[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 225 (Monday, November 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73015-73016]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29745]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Form N-8F, SEC File No. 270-136, OMB Control No. 3235-0157.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Form N-8F (17 CFR 274.218) is the form prescribed for use by
registered investment companies in certain circumstances to request
orders of the Commission declaring that the registration of that
investment company cease to be in effect. The form requests information
about: (i) The investment company's identity, (ii) the investment
company's distributions, (iii) the investment company's assets and
liabilities, (iv) the events leading to the request to deregister, and
(v) the conclusion of the investment company's business. The
information is needed by the Commission to determine whether an order
of deregistration is appropriate.
    The Form takes approximately 5.2 hours on average to complete. It
is estimated that approximately 150 investment companies file Form N-8F
annually, so the total annual burden for the form is estimated to be
approximately 780 hours. The estimate of average burden hours is made
solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and is not
derived from a comprehensive or even a representative survey or study.
    The collection of information on Form N-8F is not mandatory. The
information provided on Form N-8F is not kept confidential. 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.
    Written comments are requested on: (i) Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (ii) the

accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burdens of the collection
of information; (iii) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information collected; and (iv) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions
submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: November 16, 2015.
 Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-29745 Filed 11-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53317-53324]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21617]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28661; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-013-AD;
Amendment 39-16785; AD 2011-18-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD requires installation of an automatic
shutoff system for the center tank fuel boost pumps, and installation
of a placard in the airplane flight deck if necessary. This AD also
requires revisions to the Limitations and Normal Procedures sections of
the airplane flight manual to advise the flightcrew of certain
operating restrictions for airplanes equipped with an automated center
tank fuel pump shutoff control. This AD further requires installation
of a secondary control relay for the electrical control circuit of each
of the two center tank fuel boost pumps. Additionally, this AD requires
a revision to the maintenance program to incorporate Airworthiness
Limitation (AWL) No. 28-AWL-23. This AD also provides an option of
installation and maintenance of universal fault interrupters using a
certain supplemental type certificate, which terminates certain
requirements of this AD. This AD was prompted by fuel system reviews
conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent center
tank fuel pump operation with continuous low pressure, which could lead
to friction sparks or overheating in the fuel pump inlet that could
create a potential ignition source inside the center fuel tank. These
conditions, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in
a center fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective September 30, 2011.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 30,
2011.

ADDRESSES: For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. For TDG
Aerospace information identified in this AD, contact TDG Aerospace,
Inc., 545 Corporate Drive, Escondido, California 92029; telephone 760-
466-1040; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet http://www.tdgaerospace.com; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    You may review copies of the referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; 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:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document 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: Tak Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone:
(425) 917-6499; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that
would apply to the specified products. That SNPRM published in the
Federal Register on March 8, 2011 (76 FR 12634). The original NPRM (72
FR 37479, July 10, 2007) proposed to require installation of an
automatic shutoff system for the center tank fuel boost pumps,
installation of a placard in the airplane flight deck if necessary, and
concurrent modification of the P5-2 fuel control module assembly. The
original NPRM also proposed to require revisions to the Limitations and
Normal Procedures sections of the airplane flight manual (AFM) to
advise the flightcrew of certain operating restrictions for airplanes
equipped with an automated center tank fuel pump shutoff control.
Additionally, the original NPRM proposed to require a revision to the
Airworthiness Limitations (AWL) section of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICA) to incorporate AWL No. 28-AWL-19 and No.
28-AWL-23. The original NPRM further proposed to require installation
of a secondary control relay for the electrical control circuit of each
of the two center tank fuel boost pumps. The SNPRM proposed to revise
the original NPRM by adding airplanes, adding additional operational
testing of the automatic shutoff system for certain airplanes, removing
the requirement for incorporating AWL No. 28-AWL-19 into the AWL
section of the ICA, and adding an option of installation and
maintenance of universal fault interrupters using a certain
supplemental type certificate.

Comments

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

Support for SNPRM

    Delta Airlines (Delta) stated that it has no objections to the
SNPRM.

Request To Correct Service Information Citation

    Boeing requested that we revise the fifth paragraph under the
``Explanation

of Additional Changes Made to this Supplemental NPRM'' section of the
SNPRM to correct the model designation portion of the document citation
provided in that paragraph.
    Although we agree that there was a typographical error in the
document citation specified in the ``Explanation of Additional Changes
Made to this Supplemental NPRM'' section of the SNPRM, we do not agree
to revise this AD in this regard, as that section is not restated in
the final rule. No change to the AD is necessary in this regard.

Request To Include Definition in Paragraph (b) of the SNPRM

    Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (b) of the SNPRM to
properly define ``2001-08-24'' as an airworthiness directive. We agree
and have revised paragraph (b) of this AD accordingly.

Request To Revise Conditions Specified in Paragraph (h) of the SNPRM

    Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (h) of the SNPRM to
remove the last sentence of the paragraph, which specifies the
conditions when a placard is not necessary. Boeing stated that this
sentence is confusing and possibly contradictory, and that the placard
requirement provided in those paragraphs is well defined without the
use of this sentence.
    We agree partially. We agree to remove the first condition
specified in the second to last sentence of paragraph (h) of this AD,
which states, ``If automatic shutoff systems are installed concurrently
on all airplanes in an operator's fleet in accordance with paragraph
(g) of this AD * * *, the placard installation specified in this
paragraph is not necessary.'' If the automatic shutoff system is
concurrently installed on all airplanes, there will be no airplanes on
which a placard would be required to be installed. Therefore, this
condition is unnecessary. We have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to
remove this condition.
    We do not agree to remove the second condition in the second to
last sentence of paragraph (h) of this AD. That condition provides an
option to operators that prefer not to install a placard on any
airplane in their fleet. If an operator intends to maintain fuel usage
restrictions specified in AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10,
January 2, 2003), and AD 2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR 20733,
April 25, 2001), for all airplanes in the fleet until the automatic
shutoff systems are installed on all of those airplanes, the operator
is not required to install a placard, even after installing the
automatic shutoff system on any airplane in its fleet. We have
determined that this option should remain available to operators, and
have not revised paragraph (h) of this AD to remove this condition. We
also have not revised paragraph (s) of this AD to remove the same
condition specified in the second to last sentence of paragraph (h) of
this AD.
    Also, we acknowledge that a reference to AD 2001-08-24, Amendment
39-12201 (66 FR 20733, April 25, 2001), was inadvertently omitted in
the last sentence of paragraph (h) of the SNPRM. We have added a
reference to AD 2001-08-24 in paragraph (h) of this AD, and provided
additional clarification in the ``Additional Changes Made to this AD''
section of this AD.

Request To Revise Proposed Wording of Placard in Paragraph (h) of the
SNPRM

    Southwest Airlines (Southwest) requested that the SNPRM be revised
to allow alternative wording for the placard required by paragraph (h)
of the SNPRM. Southwest stated that it has a placard adjacent to the
pilot's primary flight display on all of its airplanes that are not
equipped with an automatic shutoff system, which reads, ``AD 2002-19-52
fuel usage restrictions required.'' Southwest reported that it is
unable to find any language in either AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900
(67 FR 61253, September 30, 2002), or AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992
(68 FR 10, January 2, 2003), that requires the placard text proposed in
paragraph (h) of the SNPRM.
    We agree partially. We have determined that clarification of
paragraph (h) of this final rule is necessary to prevent inadvertent
removal of the placard required by paragraph (h) of this AD and by
paragraph (e) of AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253,
September 30, 2002). As discussed in the preamble of the SNPRM, AD
2002-19-52 requires installation of a placard, and provides an optional
terminating action that allows removal of that placard. The intent of
the placard installation required by AD 2002-19-52 is to address mixed
operation of the airplanes with and without the optional terminating
action accomplished within an operator's fleet. After issuance of AD
2002-19-52, we issued AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10,
January 2, 2003), to mandate fuel usage restrictions identical to those
required by AD 2002-19-52, to address an unsafe condition not related
to AD 2002-19-52. Airworthiness Directive 2002-24-51 did not require
installation of a placard, because terminating action for that AD was
not available at the time, and, therefore, there was no concern about
mixed fleet operation.
    We do not agree to revise the placard wording required by paragraph
(h) of this AD. However, if a placard that refers to AD 2002-19-52,
Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253, September 30, 2002), already exists on
an airplane, we have determined that use of that placard does meet the
placard installation requirement of paragraph (h) of this AD.
Therefore, we have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to state that
installation of a placard in accordance with paragraph (e) of AD 2002-
19-52 is acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph
(h) of this AD, and that the placard may be removed from an airplane
only once the terminating action specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2002-
19-52 and installation of an automatic shutoff system required by
paragraph (g) of this AD have been accomplished.

