[Federal Register: January 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 15)]
[Notices]
[Page 3956-3958]
[DOCID:fr23ja08-41]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0078, FRL-8519-3]

Agency Information Collection Activity; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; National Wastewater Operator Training and Technical
Assistance Program (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1977.03, OMB Control
Number 2040-0238

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Before
submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting
comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as
described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 24, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OW-2003-0078, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for

submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(Identify Docket ID number EPA-
HQ-OW-2003-0078, in the subject line)
     Mail: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments identified by the Docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0078. EPA's policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket without change and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an

``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or

viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gajindar Singh, Municipal Support
Division, Office of Wastewater Management, OWM Mail Code: 4204M,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for the ICR identified in this
document (ID number EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0078), which is available for online
viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Water

Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/ DC Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of

information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified in this
document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of technical information/data you used that
support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
state and local governments, state and county colleges, and
organizations that provide training assistance through the Clean Water
Act 104(g)(1) Program to municipal wastewater treatment plants.
    Title: National Wastewater Operator Training and Technical
Assistance Program (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1977.03, OMB Control No. 2040-0238.
    ICR status: The current ICR expires on June 30, 2008. An Agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title
40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved,
are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB
control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR
part 9.
    Abstract: The Wastewater Operator Training Program provides on-site
technical assistance to municipal wastewater treatment plants.
Information will be collected from the network of forty-six states or
the 104(g)(1) training centers set up through out the United States.
The information will be collected to identify the facilities assisted,
the different types of assistance the program provides and the
environmental outcomes and benefits of the assistance provided by the
program. The information will be collected and submitted on either an
annual or semi-annual basis. A Microsoft Access database and an Excel
spreadsheet have been developed for this purpose. This ICR will be used
by EPA for the technical and financial management of the 104(g)(1)
Program. The 104(g)(1) Program training centers participate in the
information collection in compliance with the grant conditions. All
information in the data system will be made public upon request.
    Burden Statement: The total number of respondents is estimated to
be 46 including the states and the training centers. The annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information
is estimated to be seven hours per respondent for 46 respondents with a
total burden of 322 hours at an annual cost of $14,361(assuming an
average hourly salary of $44.60). All forty-six (46) training centers
and EPA have the necessary equipment, desk-top computers and software,
to collect and manage this information. There will be no additional
start-up or maintenance costs associated with this project to perform
this information collection request. Burden means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and use technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose
information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's
estimate, which is only briefly summarized here:

    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 46.
    Frequency of response: Three times a year.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
Three.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 322 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $14,361. This includes an estimated
reporting burden cost of $14,361 and an estimated cost of $0 for
capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the total estimated
respondent burden hours compared with that identified in the ICR
currently approved by OMB. EPA has not modified the requirements that
were included in the previous ICR.

    Dated: January 8, 2008.
James A. Hanlon,
Director, Office of Wastewater Management.
[FR Doc. E8-1100 Filed 1-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


To: John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

From: "Guenther, Franklin R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Date: 08/16/2010 04:15PM

Cc: "Gameson, Lyn"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject: RE: NIST Cost Forecast for PGVP Cylinder Analyses

John,

NIST began the audit of commercial EPA Protocol Gas standards through
funding out of several different offices within EPA.  The cost that we
estimated to setup and deliver the data quality requested was
approximately $2,000 per cylinder for a tri-blend mixture.  NIST saw
additional value in this program during these years as it allow NIST to
assess how effective the traceability chain was performing from Primary
standard, through SRMs and NTRMs, down to EPA Protocol Gases.
Therefore NIST was willing to subsidize the effort to some extent.
That is no longer the case as we feel we have demonstrated that the
traceability chain is effective, as long as proper procedures (EPA
protocol gas document as an example) are strictly followed by the
specialty gas company delivering the product.

As NIST is a government agency, and due to the fact that we are not
funded to do this particular activity, we must recover any costs
expended in accomplishing the audit of EPA Protocol Gas Standards going
forward.  That being said, NIST is now in a much better position to
audit these gas standards as we have developed many of the procedures
and methods to accomplish the task.  However, with every new audit,
comes different concentrations and challenges which must be dealt with,
costing extra time and effort.  NIST is also being tasked with several
new programs that will require ever increasing research time for the Gas
Metrology Group.  These programs include Climate Change and the
Hydrogen Economy.  So for NIST to go ahead with the EPA Audits, the
scheduling of the activity during the year must be strictly set out and
followed by all the companies involved in the audit.  It is only with
the economy of batching similar gas standards, and receiving them all
within a specific time frame, will NIST be able to control costs. NIST,
along with EPA, must set a strict time schedule, those cylinders with
the appropriate funding documents, that arrive within that time frame
will be part of the audit.  Those that do not will be excluded.  That
is the only way NIST will be able to control costs.

For the estimation of per cylinder costs for the audit of tri-blend gas
mixtures, NIST is using the experiences of the 2010 audit.  We are
assuming that only NO, SO2 and CO2 will be analyzed, and that only these
compounds are within the gas mixture along with balance gas nitrogen.
Additional compounds within the gas mixture, even if they are not to be
analyzed, complicate the analysis of the primary components.  We are
also assuming that the concentrations will all fall within a relatively
narrow band that can be defined by EPA in the low, mid and high
ranges.  This is how the 2010 audit was designed, and our costs for
this audit fell within the $2000 per cylinder estimate. The 2010 audit
consumed 715 hours of time to analyze and report on 57 cylinders. We
believe we can design a better sampling system and reduce that time to
550 hours for the same 57 cylinders.  This amount of resources equals
$1,500 per cylinder, and is our estimate for this activity in 2011.
NIST will commit to this cost estimate for three years, until 2013, when
we will re-evaluate the cost and effectiveness of the program.

