmbH & Co. KG
Service Bulletin SB E53, Rev. D, dated February 18, 2021 (Hoffmann
Propeller SB E53 Rev. D).
    (3) Within 20 flight hours (FHs) after January 10, 2022 (the
effective date of AD 2021-23-17), perform a non-destructive test
(NDT) inspection of propeller hub HO-V 72 ( ) ( )-( )-( ) using
paragraph 2.3 of Hoffmann Propeller SB E53 Rev. D.
    (4) During each overhaul of propeller hub HO-V 72 ( ) ( )-( )-(
) after January 10, 2022 (the effective date of AD 2021-23-17),
perform an NDT inspection using paragraph 2.3 of Hoffmann Propeller
SB E53 Rev. D.
    (5) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, review
the maintenance records to confirm the propeller blade retention
nuts were tightened at the last in-shop maintenance visit to the
torque values in paragraph 5 of Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin
SB057 C, dated February 22, 2022 (Hoffmann Propeller SB057 C).
    (6) If, during the records review required by paragraph (g)(5)
of this AD, it is determined that the propeller blade retention nuts
were not tightened to the torque values in paragraph 5 of Hoffmann
Propeller SB057 C, or it cannot be confirmed if the propeller blade
retention nuts were tightened to the torque values in paragraph 5 of
Hoffmann Propeller SB057 C, perform the following actions:
    (i) Within 90 FHs after the effective date of this AD, tighten
each propeller blade retention nut to the torque values in paragraph
5 of Hoffmann Propeller SB057 C, using paragraphs 6 and 7 of
Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB059 B, dated February 23,
2022.
    (ii) Before the next flight after the effective date of this AD
and, thereafter, before each flight until the propeller blade
retention nut is tightened to the torque values in paragraph 5 of
Hoffmann Propeller SB057 C, as required by paragraph (g)(6)(i) of
this AD, confirm that there is no axial play in the blade retention
system by inspecting the propeller blade for shake. If any axial
play is detected, remove the propeller from service and perform an
NDT inspection of the propeller hub using paragraph 2.3 of Hoffmann
Propeller SB E53 Rev. D.
    (7) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g)(2), (3),
(4) or (6)(ii) of this AD, any crack is detected, replace propeller
hub HO-V 72 ( ) ( )-( )-( ) with a part eligible for installation.

(h) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, a ``part eligible for installation''
is a propeller hub HO-V 72 ( ) ( )-( )-( ) with zero hours time
since new, or a propeller hub HO-V 72 ( ) ( )-( )-( ) that

has passed an NDT inspection using paragraph 2.3 of Hoffmann
Propeller SB E53 Rev. D.

(i) Non-Required Actions

    (1) Sending the propeller to Hoffmann for investigation, as
contained in paragraph 2.1 of Hoffmann Propeller SB E53 Rev. D, is
not required by this AD.
    (2) Reporting propeller hubs with cracks to Hoffmann, as
contained in paragraph 2.3 of Hoffmann Propeller SB E53 Rev. D, is
not required by this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) You may take credit for the initial visual inspection and
NDT inspection of the propeller hub required by paragraphs (g)(2),
(3), and (4) of this AD if you performed any of these actions before
January 10, 2022 (the effective date of AD 2021 23-17) using
Hoffmann Propeller GmbH & Co. KG SB E53, Rev. A, dated October 9,
2020; Rev. B, dated October 14, 2020; or Rev. C, dated December 9,
2020.
    (2) You may take credit for the records review to confirm the
propeller blade retention nuts were tightened to the torque values
as required by paragraph (g)(5) of this AD, and the tightening of
each propeller blade retention nut as required by paragraph
(g)(6)(i) of this AD if you performed any of these actions before
the effective date of this AD during the last in-shop maintenance
visit using Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB057 B, dated
February 8, 2022; or Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB059 A,
dated February 11, 2022.

(k) Special Flight Permit

    A special flight permit may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199 to operate the airplane to a service facility to
perform the NDT inspection. Special flight permits are prohibited to
perform the visual inspection of the propeller hub.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Boston 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 (m)(1) of this AD.
    (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.

(m) Additional Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Michael Schwetz,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].
    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2022-0061, dated April 4, 2022, for related information. This EASA
AD may be found in the AD docket at regulatFAA-2022-0980.

 (n) 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.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
December 6, 2022.
    (i) Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB057 C, dated February
22, 2022.
    (ii) Hoffmann Propeller Service Bulletin SB059 B, dated February
23, 2022.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
January 10, 2022 (86 FR 68905, December 6, 2021).
    (i) Hoffmann Propeller GmbH & Co. KG Service Bulletin SB E53
Rev. D, dated February 18, 2021.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) For Hoffmann service information identified in this AD,
contact Hoffmann GmbH & Co. KG, K[uuml]pferlingstrasse 9, 83022,
Rosenheim, Germany; phone: +49 0 8031 1878 0; email: prop.com">hoffmann-prop.com">[email protected]prop.com">hoffmann-prop.com; website: prop.com">hoffmann-prop.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (7) 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, email: [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on October 6, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-23716 Filed 10-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P