Request To Reference Latest AWL Revision in Paragraph (k) of the SNPRM

    Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (k) of the SNPRM to
reference the latest revision of the maintenance planning data (MPD)
document. Boeing stated that the document specified in paragraph (k) of
the SNPRM has been revised, and that the applicable subsection has
changed from ``G'' to ``E.1.'' in Revision February 2011.
    We agree that this AD should refer to the current revision of the
MPD document specified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Therefore, we have
revised paragraph (k) of this AD to refer to Subsection E, AWLs--Fuel
Systems, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-600/
700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2011.
    We have also added new paragraph (t) to this AD (and re-identified
subsequent paragraphs accordingly) to give credit to operators that
accomplish the AWL revision required by paragraph (k) of this AD before
the effective date of this AD using any of the following revisions of
Subsection G, Airworthiness Limitations--Fuel System AWLs, of Section
9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance
Requirements (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document,
D626A001-CMR:

 Revision March 2008
 Revision April 2008
 Revision June 2008
 Revision February 2009
 Revision March 2009
 Revision August 2009

 Revision September 2009
 Revision November 2009
 Revision January 2010
 Revision May 2010
 Revision July 2010
 Revision August 2010
    Paragraph (t) of this AD also provides credit to operators that
accomplish the AWL revision required by paragraph (k) of this AD before
the effective date of this AD using Subsection E, AWLs--Fuel Systems,
of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification
Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD
Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision February 2011.

Request To Clarify Terminating Action for Paragraphs (m) and (n) of
SNPRM

    Delta requested that we revise paragraphs (m) and (n) of the SNPRM
to clarify that accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (s) of
the SNPRM terminates the actions required in paragraphs (m) and (n) of
the SNPRM. Delta pointed out that paragraph (s) of the SNPRM terminates
only paragraphs (g) through (k) of the SNPRM, and not paragraphs (m)
and (n) of the SNPRM. Delta stated that operators planning to comply
with the proposed requirements by installing universal fault
interrupters (UFIs) in accordance with paragraph (s) of the SNPRM will
not accomplish paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of the SNPRM. Therefore,
Delta asserted that, as the SNPRM is currently written, operators that
do not do the actions specified in paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of the
SNPRM will not be able to comply with the requirements of paragraphs
(m) and (n) of the SNPRM.
    We agree. Accomplishing the optional terminating action specified
in paragraph (s) of this AD terminates the requirements of paragraphs
(g) through (k) of this AD, making the optional terminating action
specified in paragraph (s) of this AD equivalent to the actions
required by paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD. Therefore, complying
with paragraph (s) of this AD meets the condition required to terminate
the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD 2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201
(66 FR 20733, April 25, 2001), and paragraph (b) of AD 2002-24-51,
Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10, January 2, 2003). We have revised
paragraphs (m) and (n) of this AD to state that accomplishing the
actions (i.e., optional terminating action) specified in paragraph (s)
of this AD terminates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD 2001-08-
24 and paragraph (b) of AD 2002-24-51.

Request To Provide Credit for Aerospace Supplemental Type Certificate
(STC)

    Continental Airlines (Continental) requested that we revise the
SNPRM to give credit for incorporating universal fault interrupters
(UFIs) using TDG Aerospace STC ST02076LA before the effective date of
the AD. Continental pointed out that paragraphs (q) and (r) of the
SNPRM provide credit for actions done before the effective date of the
AD using other service information.
    While we do agree that installing TDG Aerospace UFIs before the
effective date of this AD is acceptable for terminating certain actions
required by this AD, we do not agree to revise the AD to provide
specific credit for those actions. Installing TDG Aerospace UFIs, as
specified in paragraph (s) of this AD, is acceptable both before and
after the effective date of this AD. Operators are always permitted to
accomplish the requirements of an AD at a time earlier than the
specified compliance time. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Request To Revise Paragraph (v) of the SNPRM To Add Contact Information

    Delta requested that we revise paragraph (v) of the SNPRM to add
contact information for TDG Aerospace. Delta pointed out that contact
information for the other service information identified in the SNPRM
is provided, but not for TDG Aerospace.
    We agree partially. We do not agree to revise paragraph (v) of the
SNPRM, because that paragraph is not restated in this final rule.
However, we do agree to provide contact information for TDG Aerospace.
We have revised the ADDRESSES section of this AD to include this
contact information.

Additional Changes Made to This AD

    We have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to clarify when a placard
is not necessary. We have determined that the second to last sentence
of paragraph (h) of this AD should also refer to AD 2001-08-24,
Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR 20733, April 25, 2001), for clarity.
Operators that choose to maintain the fuel usage restrictions of AD
2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10, January 2, 2003), for all
airplanes in their fleet do not meet the condition to terminate AD
2002-24-51 and AD 2001-08-24 until the actions required by paragraphs
(g) and (i) of this AD are accomplished on all airplanes in their
fleet. Therefore, those operators are otherwise required to comply with
the requirements of AD 2001-08-24, regardless of whether that AD is
mentioned in paragraph (h) of this AD. Therefore, this change does not
increase the burden on operators.
    We have revised paragraph (s) of this AD to specify that
installation of TDG Aerospace UFIs, as provided in that paragraph, must
be done in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, because referring to the STC
now violates Office of the Federal Register (OFR) policies for approval
of optional materials ``incorporated by reference'' in rules. We have
added Note 5 to this AD to specify that additional guidance on
installing TDG Aerospace UFIs can be found in TDG Aerospace STC
ST02076LA.
    We have also revised paragraph (s) of this AD to clarify the time
limit for doing the optional terminating action. Since paragraph (s) of
this AD terminates the actions required by paragraphs (g) through (k)
of this AD, if done, paragraph (s) of this AD must be accomplished
within the earliest time specified among those paragraphs to be
considered terminating action; that earliest time is 36 months.
    Additionally, we have revised paragraph (s) of this AD to allow the
use of alternative placard wording that is approved by an appropriate
FAA Principal Operations Inspector, instead of requiring approval of
alternative placard wording as an alternative method of compliance in
accordance with paragraph (u) of this AD.
    We have also revised paragraph (s) of this AD by adding a statement
to allow installation of a placard in accordance with paragraph (e) of
AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253, September 30, 2002).