Franklin R. Guenther

Group Leader, Gas Metrology Group

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8393

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:28 PM

To: Guenther, Franklin R.

Subject: Fw: NIST Cost Forecast for PGVP Cylinder Analyses

Frank,

At the risk of being a pest, any information you can provide on NIST
PGVP costs (see below) would be very helpful.

Thanks

John Schakenbach

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Clean Air Markets Division

  HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS>\t "blank"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

-----Forwarded by John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US on 08/16/2010 02:16PM
-----

To: "Guenther, Franklin R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
From: John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US

Date: 08/05/2010 10:17AM

Subject: NIST Cost Forecast for PGVP Cylinder Analyses

Frank,

I am writing a response to comments document for EPA's recent proposed
rule related to the Protocol Gas Verification Program.  We have
received several comments related to cost.  There is a concern that
the amount charged by NIST to perform EPA Protocol gas cylinder
analyses may spiral upward over time.  As you know, every year each
EPA Protocol gas production site (there are about 30 such sites) will
contract with NIST to analyze up to 4 cylinders, for a total of 120
cylinders to be analyzed with an analysis report produced by NIST each
year.

I realize that NIST is a government agency that, by statute, can receive
funds from the private sector for services performed.  Is there some
assurance that you can provide me that the costs charged by NIST for the
above analyses will continue to be reasonable.  Ideally, it would be
very helpful if you could provide an estimate of the total annual cost
(assume all tri-blend cylinders) and expected cost increase, if any,
per year for the next five years.  This type of cost forecast will
allow specialty gas companies to have more certainty in their budget
process.

Best Regards,

John Schakenbach

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Clean Air Markets Division

  HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS>\t "blank"
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 11, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63567-63569]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26678]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2018-1013; Airspace Docket No. 18-ANE-7]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-318 and V-352; Northeastern
United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies the descriptions of VHF Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) Federal airways V-318 and V-352 to reflect the removal of
certain route segments within Canadian airspace that were deleted by
NAV CANADA. This rule modifies the above airway descriptions to match
the current configuration of the routes.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, February 28, 2019. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202)

741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-
locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11 Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the descriptions of VOR Federal airways V-318
and V-352 to maintain the accuracy of navigation publications.

Background

    NAV CANADA is the company that operates Canada's civil air
navigation service. As part of Canada's efforts to expand the
availability of area navigation (RNAV) routing, NAV CANADA has amended
certain routes that traverse both Canadian and United States airspace.
In this case, the descriptions of VOR Federal airways V-318 and V-352,
as published in FAA Order 7400.11C, originate in Canadian airspace,
then traverse through United States airspace (in the State of Maine)
then reenter Canadian airspace.
    The current route description of V-318 extends between the Quebec,
PQ, Canada, VORTAC and the St John, NB, Canada, VOR/DME. NAV CANADA has
deleted that segment at the western end of V-318 that runs between the
Quebec VORTAC and the United States/Canadian border, at the PINTE,
Canada, navigation fix. Therefore, the FAA is removing that segment
from the V-318 description. The remainder of the route from the PINTE
fix to the Houlton, ME, VOR/DME, and on to the St John, Canada VOR/DME
remains in effect as currently charted.
    The current route description of V-352 extends between the Beauce,
PQ, Canada VORTAC and the Fredericton, NB, Canada, VOR/DME. NAV CANADA
has deleted the segment on the western end of the route between the
Beauce VORTAC and the DEPRI, ME, waypoint (WP) at the United States/
Canadian border. Additionally, NAV CANADA has deleted the route segment
on the eastern end of the route between the Houlton, ME, VOR/DME and
the Fredericton, NB, VOR/DME. FAA is amending the description of V-352
to remove the segments deleted by NAV CANADA. The amended V-352 lies
totally within United States airspace and extends between PATTA, ME,
navigation fix (defined by the intersection of the Beauce, PQ, Canada
VOR/DME 085[deg](T)/100[deg](M) and the Bangor, ME, VORTAC 336[deg](T)/
355[deg](M) radials) and the Houlton, ME, VOR/DME.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
7400.11C dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways
listed in this document will be subsequently amended in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by modifying the descriptions of VOR Federal airways V-318 and
V-352 to remove certain route segments in Canadian airspace.
    V-318: NAV CANADA has deleted the route segment that extends
between the Quebec VORTAC and the PINTE navigation fix (located on the
United States/Canadian border). The FAA is amending the description of
V-318 by removing the words ``From Quebec, Province of Quebec, Canada,
81 miles 65 MSL, 26 miles 85 MSL,'' and replacing them with the words
``From INT Beauce, PQ, Canada 103[deg](T)/119[deg](M) and Quebec, PQ,
Canada 047[deg](T)/062[deg](M) radials.'' The new wording defines the
PINTE fix. The remainder the route description to St John, NB, Canada,
is unchanged.
    The amended V-318 description reads:
    ``From INT Beauce, PQ, Canada 103[deg] and Quebec, PQ, Canada
047[deg] radials; Houlton, ME; INT Houlton 128[deg] and St John, NB,
Canada 267[deg] radials; to St John. The airspace in Canada is
excluded.''
    V-352: NAV CANADA has deleted the route segments between the
Beauce, PQ, Canada, VOR/DME and the United States/Canadian border; and
the segments between the Houlton, ME, VOR/DME and the Fredericton, NB,
Canada, VOR/DME.
    The FAA is amending the description of V-352 by removing the words
``From Beauce, Quebec, Canada, via'' and replacing them with the words
``From INT Beauce, PQ, Canada 085[deg](T)/100[deg](M) and Bangor, ME
336[deg](T)/355[deg](M) radials; to'' and removing the words ``to
Fredericton, NB, Canada, excluding the airspace in Canada.'' The
amended route is entirely within United States airspace.
    The amended V-352 description reads:
    ``From INT Beauce, PQ, Canada 085[deg] and Bangor, ME, 336[deg]
radials; to Houlton, ME.''
    Note: For reference, both True and Magnetic degrees are shown where
new navigation aid radials are added in the above descriptions. Per
standard practice, only True degrees are stated in the amended route
descriptions as listed in ``The Amendment'' section, below.
    Because this amendment is necessary to update the descriptions of
V-318 and V-352 by removing airway segments in Canadian airspace that
have been deleted by NAV CANADA, I find that notice and public
procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impractical and contrary to the
public interest. This action is necessary to ensure agreement between
navigation databases and accurate depiction of the routes on
aeronautical charts.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is

certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action, of modifying the
descriptions of VOR Federal airways V-318 and V-352 to reflect the
removal of certain route segments within Canadian airspace deleted by
NAV CANADA, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR
part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F--Environmental
Impacts: Policies and Procedures, Paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically
excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions
that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes,
and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C,
D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting
Points). This action is not expected to result in any potentially
significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, this
action has been reviewed for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have a significant
environmental impact requiring further analysis, and it is determined
that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

     Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018 and
effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-318 [Amended]

    From INT Beauce, PQ, Canada 103[deg] and Quebec, PQ, Canada,
047[deg] radials; Houlton, ME; INT Houlton 128[deg] and St John, NB,
Canada, 267[deg] radials; to St John. The airspace within Canada is
excluded.

V-352 [Amended]

    From INT Beauce, PQ, Canada 085[deg] and Bangor, ME 336[deg]
radials; to Houlton, ME.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 3, 2018.
Rodger A. Dean, Jr.,
Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2018-26678 Filed 12-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 181)]
[Notices]
[Page 53860-53861]
[DOCID:fr17se08-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings, 1

September 11, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC08-122-000.
    Applicants: Indeck Maine Energy, LLC, Indeck Energy Services, Inc.,
Ridgewood Maine, L.L.C., Covanta Energy Corporation.
    Description: Indeck Maine Energy LLC et al. submit Joint
Application for Authority to Transfer Jurisdictional Facilities and
Request for Expedited Consideration and Waiver et al.
    Filed Date: 09/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080909-0082.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, September 25, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER99-2342-012.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Tampa Electric Co submits an updated market power
analysis that demonstrates continued eligibility to sell electric
capacity etc.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080909-0061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 23, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER01-2636-004.
    Applicants: ALLETE, Inc.
    Description: ALLETE, Inc request that the Commission provide for
tariff revisions filed on 8/11/08 to become effective on such date the
Midwest ISO has fully implemented the Ancillary Services Market.
    Filed Date: 09/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080909-0086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-927-001.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services Inc. submits a compliance refund
report summarizing transmission rate refunds for June 1, 2007 through
May 31, 2008.
    Filed Date: 09/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080909-0059.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-958-001, ER07-936-001.
    Applicants: Rumford Power Inc., Tiverton Power Inc.
    Description: Rumford Power Inc et al. submit a revised Appendix B
with certain additional fields included in response to FERC's informal
request for additional information re their 6/27/08 submission.
    Filed Date: 09/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080909-0084.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-1194-001.
    Applicants: Castlebridge Energy Group LLC.
    Description: Motion of Castlebridge Energy Group LLC for
Determination of Category 1 Seller Status.
    Filed Date: 08/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080813-5058.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-953-002.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Wisconsin Electric Power Company submits corrected
tariff sheets to properly designate First Revised Rate Schedule 112.
    Filed Date: 09/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080909-0060.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1210-001.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Co. submits an Amended and
Restated Arizona Nuclear Power Project Hassayampa Switchyard
Interconnection Agreement.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080910-0072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1310-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: Withdrawal of Application of American Electric Power
Service Corporation for approval of limited notices to proceed or, in
the alternative notice of cancellation on filed rate schedules.
    Filed Date: 09/10/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080910-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 01, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1425-001.
    Applicants: ML Partnership, LLC.
    Description: ML Partnership, LLC submits an updated Petition and
FERC Electric Tariff Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080910-0071.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1432-001.
    Applicants: MS Solar Solutions Corp.
    Description: MS Solar Solutions Corp resubmits Original Sheet 1 et
al. to FERC Rate Schedule No. 1, effective 7/21/08, associated with the
Notice of succession in ownership operation filed August 20, 2008.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080910-0070.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1485-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent System Transmission Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest ISO submits proposed revisions to the Credit
Policy in Attachment L of the Midwest ISO's Open Access Transmission
and Energy Markets Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff, Third Revised etc.
    Filed Date: 08/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080903-0301.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 19, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1507-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc., New York
Power Authority.
    Description: New York ISO et al. submits an Executed Standard Large
Generator Interconnection Agreement with Noble Chateaugay Windpark,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080910-0069.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1508-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corp submits
proposed tariff revisions re 2009 CRR Release Process. On 9/9/08 a
letter informing FERC that service of the 9/8/08 filing was actually
made on 9/9/08 etc. was submitted.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080910-0068.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES08-60-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Application for Authorization to Issue and Sell up to
$870 Million of Bonds, Notes, Debentures, Guarantees or Other Evidences
of Long-Term Indebtedness.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080826-5067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 16, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ES08-61-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Application for Authorization to Issue and Sell up to
$1.2 Billion of Promissory Notes or Other Evidences of Unsecured Short-
Term Indebtedness.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080826-5068.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 16, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:
    Docket Numbers: OA07-32-005.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Order No. 890 OATT Compliance Filing.
    Filed Date: 09/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080905-5148.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: OA08-151-000.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.--Yadkin.
    Description: Order No. 890-B Compliance Filing.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080908-5149.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: OA08-152-000.
    Applicants: Ohio Valley Electric Corporation.
    Description: Ohio Valley Electric Corporation's Order No. 890-B
OATT Filing.
    Filed Date: 09/08/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080908-5150.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-21698 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 176)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46910-46914]
[DOCID:fr14se09-15]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2008-0815; FRL-8954-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico;
Excess Emissions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving revisions to the New Mexico State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Governor of New Mexico on
behalf of the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) in a letter
dated October 7, 2008 (the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal). The October
7, 2008 SIP submittal concerns revisions to New Mexico Administrative
Code Title 20, Chapter 2, Part 7 Excess Emissions (20.2.7 NMAC--Excess
Emissions) occurring during startup, shutdown, and malfunction related
activities. We are approving the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal because
the revisions to 20.2.7 NMAC are consistent with the Clean Air Act (the
Act). This action is in accordance with section 110 of the Act.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective November 13, 2009
without

