[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52941-52946]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0779; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD;
Amendment 39-18260; AD 2015-18-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Model
382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G airplanes. This AD requires replacing
the center wing box (CWB) and certain outer wings. This AD was prompted
by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that
the CWB and outer wings are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD).
We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the outer wings
and the lower surface of the CWB, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective September 17, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 17,
2015.
    We must receive comments on this AD by October 19, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Lockheed
Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Airworthiness
Office, Dept. 6A0M, Zone 0252, Column P-58, 86 S. Cobb Drive, Marietta,
GA 30063; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ams/tools/TechPubs.html. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0779.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0779; 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 street address for the Docket Office (phone:
800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Gray, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ACE-117A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone: 404-474-
5554; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued two notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRMs) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding ADs that would apply to all Lockheed Martin
Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Model 382, 382B, 382E,
382F, and 382G airplanes. The NPRMs were prompted by an evaluation by
the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that certain structure is
subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We proposed the NPRMs to
address fatigue cracking that could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
    One NPRM (Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD, Docket No. FAA-
2014-0427), published in the Federal Register on July 1, 2014 (79 FR
37248), was prompted by the determination that the CWB is subject to
WFD. This NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections and
corrective actions for damage of the lower surface of the center wing
box; and replacement of the center wing box, which would terminate the
repetitive inspections.
    The other NPRM (Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD, Docket No.
FAA-2014-0779) is the subject of this AD. This NPRM, published in the
Federal Register on December 1, 2014 (79 FR 71033), was prompted by the
determination that the outer wings are subject to WFD. This NPRM
proposed to require replacing certain outer wings with new or certain
serviceable outer wings.

Actions Since Previous Rulemaking

    We have subsequently determined that the proposed compliance time
for replacing the CWB and outer wings would not adequately address the
unsafe condition. The risk of undetected WFD rises rapidly for certain
outer wings that have accumulated 30,000 total flight hours and for
CWBs that have accumulated 50,000 total flight hours.
    Lockheed, commenting on the NPRMs for Directorate Identifier 2013-
NM-218-AD (79 FR 37248, July 1, 2014) and Directorate Identifier 2014-
NM-052-AD (79 FR 71033, December 1, 2014), also considered the proposed
grace periods (24 months and 30 months, respectively) for replacing the
CWBs and outer wings inappropriate in relation to the probable risk of
the unsafe condition. Based on its engineering analysis, Lockheed
concluded that the most prudent way to ensure fleet safety would be to
ground affected Model 382 airplanes until over-threshold CWBs and outer
wings are replaced.
    Therefore, in light of the urgency of the unsafe condition
identified in this AD, we have determined that the unsafe condition
associated with both NPRMs--Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD (79
FR 37248, July 1, 2014) and Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD (79
FR 71033, December 1, 2014)--necessitates the immediate adoption of
this AD. We have revised both AD actions as follows:
     For the AD action related to Directorate Identifier 2013-
NM-218-AD (79 FR 37248, July 1, 2014): We are considering issuing the
final rule without the requirement to replace the CWB.
     For this AD: We have added a requirement to replace the
CWB, with a shorter grace period (for airplanes over the 50,000-flight-
hour threshold) than was provided in the NPRM for Directorate
Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD (79 FR 38249, July 1, 2014). And, for the
outer wing replacement, this AD provides a shorter grace period (for
airplanes over the 30,000-flight-hour threshold) than was provided in
the NPRM for this AD. This AD therefore requires replacement of both
the CWB and outer wings.

Comments on NPRM for Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD (79 FR
37248, July 1, 2014)

    Other commenters had expressed concern about the urgency of the
unsafe condition and the compliance times for the CWB replacement
proposed in the NPRM for Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD (79 FR
37248, July 1, 2014). The following presents the comments that are
related to the proposed CWB replacement requirement (which has been
moved to this final rule) and the FAA's response to those comments.

Requests To Revise Compliance Time for CWB Replacement

    Lockheed requested that we remove the grace period from the NPRM
(79 FR 37248, July 1, 2014) so that any airplane with a CWB that has
accumulated over 50,000 total flight hours would be grounded until the
CWB is replaced. Lockheed stated the level of risk rises rapidly beyond
50,000 total flight hours due to increasing probabilities of the
presence of undetected WFD.
    Lynden Air Cargo (Lynden) suggested a sliding scale of compliance
times, based on time accumulated on the CWB, instead of the proposed
compliance time, with the highest-risk CWBs to be removed from service
earliest.
    Safair questioned the two-year grace period in light of the safety
concern associated with this final rule. The commenter stated that the
compliance time, which appears to allow the DAH time to manufacture new
wings, appears to be commercially driven. Safair added that the DAH,
which has considered the unsafe condition associated with this AD to be
a significant safety risk, has strongly advised operators to ground
airplanes with center wings having more than 50,000 total flight hours.
    As explained previously under ``Actions Since Previous
Rulemaking,'' we have determined that the proposed compliance time for
replacing the CWB would not adequately address the unsafe condition.
Therefore, we have shortened the proposed grace period for the CWB
replacement, in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, to 30 days or 50 flight

hours (whichever occurs later) for any CWB that has accumulated 50,000
or more total flight hours.