Conclusion

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 685 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
           Action                Labor cost       Parts cost        Cost per       registered      Cost on U.S.
                                                                    product         airplanes       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation of the           Between 94 and   Between $22,994  Between $30,984             538  Between
 automatic shutoff system      117 (depending   and $30,197      and $40,142.                     $16,669,392
 (Boeing Alert Service         on airplane      (depending on                                     and
 Bulletin 737-28A1206).        configuration)   airplane                                          $21,596,396.
                               work-hours x     configuration).
                               $85 per hour =
                               Between $7,990
                               and $9,945.
Placard installation, if      1 work-hour x    $10............  $95............             685  $65,075.
 necessary.                    $85 per hour =
                               $85.
AFM revision................  1 work-hour x    None...........  $85............             538  $45,730.
                               $85 per hour =
                               $85.
Installation of secondary     68 work-hours x  $3,274.........  $9,054.........             685  $6,201,990.
 pump control relays (Boeing   $85 per hour =
 Alert Service Bulletin 737-   $5,780.
 28A1248).
AWL revision to add 28-AWL-   1 work-hour x    None...........  $85............             685  $58,225.
 23.                           $85 per hour =
                               $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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):

2011-18-03 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16785; Docket No. FAA-
2007-28661; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-013-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD is effective September 30, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) Accomplishing certain requirements of this AD terminates
certain requirements of AD 2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR
20733, April 25, 2001); AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10,
January 2, 2003); and AD 2008-24-51, Amendment 39-15781 (74 FR 8155,
February 24, 2009). Airworthiness Directive 2002-19-52, Amendment
39-12900 (67 FR 61253, September 30, 2002), is affected by this AD.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -
900 series airplanes, identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-28A1206, Revision 2, dated May 21, 2009.
    (2) The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -
900 series airplanes, identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-28A1248, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2009.

    Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
according to paragraph (u) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Subject

    (d) Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport
Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD was prompted by fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent center tank fuel
pump operation with continuous low pressure, which could lead to
friction sparks or overheating in the fuel pump inlet that could
create a potential ignition source inside the center fuel tank.
These conditions, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could
result in a center fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the
airplane.

Compliance

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

Installation of Automatic Shutoff System for the Center Tank Fuel Boost
Pumps

    (g) For airplanes identified in paragraph 1.A.1. of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-28A1206, Revision 2, dated May 21, 2009: Within
36 months after the effective date of this AD, install an automatic
shutoff system for the center tank fuel boost pumps, by
accomplishing all of the actions specified in Part 1 and Part 2 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-28A1206, Revision 2, dated May 21, 2009, except that Figure 1 of
this AD must be used in lieu of Sheet 2 of Figure 11 of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-28A1206, Revision 2, dated May 21, 2009. If a
placard has been previously installed on the airplane in accordance
with paragraph (h) of this AD, the placard may be removed from the
flight deck of only that airplane after the automatic shutoff system
has been installed. Installing automatic shutoff systems on all
airplanes in an operator's fleet, in accordance with this paragraph,
terminates the placard installation required by paragraph (h) of
this AD for all airplanes in an operator's fleet.

    Note 2: Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-28A1206, Revision 2,
dated May 21, 2009, refers to Boeing Component Service Bulletin
233A3202-28-03, dated January 12, 2006, as an additional source of
guidance for replacing the left and right center boost pump switches
of the P5-2 fuel control module assembly with new switches and
changing the wiring of the P5-2 fuel control module assembly.

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU11.015

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

Placard Installation for Mixed Fleet Operation

    (h) Prior to or concurrently with installing an automatic
shutoff system on any airplane in an operator's fleet, as required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, install a placard adjacent to the
pilot's primary flight display on all airplanes in the operator's
fleet that are not equipped with an automatic shutoff system for the
center tank fuel boost pumps. The placard must read as follows
(unless alternative placard wording is approved by an appropriate
FAA Principal Operations Inspector):
    ``AD 2002-24-51 fuel usage restrictions required.''

Installing an automatic shutoff system, in accordance with paragraph
(g) of this AD, terminates the placard installation required by this
paragraph for only that airplane. Installing automatic shutoff
systems on all airplanes in an operator's fleet, in accordance with
paragraph (g) of this AD, terminates the placard installation
required by this paragraph for all airplanes in an operator's

fleet. If operation according to the fuel usage restrictions of AD
2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10, January 2, 2003), and AD
2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR 20733, April 25, 2001), is
maintained until automatic shutoff systems are installed on all
airplanes in an operator's fleet, the placard installation specified
in this paragraph is not required. Installation of a placard in
accordance with paragraph (e) of AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900
(67 FR 61253, September 30, 2002), is acceptable for compliance with
the placard installation requirements of this paragraph; however,
terminating action specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2002-19-52 and
installation of an automatic shutoff system required by paragraph
(g) of this AD must be accomplished on the airplane before the
placard is removed from the airplane.

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision

    (i) For airplanes on which Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
28A1206, Revision 2, dated May 21, 2009, has been accomplished: At
the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this
AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(3) and (i)(4) of this
AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which the terminating action specified in
paragraph (g) of AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253,
September 30, 2002), has been done: Concurrently with accomplishing
the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes on which the terminating action specified in
paragraph (g) of AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253,
September 30, 2002), has not been done: Concurrently with
accomplishing the terminating action specified in paragraph (g) of
AD 2002-19-52.
    (3) Revise Section 1 of the Limitations section of the Boeing
737-600/-700/-700C/-800/-900 AFM to include the following statement.
This may be done by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.

``Center Tank Fuel Pumps

    Intentional dry running of a center tank fuel pump (low pressure
light illuminated) is prohibited.''

    Note 3: For clarification purposes, the AFM limitations required
by AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253, September 30,
2002), continue to be required until the optional terminating
actions specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2002-19-52 have been done.

    (4) Revise Section 3 of the Normal Procedures section of the
Boeing 737-600/ -700/-700C/-800/-900 AFM to include the following
statements. This may be done by inserting a copy of this AD into the
AFM. Alternative statements that meet the intent of the following
requirements may be used if approved by an appropriate FAA Principal
Operations Inspector.

``CENTER TANK FUEL PUMPS

Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) to AD 2001-08-24 and AD
2002-24-51 for Aircraft With the Automated Center Tank Fuel Pump
Shutoff

    Center tank fuel pumps must not be ``ON'' unless personnel are
available in the flight deck to monitor low pressure lights.
    For ground operation, center tank fuel pump switches must not be
positioned ``ON'' unless the center tank fuel quantity exceeds 1000
pounds (453 kilograms), except when defueling or transferring fuel.
Upon positioning the center tank fuel pump switches ``ON'' verify
momentary illumination of each center tank fuel pump low pressure
light.
    For ground and flight operations, the corresponding center tank
fuel pump switch must be positioned ``OFF'' when a center tank fuel
pump low pressure light illuminates [1]. Both center tank fuel pump
switches must be positioned ``OFF'' when the first center tank fuel
pump low pressure light illuminates if the center tank is empty.
    [1] When established in a level flight attitude, both center
tank pump switches should be positioned ``ON'' again if the center
tank contains usable fuel.

Defueling and Fuel Transfer

    When transferring fuel or defueling center or main tanks, the
fuel pump low pressure lights must be monitored and the fuel pumps
positioned to ``OFF'' at the first indication of the fuel pump low
pressure [1].
    Defueling the main tanks with passengers on board is prohibited
if the main tank fuel pumps are powered [2].
    Defueling the center tank with passengers on board is prohibited
if the center tank fuel pumps are powered and the auto-shutoff
system is inhibited [2].
    [1] Prior to transferring fuel or defueling, conduct a lamp test
of the respective fuel pump low pressure lights.
    [2] Fuel may be transferred from tank to tank or the aircraft
may be defueled with passengers on board, provided fuel quantity in
the tank from which fuel is being taken is maintained at or above
2000 pounds (907 kilograms).''

    Note 4: When statements identical to those in paragraphs (i)(3)
and (i)(4) of this AD have been included in the general revisions of
the Boeing 737-600/-700/-700C/-800/-900 AFM, the general revisions
may be inserted into that AFM, and the copy of this AD may be
removed from that AFM.