further notice unless EPA receives relevant adverse comments by October
14, 2009. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2008-0815, by one of the following methods:
     Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
     Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     EPA Region 6 ``Contact Us'' Web site: http://epa.gov/
region6/r6comment.htm. Please click on ``6PD (Multimedia)'' and select
``Air'' before submitting comments.
     E-mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
also send a copy by e-mail to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
     Fax: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), at fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
     Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are
accepted only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays, and not
on legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2008-
0815. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made available by
appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal
holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment. If possible, please
make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your
visit. There will be a fee of 15 cents per page for making photocopies
of documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA
Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
    The State submittal is also available for public inspection during
official business hours, by appointment, at the State Air Agency listed
below during official business hours by appointment: NMED, Air Quality
Bureau, 1301 Siler Road, Building B, Santa Fe, NM 87507.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Shar, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax
(214) 665-7263, e-mail address shar.alan @epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Outline

I. Background
    A. What action are we taking in this document?
    B. What documents did we use in our evaluation of the October 7,
2008 SIP submittal?
    C. Why are we approving the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal?
II. Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. What action are we taking in this document?

    We are approving revisions to 20.2.7 NMAC--Excess Emissions
occurring during startup, shutdown, and malfunction related activities
as revisions to the New Mexico SIP. We received this submittal with an
October 7, 2008 letter from the Governor of New Mexico on behalf of the
NMED.
    We are approving the repeal of the existing EPA-approved 20.2.7--
Excess Emissions, and replacing it with the revised version of 20.2.7
NMAC as contained in the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal. The existing
20.2.7 NMAC--Excess Emissions rule was approved by EPA on September 26,
1997 (62 FR 50518) at 40 CFR 52.1620(c)(66). See Chapter A of our
Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared in conjunction with this
rulemaking action for more information. The TSD is a part of the docket
and available for public review.
    The October 7, 2008 submittal also included proposed revisions to
NMAC 20.2.70--Operating Permits. We are not taking action on those
revisions as part of today's rulemaking action. The revisions to NMAC
20.2.70 are part of the Title V program approval, and will be handled
in a separate rulemaking action.

B. What documents did we use in our evaluation of the October 7, 2008
SIP submittal?

    The EPA's interpretation of the Act on excess emissions occurring
during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction is set forth in
the following documents: A memorandum dated September 28, 1982, from
Kathleen M. Bennett, Assistant Administrator for Air, Noise, and
Radiation, entitled ``Policy on Excess Emissions During Startup,
Shutdown, Maintenance, and Malfunctions'' (1982 Policy); EPA's
clarification to the above policy memorandum dated February 15, 1983,
from Kathleen M. Bennett, Assistant Administrator for Air, Noise, and
Radiation (1983 Policy); EPA's policy memorandum reaffirming and
supplementing the above policy, dated September 20, 1999, from Steven
A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant

Administrator for Air and Radiation, entitled ``State Implementation
Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup,
and Shutdown'' (1999 Policy); EPA's final rule for Utah's sulfur
dioxide control strategy (Kennecott Copper), April 27, 1977 (42 FR
21472); EPA's final rule for Idaho's sulfur dioxide control strategy,
November 8, 1977 (42 FR 58171); and the latest clarification of EPA's
policy issued on December 5, 2001 (2001 Policy). You can find the 2001
Policy at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html (URL dating July 22,
2008). The EPA's interpretation of the Act related to exclusions from
emission limitations for sources in certain startup, shutdown, or
malfunction situations was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals
for the Sixth Circuit in Michigan Mfrs. Ass'n v. Browner, 230 F.3d 181
(6th Cir. 2000).