Request To Revise Applicability

    Lynden questioned whether the FAA considered the safety risk factor
for ``restricted category type certificated Model C-130A through H
airplanes'' and whether those airplanes should be included in the
applicability.
    We did consider the safety risk factor for Model C-130 airplanes.
We issued restricted-category type certificates only for Model C-130A
and C-130B airplanes, and these are low-usage airplanes. The wings on
Model C-130A airplanes are different from those of other models. In
addition, the CWBs have previously been replaced on all Model C-130A
airplanes. There are no civil-registered Model C-130B airplanes in
service. We have not changed this AD in this regard. However, we might
consider further rulemaking for Model C-130 airplanes.

Request To Allow Use of Certain Other Service Information

    Lynden requested that we revise the NPRM (79 FR 37248, July 1,
2014), for the CWB replacement requirement, to allow use of Lockheed
Service Bulletin 382-57-90, dated November 5, 2010, which is specific
to Lynden's fleet. Lynden explained that Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-
57-90, dated November 5, 2010, includes all the detailed installation
procedures, whereas Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-94, dated December
3, 2013, is more generic and could involve additional nonrecurring
engineering and possible alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) for
each specific CWB variant to accommodate production changes and
individual airplane peculiarities. Lynden explained that those
differences have already been addressed in Lockheed Service Bulletin
382-57-90, dated November 5, 2010.
    We agree with the commenter's request, for the reasons provided by
the commenter. We have included the requested provision in paragraph
(l) of this AD.

Request To Revise Cost Estimates

    Safair requested that we revise the CWB replacement costs provided
in the NPRM for Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD (79 FR 37248,
July 1, 2014). The commenter stated that he was ``unable to achieve
this level of pricing'' from Lockheed, and estimated that the
replacement would take 15,000 work-hours, at $8.25 million per
airplane.
    We do not agree to revise the per-airplane cost estimate. We have
received no revised cost information from Lockheed. The cost estimates
provided in this final rule are also based on costs provided by
operators that have already replaced their CWBs. We have not changed
this final rule regarding this issue.

Statement Regarding Impact on Small Entities

    Safair questioned the statement in the NPRM (79 FR 37248, July 1,
2014) that the AD ``[w]ill not have a significant economic impact,
positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under
the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.'' The commenter stated
that the NPRM will have a significant impact on aid and relief efforts
in the Third World where the Lockheed Model 382 is a significant
contributor to food and aid distribution. This impact on the cost per
flight hour will result in less aid delivered.
    As specified under the Regulatory Findings section, this AD does
have a significant economic impact on small entities, based on the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis included in the NPRM for
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD (79 FR 71033, December 1, 2014).
However, the FAA has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for
this AD. In accordance with Sec.  603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, such analyses are required only for rules for which a notice of
proposed rulemaking is required by 5 U.S.C. 553. Because of the urgency
of this action, as discussed later in this preamble, we find that
notice and comment procedures are not required for this rulemaking.

Request To Allow Replacement With Serviceable CWB

    Safair requested that we revise the NPRM (79 FR 37248, July 1,
2014) to allow replacement of the CWB with a serviceable CWB that has
accumulated less than 50,000 total flight hours, or that has more than
25,000 flight hours of usage remaining. The commenter noted that
operators have acquired pre-owned center wings in anticipation of this
NPRM.
    We partially agree with the request. The service information for
the CWB replacement (Lockheed Service Bulletins 382-57-94, dated
December 3, 2013; and 382-57-90, dated November 5, 2010); provides
procedures for installing only a CWB that is new. Replacement with
anything other than a new CWB would therefore require using a method
specific to each airplane and approved by the FAA. Paragraph (j)(1) of
this AD specifies replacement with a new CWB using the specified
service information, and paragraph (j)(2) of this AD specifies
replacement with a serviceable CWB using a method approved by the FAA.