Installation of Secondary Pump Control Relays

    (j) For airplanes identified in paragraph 1.A.1. of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-28A1248, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2009:
Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, install one
secondary control relay for the electrical control circuit of each
of the two center tank fuel boost pumps, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
28A1248, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2009.

Airworthiness Limitations (AWL) Revision for AWL No. 28-AWL-23

    (k) For airplanes identified in paragraph 1.A.1. of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-28A1248, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2009:
Concurrently with accomplishing the actions required by paragraph
(j) of this AD, or within 30 days after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later, revise the maintenance program by
incorporating AWL No. 28-AWL-23 of Subsection E, AWLs--Fuel Systems,
of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification
Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900
MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2011. The initial
compliance time for the actions specified in AWL No. 28-AWL-23 is
within 1 year after accomplishing the installation required by
paragraph (j) of this AD, or within 1 year after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later.

No Alternative Inspections or Inspection Intervals

    (l) After accomplishing the applicable actions specified in
paragraph (k) of this AD, no alternative inspections or inspection
intervals may be used unless the inspections or inspection intervals
are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (u) of this AD.

Terminating Action for AD 2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR 20733,
April 25, 2001)

    (m) Accomplishing the actions required by paragraphs (g), (h),
and (i) of this AD, or accomplishing the actions specified in
paragraph (s) of this AD, terminates the requirements of paragraph
(a) of AD 2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR 20733, April 25,
2001), for Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes that have the automatic shutoff system, or a TDG
Aerospace, Inc., universal fault interrupter (UFI), installed. After
accomplishing the actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), and (i)
of this AD, or accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (s)
of this AD, the AFM limitation required by paragraph (a) of AD 2001-
08-24 may be removed from the AFM for those airplanes.

Terminating Action for AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10,
January 2, 2003)

    (n) Accomplishing the actions required by paragraphs (g), (h),
and (i) of this AD, or accomplishing the actions specified in
paragraph (s) of this AD, terminates the requirements of paragraph
(b) of AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10, January 2,
2003), for Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes that have the automatic shutoff system, or a TDG
Aerospace, Inc., UFI, installed. After accomplishing the actions
required by paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD, or
accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (s) of this AD, the
AFM limitations required by paragraph (b) of AD 2002-24-51 may be
removed from the AFM for those airplanes.

Terminating Action for AWL Revision

    (o) Incorporating AWL No. 28-AWL-23 into the maintenance program
in accordance with paragraph (g)(3) of AD 2008-10-10 R1, Amendment
39-16164 (75 FR 1529, January 12, 2010), terminates the
corresponding action required by paragraph (k) of this AD.

Terminating Action for AD 2008-24-51, Amendment 39-15781 (74 FR 8155,
February 24, 2009)

    (p) Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) of this
AD terminates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD 2008-24-51,
Amendment 39-15781 (74 FR 8155, February 24, 2009).

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (q) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-28A1248, dated
December 21, 2006; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-28A1248,
Revision 1, dated January 9, 2008; are considered acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions specified in paragraph (j)
of this AD.
    (r) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-28A1206, dated
January 11, 2006; or Revision 1, dated January 30, 2008; are
considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions
specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, provided one of the actions
specified in paragraph (r)(1) or (r)(2) of this AD have been done.
    (1) The procedures specified in paragraph (f) of AD 2008-24-51,
Amendment 39-15781 (74 FR 8155, February 24, 2009), have been
accomplished.
    (2) The actions specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-28A1206, Revision
2, dated May 21, 2009, have been accomplished.

Optional Terminating Action

    (s) Installing TDG Aerospace, Inc., UFI, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, within 36 months after the effective date of this
AD, terminates the actions required by paragraphs (g) through (k) of
this AD; provided that, concurrently with installing a UFI on any
airplane in an operator's fleet, a placard is installed adjacent to
the pilot's primary flight display on all airplanes in the
operator's fleet not equipped with a UFI or an automatic shutoff
system. The placard must read as follows (unless alternative placard
wording is approved by an appropriate FAA Principal Operations
Inspector):
    ``AD 2002-24-51 fuel usage restrictions required.''

    Installation of a placard in accordance with paragraph (h) of
this AD is acceptable for compliance with the placard installation
required by this paragraph. Installing a TDG Aerospace, Inc., UFI in
accordance with this paragraph on an airplane terminates the placard
installation required by this paragraph for only that airplane.
Installing TDG Aerospace, Inc., UFIs in accordance with this
paragraph, or automatic shutoff systems in accordance with paragraph
(g) of this AD, on all airplanes in an operator's fleet terminates
the placard installation required by this paragraph for all
airplanes in an operator's fleet. If operation according to the fuel
usage restrictions of AD 2002-24-51, Amendment 39-12992 (68 FR 10,
January 2, 2003), and AD 2001-08-24, Amendment 39-12201 (66 FR
20733, April 25, 2001), is maintained until UFIs or automatic
shutoff systems are installed on all airplanes in an operator's
fleet, the placard installation specified in this paragraph is not
required. Installation of a placard in accordance with paragraph (e)
of AD 2002-19-52, Amendment 39-12900 (67 FR 61253, September 30,
2002), is acceptable for compliance with the placard installation
requirements of this paragraph; however, terminating action
specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2002-19-52 and installation of a
UFI specified by this paragraph must be accomplished on the airplane
before the placard is removed from the airplane.

    Note 5: Guidance on installing a TDG Aerospace, Inc., UFI can be
found in TDG Aerospace, Inc., Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST02076LA.

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (t) Revising the maintenance program by incorporating AWL No.
28-AWL-23 of a revision specified in paragraphs (t)(1) through
(t)(12) of this AD of Subsection G, Airworthiness Limitations--Fuel
System AWLs, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR; or Subsection E, AWLs--
Fuel Systems, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision February 2011;
before the effective date of this AD is considered acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions specified in paragraph (k)
of this AD.

(1) Revision March 2008.
(2) Revision April 2008.
(3) Revision June 2008.
(4) Revision February 2009.
(5) Revision March 2009.
(6) Revision August 2009.
(7) Revision September 2009.
(8) Revision November 2009.
(9) Revision January 2010.
(10) Revision May 2010.
(11) Revision July 2010.
(12) Revision August 2010.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (u)(1) The Manager, Seattle 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 the Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be e-mailed 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.

Related Information

    (v) For more information about this AD, contact Tak Kobayashi,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Ave., SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Material Incorporated by Reference

    (w) You must use the service information contained in table 1 of
this AD, as applicable, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.

                                 Table 1--All Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Document                               Revision                              Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-        2.................................  May 21, 2009.
 28A1206.
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-        2.................................  August 28, 2009.
 28A1248.
AWL No. 28-AWL-23 of Subsection E, AWLs-- March 2011........................  March 2011.
 Fuel Systems of Section 9,
 Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
 Certification Maintenance Requirements
 (CMRs), of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/
 900 Maintenance Planning Data Document,
 D626A001-CMR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information contained in
table 1 of this AD under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax

206-766-5680; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 12, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-21617 Filed 8-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


d Assumes that the respondents' compliance date is in the first half of the year, so respondents will submit one compliance report the first year that they start complying with the rule and two compliance reports the following years.

e Assumes 90 percent of facilities will have no deviations, and 10 percent will have deviations.

f Assumes all facilities will report actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the SSMP.

g Assumes all facilities will submit a description of the control system maintenance performed.

h Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

i Includes records of CMS data for emission limitations and various records for work practice standards.

j Assumes calibration of the CMS will require 8 hours per year for each monitor. Assuming a total of 2 CMS for each facility, a total of 16 hours per year per facility is required.

k Assumes 2 days ( 16 hours) to provide refresher training for personnel.