C. Why are we approving the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal?

    Under section 110(a) of the Act, EPA views all excess emissions as
violations of the applicable emission limitation because excess
emissions have the potential to interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, or with the
protection of Prevention of Significant Deterioration increments.
However, EPA recognizes that imposition of a penalty for sudden and
unavoidable malfunctions, startups or shutdowns caused by circumstances
entirely beyond the control of the owner or operator may not be
appropriate. The EPA has provided guidance on two approaches for
addressing excess emissions, the use of enforcement discretion and
providing an affirmative defense to actions for civil penalties.
Neither approach waives liability or reporting requirements for the
violation. Excess emissions occurring during periods of startup,
shutdown, maintenance, and malfunction must be included in determining
compliance with SIP emission limitations. States are not required to
provide an affirmative defense approach, but if they choose to do so,
EPA will evaluate the State's SIP rules for consistency with our policy
and guidance documents listed in section B of this document. Our
reasons for approval of the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal are as
follows:
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal adopts an affirmative
defense approach to address excess emissions. This approach is
permissible under the 1999 Policy.
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal clearly states that
operation resulting in an excess emission is a violation of the air
quality regulation or permit, and may be subject to potential
enforcement action. This statement is consistent with the 1999 Policy.
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal adequately sets forth
notification and reporting requirements for the owner or operator of a
source having an excess emission. We believe that notification and
reporting, including implementation of corrective action(s) when
needed, of excess emissions will assist with the management of excess
emissions and will enhance the New Mexico SIP by reducing the amount or
frequency of future potential excess emissions.
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal contains criteria to be
considered when asserting an affirmative defense for an excess emission
during startup or shutdown to claims for a civil penalty (not
injunctive relief) that are similar, if not identical, to those in the
1999 Policy. We believe the criteria for asserting an affirmative
defense are consistent with our guidance documents and should be
approved.
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal contains criteria to be
considered when asserting affirmative defense for an excess emission
during a malfunction to claims for a civil penalty (but not the
injunctive relief) that are similar, if not identical, to those in the
1999 Policy. We believe the criteria for asserting an affirmative
defense are consistent with our guidance documents and should be
approved.
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal clearly states that NMED's
determinations concerning an owner or operator's assertion of the
affirmative defense shall not preclude EPA or citizens' enforcement
authority under the Act. This statement is consistent with 42 U.S.C.
7413 and 7604.
    Neither section <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC nor section <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC of the
October 7, 2008 SIP submittal makes an affirmative defense available to
an owner or operator of a source having an excess emission due to
maintenance related activities. We believe that maintenance activities
are predictable events that are subject to planning to minimize
releases, unlike malfunctions or upsets, which are sudden, unavoidable
or beyond the control of owner or operator. The owner or operator of a
source should be able to plan maintenance that might otherwise lead to
excess emissions to coincide with maintenance of production equipment
or other facility shutdowns. This position is consistent with EPA's
interpretation of section 110 of the Act, and with our guidance
documents.
    The NMED's October 7, 2008 SIP submittal narrowly defines an
emergency situation. An owner and operator may assert an affirmative
defense for an emergency if certain criteria are met. See
<IP_ADDRESS>(B)(1) through (4) NMAC for these criteria. In any
enforcement proceeding, the owner or operator seeking to establish the
occurrence of an emergency has the burden of proof. In addition, NMED
may require additional information reported within the time period
specified by the department. See <IP_ADDRESS>(C) and (D) NMAC. We believe
this approach is consistent with our guidance documents.
    For a section-by-section evaluation of the October 7, 2008 SIP
submittal see Chapter B of our TSD. The TSD is a part of the docket and
available for public review. For these reasons we are approving 20.2.7
NMAC into New Mexico SIP.
    In addition, we are approving the repeal and replacement of the
existing EPA-approved 20.2.7 NMAC Excess Emissions rule with the
revised 20.2.7 NMAC contained in the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal. The
existing EPA-approved 20.2.7 NMAC Excess Emissions rule provided for
frequent startup and shutdowns, and exempted certain facilities from
notification requirements. See Chapter A of the TSD. The existing EPA-
approved 20.2.7 NMAC Excess Emissions rule did not conform with the
1999 Policy. The revised 20.2.7 NMAC contained in the October 7, 2008
SIP submittal conforms with the 1999 Policy, and its approval will
enhance the New Mexico SIP. See Chapter B of the TSD.

II. Final Action

    Today, we are approving revisions to New Mexico Administrative Code
Title 20, Chapter 2, Part 7 Excess Emissions (20.2.7 NMAC--Excess
Emissions) occurring during startup, shutdown, and malfunction related
activities into New Mexico SIP. We are approving the repeal of the
existing 20.2.7 NMAC, and replacing it with the revised 20.2.7 NMAC
contained in the October 7, 2008 SIP submittal.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely

approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act;
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994);
     Does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law; and
     Is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2)
under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. A major
rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule.'' Under section
307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by November 13, 2009. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (See section 307(b)(2) of the Act.)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Ozone, Volatile
organic compounds.

    Dated: August 28, 2009.
Lawrence E. Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. The table in Sec.  52.1620(c) entitled ``EPA Approved New Mexico
Regulations'' is amended by revising the entry for ``Part 7'' to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.1620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                       EPA Approved New Mexico Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     State approval/
         State citation             Title/subject       submittal       EPA approval date          Comments
                                                          date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20--Environmental Protection
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Chapter 2--Air Quality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Part 7.........................  Excess Emissions..       7/10/2008  9/14/2009 [Insert FR
                                                                      page number where
                                                                      document begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-21827 Filed 9-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57014-57015]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25849]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Investment Company Act Release No. 32922; File No. 812-14786;
Ausdal Unit Investment Trust and Ausdal Financial Partners, Inc.

November 27, 2017.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application for an order under section 12(d)(1)(J) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from
sections 12(d)(1)(A), (B), and (C) of the Act and under sections 6(c)
and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and (2) of
the Act. The requested order would permit certain registered unit
investment trusts (``UITs'') to acquire shares of certain registered
open-end investment companies, registered closed-end investment
companies and registered UITs (collectively, the ``Underlying Funds'')
that are within and outside the same group of investment companies as
the acquiring UITs, in excess of the limits in section 12(d)(1) of the
Act.
    Applicants: Ausdal Unit Investment Trust (the ``Trust''), a UIT
that is or will be registered under the Act, and Ausdal Financial
Partners, Inc. (``Ausdal''), an Iowa corporation registered as a
broker-dealer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange
Act'').
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on June 20, 2017, and
amended on October 27, 2017.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the

Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the
request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by
the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on December 22, 2017, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on the applicants, in the form of an
affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule
0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, 3250 Lacey Road,
Suite 130, Downers Grove, IL 60515, and Morrison C. Warren, Walter L.
Draney and Suzanne M. Russell, Chapman and Cutler LLP, 111 West Monroe
Street, Chicago, IL 60603.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6915 or David J. Marcinkus, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Summary of the Application

    1. Applicants request an order to permit (a) a Series \1\ to
acquire shares of Underlying Funds \2\ in excess of the limits in
sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (C) of the Act and (b) the Underlying Funds
that are registered open-end investment companies, their principal
underwriters and any broker or dealer registered under the Exchange Act
to sell shares of the Underlying Funds to the Series in excess of the
limits in section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act.\3\ Applicants also request an
order of exemption under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act from the
prohibition on certain affiliated transactions in section 17(a) of the
Act to the extent necessary to permit the Underlying Funds to sell
their shares to, and redeem their shares from, the Series.\4\
Applicants state that such transactions will be consistent with the
policies of each Series and each Underlying Fund and with the general
purposes of the Act and will be based on the net asset values of the
Underlying Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that the order apply to each existing and
future series of the Trust and to any future registered UIT and
series thereof sponsored by Ausdal or an entity controlling,
controlled by or under common control with Ausdal (the ``Series'').
    \2\ Certain of the Underlying Funds may be registered as an
open-end investment company or a UIT, but have received exemptive
relief from the Commission to permit their shares to be listed and
traded on a national securities exchange at negotiated prices and to
operate as exchange-traded funds (``ETFs'').
    \3\ Applicants do not request relief for the Series to invest in
reliance on the order in closed-end investment companies that are
not listed and traded on a national securities exchange.
    \4\ A Series generally would purchase and sell shares of an
Underlying Fund that operates as an ETF through secondary market
transactions rather than through principal transactions with the
Underlying Fund. Applicants nevertheless request relief from section
17(a) to permit a Series to purchase or redeem shares from the ETF.
A Series will purchase and sell shares of an Underlying Fund that is
a closed-end fund through secondary market transactions at market
prices rather than through principal transactions with the closed-
end fund. Accordingly, applicants are not requesting section 17(a)
relief with respect to transactions in shares of closed-end funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief
will be subject to the terms and conditions stated in the application.
Such terms and conditions are designed to, among other things, help
prevent any potential (i) undue influence over an Underlying Fund that
is not in the same ``group of investment companies'' as the UIT through
control or voting power, or in connection with certain services,
transactions, and underwritings, (ii) excessive layering of fees, and
(iii) overly complex fund structures, which are the concerns underlying
the limits in sections 12(d)(1)(A), (B), and (C) of the Act.
    3. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may
exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions, from any provision of section
12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public interest and
the protection of investors. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the
Commission to grant an order permitting a transaction otherwise
prohibited by section 17(a) if it finds that (a) the terms of the
proposed transaction are fair and reasonable and do not involve
overreaching on the part of any person concerned; (b) the proposed
transaction is consistent with the policies of each registered
investment company involved; and (c) the proposed transaction is
consistent with the general purposes of the Act. Section 6(c) of the
Act permits the Commission to exempt any persons or transactions from
any provision of the Act if such exemption is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors
and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the
Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-25849 Filed 11-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 169 (Wednesday, August 31, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59830-59834]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20686]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-8133; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-101-AD;
Amendment 39-18631; AD 2016-18-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER
series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of heavy corrosion
and chrome damage on the forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies of the
right and left main landing gears (MLGs). This AD requires repetitive
lubrication of the forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies of the right
and left MLGs; repetitive inspections of these assemblies for corrosion
and chrome damage, and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary; and installation of new or modified trunnion pin assembly
components, which will terminate the repetitive lubrication and
repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
heavy corrosion and chrome damage on the forward and aft trunnion pin
assemblies of the right and left MLGs, which could result in cracking
of these assemblies and collapse of the MLGs.

DATES: This AD is effective October 5, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 5,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
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 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>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
8133.

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-2015-
8133; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2015 (80 FR
81795) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of heavy
corrosion and chrome damage on the forward and aft trunnion pin
assemblies of the right and left MLGs. The NPRM proposed to require
repetitive lubrication of the forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies
of the right and left MLGs; repetitive inspections of these assemblies
for corrosion and chrome damage, and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary; and installation of new or modified
trunnion pin assembly components, which would terminate the repetitive
lubrication and repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct heavy corrosion and chrome damage on the forward and
aft trunnion pin assemblies of the right and left MLGs, which could
result in cracking of these assemblies and collapse of the MLGs.