l The recurrent burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

m The average facility cost is calculated by dividing the total facility burden by the number of facilities ( 228) complying with the rule. 12 Attachment 4 TABLE 1c. ONE TIME RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FIFTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Burden itema A Personhours per occurrence B Number of occurrences per year C Technical personhours per respondent per year ( C = A * B) D Respondents per yearb E Technical person hours per year ( E = C * D) F Management person hours per year ( F = E * 0.05) G Clerical person hours per year ( G = E * 0.1) H Respondent person hours per year ( H = E + F + G) I Labor cost,

$ c 1. Applications N/ A 2. Surveys and Studies N/ A 3. Reporting Requirements A. Read Instructionsd 1 1 1 4 4 0.2 0.4 5 $ 205 B. Required Activities C. Create Information Included in 3E D. Gather Existing Information Included in 3E E. Write Report ° Notification of construction/

reconstruction 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of anticipated startup 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of actual startup 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of applicability of standardd 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Emissions averaging plane 120 1 120 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ° Request for routine control system maintenance exemptionf 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of initial performance testg 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of compliance status With performance testg 80 1 80 4 320 16 32 368 $ 16,381 Without performance testh 120 1 120 1 120 6 12 138 $ 6,143 4. Recordkeeping Requirements A. Read Instructions Included in 3A B. Plan Activities N/ A C. Implement Activities N/ A D. Develop Record Systemi 40 1 40 4 160 8 16 184 $ 8,190 E. Develop Startup, Shutdown,

Malfunction Planj 100 1 100 4 400 20 40 460 $ 20,476 F. Time to Train Personnelk 40 1 40 4 160 8 16 184 $ 8,190 G. Time for Audits N/ A ONE TIME BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY) NATIONWIDE: l 1,212 61 121 1,394 $ 62,043 Average cost per facilitym 232 $ 267 13 Attachment 4 TABLE 1c. ( continued)

a See Attachment 2 for further explanation of respondent activities.

b There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems. Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard,

4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

c Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

d This will occur only in the first year after a facility becomes subject to the rule.

e Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

f Assumes all facilities will submit a request for routine control system maintenance exemption.

g Assumes all facilities will comply by conducting a performance test( s). The notification of compliance status includes the report of the performance test( s).

h Assumes 1 new facility per year with softwood veneer dryers will submit a notification of compliance status without performance tests.

i Assumes 40 hours to develop a record system for recording parameter monitoring information.

j Assumes 80 hours to draft the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan and another 20 hours of review/ revisions, for a total of 100 hours.

k Assumes 40 hours to train personnel.

l The one time burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

m The average facility cost is calculated by dividing the total facility burden by the number of facilities ( 232) subject to the rule. 14 Attachment 4 TABLE 1d. RECURRENT RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FIFTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Burden itema A Personhours per occurrence B Number of occurrences per year C Technical personhours per respondent per year ( C = A * B) D Respondents per yearb E Technical person hours per year ( E = C * D) F Management person hours per year ( F = E * 0.05) G Clerical personhours per year ( G = E * 0.1) H Respondent person hours per year ( H = E + F + G) I Labor cost,

$ c 1. Applications N/ A 2. Surveys and Studies N/ A 3. Reporting Requirements A. Read Instructions N/ A B. Required Activities N/ A C. Create Information N/ A D. Gather Existing Information N/ A E. Write Report ° Initial compliance reportd No deviationse 8 1 8 4 32 2 3 37 $ 1,638 Deviationse 24 1 24 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportf 8 1 8 4 32 2 3 37 $ 1,638 Control system maintenance reportg 8 1 8 4 32 2 3 37 $ 1,638 Emissions averaging plan reporth 20 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ° Semi annual compliance reportd No deviationse 8 2 16 205 3,280 164 328 3,772 $ 167,905 Deviationse 24 2 48 23 1,104 55 110 1,270 $ 56,514 Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportf 8 2 16 228 3,648 182 365 4,195 $ 186,743 Control system maintenance reportg 8 2 16 228 3,648 182 365 4,195 $ 186,743 Emissions averaging plan reporth 20 2 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 4. Recordkeeping Requirements A. Read Instructions N/ A B. Plan Activities N/ A C. Implement Activities N/ A D. Develop Record System N/ A E. Time to Enter Information ° Records of startup, shutdown,

and malfunction 1.5 52 78 232 18,096 905 1,810 20,810 $ 926,343 ° Records of continuous compliancei Record parameters/

information 0.25 365 91 232 21,170 1,059 2,117 24,346 $ 1,083,703 Compile data 24 2 48 232 11,136 557 1,114 12,806 $ 570,057 15 Attachment 4 TABLE 1d. ( continued)

Burden itema A Personhours per occurrence B Number of occurrences per year C Technical personhours per respondent per year ( C = A * B) D Respondents per yearb E Technical person hours per year ( E = C * D) F Management person hours per year ( F = E * 0.05) G Clerical personhours per year ( G = E * 0.1) H Respondent person hours per year ( H = E + F + G) I Labor cost,

$ c Enter/ verify information for semi annual reports 16 2 32 232 7,424 371 742 8,538 $ 380,038 ° Records of control system maintenance Included in 3E ° Records of emissions averaging credits/ debits Included in 3E F. Calibration of CMSj 16 1 16 232 3,712 186 371 4,269 $ 190,019 G. Time to Train Personnel N/ A H. Time for Refresher Training for Personnelk 16 1 16 228 3,648 182 365 4,195 $ 186,743 I. Time for Audits N/ A RECURRENT BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY) NATIONWIDE: l 76,962 3,848 7,696 88,506 $ 3,939,723 Average cost per facilitym 232 $ 16,982 a See Attachment 2 for further explanation of respondent activities.

b There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems. Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard,

4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

c Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

d Assumes that the respondents' compliance date is in the first half of the year, so respondents will submit one compliance report the first year that they start complying with the rule and two compliance reports the following years.

e Assumes 90 percent of facilities will have no deviations, and 10 percent will have deviations.

f Assumes all facilities will report actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the SSMP.

g Assumes all facilities will submit a description of the control system maintenance performed.

h Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

i Includes records of CMS data for emission limitations and various records for work practice standards.

j Assumes calibration of the CMS will require 8 hours per year for each monitor. Assuming a total of 2 CMS for each facility, a total of 16 hours per year per facility is required.

k Assumes 2 days ( 16 hours) to provide refresher training for personnel.

l The recurrent burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

m The average facility cost is calculated by dividing the total facility burden by the number of facilities ( 232) complying with the rule. 16 Attachment 4 TABLE 1e. ONE TIME RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS SIXTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Burden itema A Personhours per occurrence B Number of occurrences per year C Technical personhours per respondent per year ( C = A * B) D Respondents per yearb E Technical person hours per year ( E = C * D) F Management person hours per year ( F = E * 0.05) G Clerical person hours per year ( G = E * 0.1) H Respondent person hours per year ( H = E + F + G) I Labor cost,

$ c 1. Applications N/ A 2. Surveys and Studies N/ A 3. Reporting Requirements A. Read Instructionsd 1 1 1 4 4 0.2 0.4 5 $ 205 B. Required Activities C. Create Information Included in 3E D. Gather Existing Information Included in 3E E. Write Report ° Notification of construction/

reconstruction 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of anticipated startup 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of actual startup 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of applicability of standardd 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Emissions averaging plane 120 1 120 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ° Request for routine control system maintenance exemptionf 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of initial performance testg 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Notification of compliance status With performance testg 80 1 80 4 320 16 32 368 $ 16,381 Without performance testh 120 1 120 1 120 6 12 138 $ 6,143 4. Recordkeeping Requirements A. Read Instructions Included in 3A B. Plan Activities N/ A C. Implement Activities N/ A D. Develop Record Systemi 40 1 40 4 160 8 16 184 $ 8,190 E. Develop Startup, Shutdown,

Malfunction Planj 100 1 100 4 400 20 40 460 $ 20,476 F. Time to Train Personnelk 40 1 40 4 160 8 16 184 $ 8,190 G. Time for Audits N/ A ONE TIME BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY) NATIONWIDE: l 1,212 61 121 1,394 $ 62,043 Average cost per facilitym 236 $ 263 17 Attachment 4 TABLE 1e. ( continued)

a See Attachment 2 for further explanation of respondent activities.

b There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems. Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard,

4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

c Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

d This will occur only in the first year after a facility becomes subject to the rule.

e Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

f Assumes all facilities will submit a request for routine control system maintenance exemption.

g Assumes all facilities will comply by conducting a performance test( s). The notification of compliance status includes the report of the performance test( s).

h Assumes 1 new facility per year with softwood veneer dryers will submit a notification of compliance status without performance tests.

i Assumes 40 hours to develop a record system for recording parameter monitoring information.

j Assumes 80 hours to draft the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan and another 20 hours of review/ revisions, for a total of 100 hours.

k Assumes 40 hours to train personnel.

l The one time burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

m The average facility cost is calculated by dividing the total facility burden by the number of facilities ( 236) subject to the rule. 18 Attachment 4 TABLE 1f. RECURRENT RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS SIXTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Burden itema A Personhours per occurrence B Number of occurrences per year C Technical personhours per respondent per year ( C = A * B) D Respondents per yearb E Technical person hours per year ( E = C * D) F Management person hours per year ( F = E * 0.05) G Clerical personhours per year ( G = E * 0.1) H Respondent person hours per year ( H = E + F + G) I Labor cost,

$ c 1. Applications N/ A 2. Surveys and Studies N/ A 3. Reporting Requirements A. Read Instructions N/ A B. Required Activities N/ A C. Create Information N/ A D. Gather Existing Information N/ A E. Write Report ° Initial compliance reportd No deviationse 8 1 8 4 32 2 3 37 $ 1,638 Deviationse 24 1 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportf 8 1 8 4 32 2 3 37 $ 1,638 Control system maintenance reportg 8 1 8 4 32 2 3 37 $ 1,638 Emissions averaging plan reporth 20 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ° Semi annual compliance reportd No deviationse 8 2 16 209 3,344 167 334 3,846 $ 171,181 Deviationse 24 2 48 23 1,104 55 110 1,270 $ 56,514 Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportf 8 2 16 232 3,712 186 371 4,269 $ 190,019 Control system maintenance reportg 8 2 16 232 3,712 186 371 4,269 $ 190,019 Emissions averaging plan reporth 20 2 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 4. Recordkeeping Requirements A. Read Instructions N/ A B. Plan Activities N/ A C. Implement Activities N/ A D. Develop Record System N/ A E. Time to Enter Information ° Records of startup, shutdown,

and malfunction 1.5 52 78 236 18,408 920 1,841 21,169 $ 942,315 ° Records of continuous compliancei Record parameters/

information 0.25 365 91 236 21,535 1,077 2,154 24,765 $ 1,102,387 Compile data 24 2 48 236 11,328 566 1,133 13,027 $ 579,886 19 Attachment 4 TABLE 1f. ( continued)

Burden itema A Personhours per occurrence B Number of occurrences per year C Technical personhours per respondent per year ( C = A * B) D Respondents per yearb E Technical person hours per year ( E = C * D) F Management person hours per year ( F = E * 0.05) G Clerical personhours per year ( G = E * 0.1) H Respondent person hours per year ( H = E + F + G) I Labor cost,

$ c Enter/ verify information for semi annual reports 16 2 32 236 7,552 378 755 8,685 $ 386,591 ° Records of control system maintenance Included in 3E ° Records of emissions averaging credits/ debits Included in 3E F. Calibration of CMSj 16 1 16 236 3,776 189 378 4,342 $ 193,295 G. Time to Train Personnel N/ A H. Time for Refresher Training for Personnelk 16 1 16 232 3,712 186 371 4,269 $ 190,019 I. Time for Audits N/ A RECURRENT BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY) NATIONWIDE: l 78,279 3,914 7,828 90,021 $ 4,007,141 Average cost per facilitym 236 $ 16,979 a See Attachment 2 for further explanation of respondent activities.

b There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems. Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard,

4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

c Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

d Assumes that the respondents' compliance date is in the first half of the year, so respondents will submit one compliance report the first year that they start complying with the rule and two compliance reports the following years.

e Assumes 90 percent of facilities will have no deviations, and 10 percent will have deviations.

f Assumes all facilities will report actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the SSMP.

g Assumes all facilities will submit a description of the control system maintenance performed.

h Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

i Includes records of CMS data for emission limitations and various records for work practice standards.

j Assumes calibration of the CMS will require 8 hours per year for each monitor. Assuming a total of 2 CMS for each facility, a total of 16 hours per year per facility is required.

k Assumes 2 days ( 16 hours) to provide refresher training for personnel.

l The recurrent burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

m The average facility cost is calculated by dividing the total facility burden by the number of facilities ( 236) complying with the rule. 20 TABLE 2a. AGENCY BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOURTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Activity A EPA hours per operation B Operations per yeara C Technical person hours per year ( C = A * B) D Management person hours per year ( D = C * 0.05) E Clerical person hours per year ( E = C * 0.1) F Total person hours per year ( F = C + D + E) G Labor cost,

$ b 1. Attend Initial Performance Testc 40 22 880 44 88 1,012 $ 45,048 2. Attend Repeat Performance Testd 40 1 40 2 4 46 $ 2,048 3. Litigation N/ A 4. Report Review A. Review of Notification of Construction/ Reconstruction 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 B. Review of Notification of Anticipated Startup 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 C. Review of Notification of Actual Startup 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 D. Review of Notification of Applicability of Standard 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 E. Review of Emissions Averaging Plane 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 F. Review of Request for Routine Control System Maintenance Exemptionf 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 G. Review of Notification of Initial Performance Test 2 216 432 22 43 497 $ 22,114 H. Review of Notification of Compliance Status ° With performance testg 40 216 8,640 432 864 9,936 $ 442,286 ° Without performance testh 40 238 9,520 476 952 10,948 $ 487,334 I. Review of Initial Compliance Reporti ° No deviationsj 2 194 388 19 39 446 $ 19,862 ° Deviationsj 8 22 176 9 18 202 $ 9,010 ° Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportk 2 216 432 22 43 497 $ 22,114 ° Control system maintenance reportl 2 216 432 22 43 497 $ 22,114 ° Emissions averaging reporte 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 J. Review of Semi Annual Compliance Reporti ° No deviationsj 2 22 44 2 4 51 $ 2,252 ° Deviationsj 8 2 16 0.8 2 18 $ 819 ° Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportk 2 24 48 2 5 55 $ 2,457 ° Control system maintenance reportl 2 24 48 2 5 55 $ 2,457 ° Emissions averaging reporte 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 TOTAL BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY): m 21,136 1,057 2,114 24,306 $ 1,081,962 TRAVEL EXPENSES FOR TEST ATTENDEDn = ( 1 person * 23 facilities/ yr * 2 days/ facility * $ 50 per diem) + ($ 400/ round trip * 23 round trip/ yr): $ 11,500 TOTAL COST = TOTAL COST ( SALARY) + TRAVEL EXPENSES: $ 1,093,462 21 TABLE 2a. ( continued)

a Operations per year are equal to the number of operations per facility ( e. g., tests, notifications, reports) times the number of facilities. There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems.

Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard, 4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

b Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

c Assumes all facilities will conduct initial performance tests, and EPA personnel will attend 10 percent of the initial tests.

d Assumes 5 percent of facilities will repeat the performance tests, and EPA personnel will attend 10 percent of the repeat tests.

e Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

f Assumes all facilities will submit a request for routine control system maintenance exemption.

g Assumes all facilities will conduct an initial performance test( s) and submit a notification of compliance status that includes the report of the performance test( s).

h Assumes 1 new facility per year with softwood veneer dryers will submit a notification of compliance status without performance tests. Assumes that 22 existing facilities with dry rotary dryers, 2 existing facilities with hardwood veneer dryers, and 90 existing facilities with softwood veneer dryers will submit notifications of compliance status in the fourth year after the effective date.

i Assumes that the facilities' compliance date is in the first half of the year, so facilities will submit one compliance report the first year that they start complying with the rule and two compliance reports the following years.

j Assumes 90 percent of facilities will have no deviations, and 10 percent will have deviations.

k Assumes all facilities will report actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the SSMP.

l Assumes all facilities will submit a description of the control system maintenance performed.

m The burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

n Tests attended include 22 initial performance tests and 1 repeat performance test, for a total of 23 tests attended. 22 TABLE 2b. AGENCY BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FIFTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Activity A EPA hours per operation B Operations per yeara C Technical person hours per year ( C = A * B) D Management person hours per year ( D = C * 0.05) E Clerical person hours per year ( E = C * 0.1) F Total person hours per year ( F = C + D + E) G Labor cost,

$ b 1. Attend Initial Performance Testc 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 2. Attend Repeat Performance Testd 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 3. Litigation N/ A 4. Report Review A. Review of Notification of Construction/ Reconstruction 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 B. Review of Notification of Anticipated Startup 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 C. Review of Notification of Actual Startup 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 D. Review of Notification of Applicability of Standard 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 E. Review of Emissions Averaging Plane 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 F. Review of Request for Routine Control System Maintenance Exemptionf 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 G. Review of Notification of Initial Performance Test 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 H. Review of Notification of Compliance Status ° With performance testg 40 4 160 8 16 184 $ 8,190 ° Without performance testh 40 0 40 2 4 46 $ 2,048 I. Review of Initial Compliance Reporti ° No deviationsj 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Deviationsj 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ° Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportk 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Control system maintenance reportl 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Emissions averaging reporte 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 J. Review of Semi Annual Compliance Reporti ° No deviationsj 2 410 820 41 82 943 $ 41,976 ° Deviationsj 8 46 368 18 37 423 $ 18,838 ° Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportk 2 456 912 46 91 1,049 $ 46,686 ° Control system maintenance reportl 2 456 912 46 91 1,049 $ 46,686 ° Emissions averaging reporte 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 TOTAL BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY): m 3,284 164 328 3,777 $ 168,110 TRAVEL EXPENSES FOR TEST ATTENDEDn = ( 1 person * 0 facility/ yr * 2 days/ facility * $ 50 per diem) + ($ 400/ round trip * 0 round trip/ yr): $ 0 TOTAL COST = TOTAL COST ( SALARY) + TRAVEL EXPENSES: $ 168,110 a Operations per year are equal to the number of operations per facility ( e. g., tests, notifications, reports) times the number of facilities. There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems. 23 TABLE 2b. ( continued)

Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard, 4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

b Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

c Assumes all facilities will conduct initial performance tests, and EPA personnel will attend 10 percent of the initial tests.

d Assumes 5 percent of facilities will repeat the performance tests, and EPA personnel will attend 10 percent of the repeat tests.

e Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

f Assumes all facilities will submit a request for routine control system maintenance exemption.

g Assumes all facilities will conduct an initial performance test( s) and submit a notification of compliance status that includes the report of the performance test( s).

h Assumes 1 new facility per year with softwood veneer dryers will submit a notification of compliance status without performance tests.

i Assumes that the facilities' compliance date is in the first half of the year, so facilities will submit one compliance report the first year that they start complying with the rule and two compliance reports the following years.

j Assumes 90 percent of facilities will have no deviations, and 10 percent will have deviations.

k Assumes all facilities will report actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the SSMP.

l Assumes all facilities will submit a description of the control system maintenance performed.

m The burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

n Tests attended include no initial performance tests and no repeat performance tests, for a total of 0 tests attended. 24 TABLE 2c. AGENCY BURDEN AND COST OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS SIXTH YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE Activity A EPA hours per operation B Operations per yeara C Technical person hours per year ( C = A * B) D Management person hours per year ( D = C * 0.05) E Clerical personhours per year ( E = C * 0.1) F Total person hours per year ( F = C + D + E) G Labor cost,

$ b 1. Attend Initial Performance Testc 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 2. Attend Repeat Performance Testd 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 3. Litigation N/ A 4. Report Review A. Review of Notification of Construction/ Reconstruction 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 B. Review of Notification of Anticipated Startup 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 C. Review of Notification of Actual Startup 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 D. Review of Notification of Applicability of Standard 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 E. Review of Emissions Averaging Plane 40 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 F. Review of Request for Routine Control System Maintenance Exemptionf 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 G. Review of Notification of Initial Performance Test 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 H. Review of Notification of Compliance Status ° With performance testg 40 4 160 8 16 184 $ 8,190 ° Without performance testh 40 1 40 2 4 46 $ 2,048 I. Review of Initial Compliance Reporti ° No deviationsj 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Deviationsj 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ° Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportk 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Control system maintenance reportl 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 9 $ 410 ° Emissions averaging reporte 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 J. Review of Semi Annual Compliance Reporti ° No deviationsj 2 418 836 42 84 961 $ 42,795 ° Deviationsj 8 46 368 18 37 423 $ 18,838 ° Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reportk 2 464 928 46 93 1,067 $ 47,505 ° Control system maintenance reportl 2 464 928 46 93 1,067 $ 47,505 ° Emissions averaging reporte 8 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 TOTAL BURDEN AND COST ( SALARY): m 3,332 167 333 4,156 $ 170,567 TRAVEL EXPENSES FOR TEST ATTENDEDn = ( 1 person * 0 facility/ yr * 2 days/ facility * $ 50 per diem) + ($ 400/ round trip * 0 round trip/ yr): $ 0 TOTAL COST = TOTAL COST ( SALARY) + TRAVEL EXPENSES: $ 170,567 25 TABLE 2c. ( continued)

a Operations per year are equal to the number of operations per facility ( e. g., tests, notifications, reports) times the number of facilities. There are an estimated 212 existing major source facilities subject to the NESHAP. These 212 facilities include 166 facilities that must install control systems to comply with the NESHAP and 46 facilities that already have the required control systems.

Assuming 19 new facilities built over the first 5 years after the effective date ( including 6 oriented strand board, 5 medium density fiberboard, 4 particleboard, and 4 laminated veneer lumber facilities), approximately 4 new facilities will be built each year.

b Labor cost assumes a rate of $ 45.04/ hour for technical labor, $ 66.73/ hour for management labor, and $ 28.14/ hour for clerical labor.

c Assumes all facilities will conduct initial performance tests, and EPA personnel will attend 10 percent of the initial tests.

d Assumes 5 percent of facilities will repeat the performance tests, and EPA personnel will attend 10 percent of the repeat tests.

e Assumes no existing facilities will choose to use the emissions averaging option because all facilities assumed to install control systems; new facilities are not allowed to use emissions averaging.

f Assumes all facilities will submit a request for routine control system maintenance exemption.

g Assumes all facilities will conduct an initial performance test( s) and submit a notification of compliance status that includes the report of the performance test( s).

h Assumes 1 new facility per year with softwood veneer dryers will submit a notification of compliance status without performance tests.

i Assumes that the facilities' compliance date is in the first half of the year, so facilities will submit one compliance report the first year that they start complying with the rule and two compliance reports the following years.

j Assumes 90 percent of facilities will have no deviations, and 10 percent will have deviations.

k Assumes all facilities will report actions taken during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the SSMP.

l Assumes all facilities will submit a description of the control system maintenance performed.