Comments

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

Support for the NPRM

    Boeing stated that it concurs with the contents of the NPRM.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing Supplemental
Type Certificate (STC) ST00830SE does not affect the accomplishment of
the actions specified in the NPRM.
    We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of
the proposed AD as paragraph (c)(1) and added new paragraph (c)(2) in
this AD to state that installation of STC ST00830SE does not affect the
ability to accomplish the actions required by this final rule.
Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST00830SE is installed, a
``change in product'' alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval
request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17.

Request for Clarification of Requirements

    Delta Airlines (DAL) requested an explanation of how the
requirements are different between AD 2014-08-11, Amendment 39-17835
(79 FR 23903, April 29, 2014) (``AD 2014-08-11'') and the NPRM. DAL
noted that the requirements of AD 2014-08-11 include an inspection for
discrepancies of the transition radius of the MLG forward trunnion
pins, and corrective actions if necessary. DAL elaborated that this
inspection is for finish damage (scrapes through primer), signs of
corrosion, pitting, and scratches in the base metal of that area. DAL
pointed out that the NPRM requires a general visual inspection of the
MLG forward trunnion pin assembly for signs of corrosion or chrome
plating damage, and if either condition is found, a detailed inspection
of the forward trunnion pin assembly is required. DAL mentioned that
the detailed inspection requires verification that a new seal and
retainer configuration is installed, and if the overhaul limits exceed
what is specified in the component maintenance manual, replacement of
the forward trunnion pin assembly is necessary. DAL reasoned that the
forward trunnion pin inspections required by AD 2014-08-11 should be
superseded by the proposed forward trunnion pin inspections in the
NPRM. DAL stated that the detailed inspection proposed in the NPRM has
additional corrective actions if any loose or missing chrome plating is
found, beyond what is required in AD 2014-08-11. DAL also conveyed that
the inspections for signs of corrosion are the same in the NPRM and AD
2014-08-11.
    We agree to provide clarification regarding how the requirements
are different between the requirements in the proposed AD and the
requirements mandated by AD 2014-08-11. The applicability of the
proposed AD includes certain The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, line numbers 1 through
3526 inclusive. The applicability of AD 2014-08-11 includes certain The
Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER
series airplanes, line numbers 1423 through 3526 inclusive. Although
certain airplane line numbers are included in the applicability of both
the proposed AD and AD 2014-08-11, the issues addressed by the NPRM and
AD 2014-08-11 are not the same. Furthermore, the inspection
instructions in the service information required for accomplishing the
actions in the proposed AD are different from the inspection
instructions in the service information required by AD 2014-08-11. The
inspections in the proposed AD focus on chrome damage and corrosion on
the shank of the forward trunnion pins, and the inspections required by
AD 2014-08-11 focus on finish scratches and corrosion in the transition
radius of the forward trunnion pins. We have not changed this AD
regarding this issue.
    In addition, we note that the service information required to do
the actions required by AD 2014-08-11 (which cites Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1402, Revision 1, dated February 7,
2013), includes a recommendation by Boeing that operators accomplish
the specified actions concurrently with the actions specified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448 (Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015,
is the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the
actions required by this AD).

Likewise, Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448,
Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015, includes a recommendation by Boeing
that operators accomplish the specified actions concurrently with the
actions specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-
1402.

Request for Clarification of Lube Fittings Location

    DAL requested clarification regarding the location of the lube
fittings for the forward and aft MLG trunnion pin assemblies in
paragraph (g) of the NPRM. DAL commented that the NPRM stated to do the
repetitive lubrication in accordance with Work Package 1 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015. DAL noted that
Work Package 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015,
refers to section 12-21-11 of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Aircraft
Maintenance Manual (AMM) as an accepted procedure for the repetitive
lubrication of the MLG trunnion pin assemblies. DAL stated that section
12-21-11 of the AMM specifically identifies the locations of the
trunnion bearing housing and the aft trunnion bearing, but does not
specifically identify the locations of the two lube fittings for the
forward and aft trunnion pins.
    We agree with the commenter that the two lube fittings for the
forward and aft trunnion pins are not specifically mentioned in section
12-21-11 of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 AMM. These locations are
identified as Item [6], ``Outer Cylinder,'' on page 307 of the AMM.
However, there are only three lube fittings associated with Item [6],
so it is possible to determine which two fittings are to be used for
lubricating the forward and aft trunnion pins. We consulted with Boeing
and confirmed that the two lube fittings are located on the bottom of
the outer cylinder trunnion, directly under the pins. We have not
changed this AD regarding this issue.

Request for Clarification of Corrective Actions in Paragraph (h) of the
Proposed AD

    DAL requested clarification of certain corrective actions in
paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. DAL asked if an operator can replace
an affected trunnion pin assembly instead of overhauling it. DAL
pointed out that neither the NPRM nor Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015, specify the part
number of the replacement trunnion pin assembly. DAL asked if an
operator can replace an affected pin assembly with any properly
approved pin assembly using the Boeing 737 Aircraft Illustrated Parts
Catalog, Boeing Drawing 161A0002, ``Boeing Model 737-NG Main Landing
Gear Component Interchangeability List,'' or a similar document.
    We agree with the commenter's request for clarification. Operators
may elect to replace a trunnion pin assembly with a serviceable unit in
lieu of performing an overhaul. However, operators should be aware that
some of the existing trunnion pin assemblies require modification.
Figures 9, 11, and 12 of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-
32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015, provide instructions for
modifying certain pin assemblies. Note (c) in each of these figures
refers to paragraph 2.C.3., ``Parts Modified and Reidentified,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1,
dated May 29, 2015, which shows the existing and modified part numbers.
For use of other part numbers, such as those identified in the Boeing
737 Aircraft Illustrated Parts Catalog or Boeing Drawing 161A0002,
``Boeing Model 737-NG Main Landing Gear Component Interchangeability
List,'' operators may request an alternative method of compliance in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.
We have not changed this AD regarding this issue.

Conclusion

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448,
Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015. The service information describes
procedures for lubricating the forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies
on the left and right MLGs, inspecting the forward and aft trunnion pin
assemblies for corrosion or damage, and performing corrective actions.
In addition, the service information describes procedures for
installing a new forward trunnion pin housing assembly, seal, and
retainer configuration. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 1,023 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Cost per          Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost         Parts cost        product           operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lubrication.......................  2 work-hours x $85                 $0            $170  $173,910, per
                                     per hour = $170, per                                   lubrication cycle
                                     lubrication cycle.                                     (1,023 airplanes).
Inspection (Groups 1 and 2,         51 work-hours x $85                 0           4,335  4,282,980, per
 Configuration 1 airplanes).         per hour = $4,335,                                     inspection cycle
                                     per inspection cycle.                                  (988 airplanes).
Inspection (Group 3 airplanes)....  93 work-hours x $85                 0           7,905  276,675, per
                                     per hour = $7,905,                                     inspection cycle (35
                                     per inspection cycle.                                  airplanes).
Replacement/overhaul (Groups 1 and  84 work-hours x $85                 0           7,140  7,054,320 (988
 2 airplanes).                       per hour = $7,140.                                     airplanes).
Replacement/overhaul (Group 3       86 work-hours x $85                 0           7,310  255,850 (35
 airplanes).                         per hour = $7,310.                                     airplanes).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    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) Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2016-18-01 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18631; Docket No. FAA-
2015-8133; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-101-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 5, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 737-600,
-700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, certificated
in any category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST00830SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/184DE9A71EC3FA5586257EAE00707DA6?OpenDocument&Highlight=st00830se)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST00830SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
Gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of heavy corrosion and chrome
damage of the forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies of the right
and left main landing gears (MLGs). We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct heavy corrosion and chrome damage of the forward and aft
trunnion pin assemblies of the right and left MLGs, which could
result in cracking of these assemblies and collapse of the MLGs.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Lubrication of MLG Trunnion Pin Assemblies

    For airplanes in Groups 1 and 2, Configuration 1, and airplanes
in Group 3, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015: Except as
required by paragraph (k) of this AD, at the applicable time
specified in Table 1 or Table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision
1, dated May 29, 2015, lubricate the forward and aft trunnion pin
assemblies of the left and right MLGs, in accordance with Work
Package 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29,
2015. Repeat the lubrication thereafter at intervals not to exceed
those specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29,
2015. Accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraph (i) of
this AD terminates the repetitive lubrication required by this
paragraph.

(h) Repetitive Inspections, Corrective Actions, and Lubrication

    For airplanes in Groups 1 and 2, Configuration 1, and airplanes
in Group 3, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015: Except as
required by paragraph (k) of this AD, at the applicable time
specified in Table 1 or Table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision
1, dated May 29, 2015, do a general visual inspection of the left
and right MLGs at the forward and aft trunnion pin locations and the
visible surfaces of the forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies for
signs of corrosion or chrome plating damage and lubricate the
forward and aft trunnion pin assemblies, in accordance with Work
Package 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29,
2015. Repeat the general visual inspection thereafter at intervals
not to exceed those specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1,
dated May 29, 2015. If any discrepancy is found during any
inspection required by this paragraph, before further flight, do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions in
accordance with Work Package 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737 32-1448, Revision 1,
dated May 29, 2015. Accomplishment of the actions required by
paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the repetitive inspections
required by this paragraph.

(i) Modification of MLG Trunnion Pin Assemblies

    For airplanes in Groups 1 and 2, Configuration 1, and airplanes
in Group 3, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015: Except as
required by paragraph (k) of this AD, at the applicable time
specified in Table 1 or Table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision
1, dated May 29, 2015, modify and lubricate the left and right MLG
trunnion pin assemblies, and do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions, in accordance with Work Package 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015.

Accomplishment of the actions in Work Package 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015, terminates the
repetitive lubrication required by paragraph (g) of this AD and the
repetitive inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(j) Replacement of MLG Forward Trunnion Pin Housing Assembly, Seal, and
Retainer

    For airplanes in Groups 1 and 2, Configuration 2, as identified
in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision
1, dated May 29, 2015: At the applicable time specified in Table 3
of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015,
replace the seal, retainer, and support ring assembly with a new
seal and retainer configuration; install the forward trunnion pin
assembly into the housing assembly; and lubricate the forward and
aft trunnion pin assemblies for the left and right MLGs; in
accordance with Work Package 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1,
dated May 29, 2015.

(k) Exception to Service Information Specification

    Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448, Revision 1, dated May 29,
2015, specifies a compliance time ``from the original issue date on
this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time ``after the effective date of this AD.''

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the requirements of paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-
32-1448, dated May 19, 2011, which is not incorporated by reference
in this AD.

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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 (n)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(n) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Alan Pohl,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (o)(3) and (o)(4) of this AD.

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-1448,
Revision 1, dated May 29, 2015.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (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.
    (4) 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
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 18, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-20686 Filed 8-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P