m The burden and cost are equal to the totals added down each column.

n Tests attended include no initial performance tests and no repeat performance tests, for a total of 0 tests attended. 26 TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS Total burden,

hours Total costs,

$

Table 1a ( one time activities in fourth year) $ 81,001 $ 3,605,654 Table 1b ( recurrent activities in fourth year) $ 76,835 $ 3,420,191 Table 1c ( one time activities in fifth year) $ 1,394 $ 62,043 Table 1d ( recurrent activities in fifth year) $ 88,506 $ 3,939,723 Table 1e ( one time activities in sixth year) $ 1,394 $ 62,043 Table 1f ( recurrent activities in sixth year) $ 90,021 $ 4,007,141 Total $ 339,151 $ 15,096,795 Bottom line annual burden $ 113,050 $ 5,032,265 27 TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF AGENCY BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS Total burden,

hours Total costs,

$

Table 2a ( fourth year) $ 24,306 $ 1,093,462 Table 2b ( fifth year) $ 3,777 $ 168,110 Table 2c ( sixth year) $ 3,832 $ 170,567 Total $ 31,915 $ 1,432,139 Bottom line annual burden $ 10,638 $ 477,380


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49322-49323]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19573]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2010-0005-N-16]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information Collection Requirements (ICRs)
abstracted below will be forwarded to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICRs describe the nature of
the information collection and their expected burden. The Federal
Register notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the
following collections of information was published on May 28, 2013.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 12, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Safety,
Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., 3rd Floor, Mail Stop 25,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>), or Ms. Kimberly
Toone, Office of Information Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., 3rd Floor, Mail Stop 35,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>). (These telephone
numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13, Section 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised
at 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public
comment on information collection activities before OMB may approve
paperwork packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5, 1320.8(d)(1),
1320.12. On May 28, 2013, FRA published a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register soliciting comment on this ICR that the agency was seeking OMB
approval. 78 FR 32005. FRA received no comments in response to this
notice.
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30 day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30 day notice
informs the regulated community to file relevant comments and affords
the agency adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a
decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication
to best ensure having their full effect. 5 CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60
FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995.
    The summary below describes the nature of the information
collection requirements (ICRs) and the expected burden for the ICRs
that will be submitted for clearance by OMB as required by the PRA.
    Title: Notice of Funding Availability and Solicitation of
Applications for Grants under the Railroad Safety Technology Grant
Program.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0587.
    Type of Request: Regular Approval of a Currently Approved
Information Collection.
    Affected Public: 1,525 Railroads/Vendors/Universities.
    Abstract: The Rail Safety Technology Program is a program
authorized under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) (Pub.
L. 110-432; October 16, 2008). The program was directed by Congress and
passed into law in the aftermath of a series of major rail accidents
that culminated in an accident at Chatsworth, California, in 2008.
Twenty-five people were killed and 135 people were injured in the
Chatsworth accident. This event turned the Nation's attention to rail
safety and the possibility that new technologies, such as PTC, could
prevent such accidents in the future. The RSIA ordered installation of
PTC by all Class I

railroads on any of their mainlines carrying poisonous inhalation
hazard (PIH) materials and by all passenger and commuter railroads on
their main lines not later than December 31, 2015.
    As part of the RSIA, Congress originally provided $50 million to
FRA to award, in one or more grants, to eligible projects by passenger
and freight rail carriers, railroad suppliers, and State and local
Governments. Presently, there is $550,000 remaining of the original
funds that FRA plans to fund two projects with. Funds will be awarded
to projects that have a public benefit of improved railroad safety and
efficiency, with priority given to projects that make PTC technologies
interoperable between railroad systems; projects that accelerate the
deployment of PTC technology on high-risk corridors, such as those that
have high volumes of hazardous material shipments; and for projects
over which commuter or passenger trains operate, or that benefit both
passenger and freight safety and efficiency.
    Funds provided under this grant program may constitute a maximum of
80 percent of the total cost of a selected project, with a minimum of
20 percent of costs funded from other sources. The funding provided
under these grants will be made available to grantees on a
reimbursement basis. FRA anticipates awarding grants to two eligible
participants. Funding made available through grants provided under this
program, together with funding from other sources that is committed by
a grantee as part of a grant agreement, must be sufficient to complete
the funded project and achieve the anticipated technology development.
    Form Number(s): FRA F 6180.146; SF-269; SF-270.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 5,337 hours.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0589.
    Abstract: Section 202 of the Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) of
2008 required the Secretary of Transportation (delegated to the Federal
Railroad Administrator by 49 CFR 1.49) to identify the 10 States that
have had the most-highway-rail grade crossing collisions, on average,
over the past three years, and to require those States to develop State
highway-rail grade crossing action plans, within a reasonable period of
time, as determined by the Secretary. Section 202 of the law further
provided that these plans must identify specific solutions for
improving safety at crossings, including highway-rail grade crossing
closures or grade separations, and must focus on crossings that have
experienced multiple accidents or are at high risk for such accidents.
    Section 202 also provided the following: The Secretary will provide
assistance to the States in developing and carrying out such plans, as
appropriate; the plans may be coordinated with other State or Federal
planning requirements; the plans will cover a period of time determined
to be appropriate by the Secretary; and the Secretary may condition the
awarding of any grants under 49 U.S.C. 20158, 20167, or 22501, to a
State identified under this section, on the development of such State's
plan.
    Lastly, Section 202 provided a review and approval process under
which, not later than 60 days after the Secretary receives such a State
action plan, the Secretary must review and either approve or disapprove
it. In the event that the proposed plan is disapproved, Section 202
indicates that the Secretary must notify the affected State as to the
specific areas in which the proposed plan is deficient, and the State
must correct all deficiencies within 30 days following receipt of
written notice from the Secretary.
    FRA uses the collection of information to ensure that States meet
the Congressional mandate and devise and implement suitable plans to
reduce/eliminate troublingly high numbers of highway-rail grade
collisions in their States. FRA reviews grade these crossing action
plans and grade crossing action plan revisions to ensure that these
plans include the following: (1) Identify specific solutions for
improving safety at highway-rail grade crossings, including highway-
rail grade crossing closures or grade separations, (2) Focus on
crossings that have experienced multiple accidents or are at high risk
for such accidents, and (3) Cover a five-year period of time.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 40 hours.
    Addressee: Send comments regarding this information collection to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments may also be sent via email to OMB
at the following address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Comments are invited on the following: Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of
the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 7, 2013.
Rebecca Pennington,
Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-19573 Filed 8-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 108 (Friday, June 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 32107]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13731]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER15-1801-000]

Harborside Energy of Massachusetts, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Harborside Energy of Massachusetts, LLC's application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is June 18, 2015.
    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
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 29, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-13731 Filed 6-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 150)]
[Notices]
[Page 47295]
[DOCID:fr05au10-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

July 20, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP08-467-001.
    Applicants: American Midstream (AlaTenn), LLC.
    Description: Request of American Midstream (AlaTenn), LLC for
Extension of Time.
    Filed Date: 07/07/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100707-5125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 23, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-447-007.
    Applicants: Monroe Gas Storage Company, L.P.
    Description: Monroe Gas Storage Company, LLC submits Substitute
First Revised Sheet 309 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume
1.
    Filed Date: 07/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100719-0203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 28, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-823-001.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.203: IFF-TRA 7/16 Filing to be effective 8/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 07/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100716-5128.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 28, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-847-001.
    Applicants: Monroe Gas Storage Company, L.P.
    Description: Monroe Gas Storage Company, LLC submits instant
filing, including the Second Revised Title Page and Second Revised
Sheet No. 17 to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 07/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100719-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 28, 2010.

    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing 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. Such protests
must be filed on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all
the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is 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 docket(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. 2010-19235 Filed 8-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P