Request To Provide Credit for Previous CWB Replacement

    Safair requested that CWBs replaced before the release of Lockheed
Service Bulletin 382-57-94, dated December 3, 2013, be excluded from
the CWB replacement requirement. Safair stated that Lockheed has
replaced CWBs on civil airplanes using alternative processes since the
1970s--before the release of Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-94, dated
December 3, 2013. Safair explained that the industry supporting the
military fleet of Model C-130 airplanes has significant experience and
exposure to center wing replacements via other means, and should be
credited for the experience and ability to develop sound processes.
    We disagree with the request to exclude those airplanes with
previously replaced CWBs. Any replacement CWB that reaches 50,000 total
flight hours before the airplane reaches its limit of validity (LOV) of
75,000 total flight hours would need to be replaced again. As explained
previously, paragraph (j)(2) of this AD allows replacement of the CWB
with a serviceable CWB using a method approved by the FAA. This AD is
based on the life of the CWB. If it can be shown that the CWB on the
airplane has accumulated less than 50,000 total flight hours, then
there is no need to replace the CWB until that wing reaches 50,000
total flight hours. We have not changed this final rule regarding this
issue.

Additional Change to NPRM for Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD (79
FR 71033, December 1, 2014)

    Paragraph (i) of the NPRM (79 FR 71033, December 1, 2014) provided
certain instructions for wings with previous military usage. We have
revised this wording in this AD to clarify the instructions for
contacting the FAA.

Other Relevant Rulemaking

    The information in this section is restated (with minor editorial
changes) from the NPRM for Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-218-AD (79 FR
37248, July 1, 2014) regarding the requirement to replace the CWBs.
Replacement of the CWBs, as required by this AD, affects the
requirements of certain other ADs:
     AD 2011-09-04, Amendment 39-16666 (76 FR 28626, May 18,
2011), requires repetitive inspections for any damage to the lower
surface of the CWB,

and corrective actions if necessary. AD 2011-09-04 was issued to detect
and correct fatigue cracks of the lower surface of the CWB, which could
result in the structural failure of the wings.
     AD 2011-15-02, Amendment 39-16749 (76 FR 41647, July 15,
2011), superseded AD 2008-20-01, Amendment 39-15680 (73 FR 56464,
September 29, 2008). AD 2011-15-02 requires revising the maintenance
program by incorporating new airworthiness limitations for fuel tank
systems to satisfy the requirements of Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR) No. 88 (``SFAR 88,'' Amendment 21-78, and subsequent
Amendments 21-82 (67 FR 57490, September 10, 2002) and 21-83 (67 FR
72830, December 9, 2002)), which is part of a regulation titled
``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, Flammability
Reduction, and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements'' (66 FR 23086,
May 7, 2001). AD 2011-15-02 also continues to require accomplishing
certain fuel system modifications, initial inspections of certain
repetitive fuel system limitations to phase in those inspections, and
repair if necessary. AD 2011-15-02 corrects certain part number
references, adds an additional inspection area and, for certain
airplanes, requires certain actions to be reaccomplished according to
revised service information. AD 2011-15-02 was issued to prevent the
potential for ignition sources inside fuel tanks caused by latent
failures, alterations, repairs, or maintenance actions, which, in
combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank
explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.
     AD 2012-06-09, Amendment 39-16990 (77 FR 21404, April 10,
2012), requires revising the maintenance/inspection program to include
inspections that will give no less than the required damage tolerance
analysis for each principal structural element (PSE), doing repetitive
inspections to detect cracks of all PSEs, and repairing cracked
structure. We issued AD 2012-06-09 to maintain the continued structural
integrity of the fleet.
     AD 2015-05-08, Amendment 39-18118 (80 FR 14805, March 20,
2015), requires repetitive inspections of the upper and lower rainbow
fittings on the outer wing to detect cracks propagating from fasteners
attaching the fittings to skin panels, and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary; and replacement of the upper and lower
rainbow fittings on the outer wing. We issued AD 2015-05-08 to prevent
fatigue cracking of the upper and lower rainbow fittings on the outer
wing and skin-panel-to-fitting fastener holes, which could result in
reduced structural integrity of the airplane and possible separation of
the wing from the airplane.
     AD 2015-06-08, Amendment 39-18126 (80 FR 19013, April 9,
2015), requires repetitive eddy current inspections to detect cracks in
the center wing upper and lower rainbow fittings, and corrective
actions if necessary; and repetitive replacements of rainbow fittings,
which would extend the repetitive interval for the next inspection. We
issued this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks, which could grow
large and lead to the failure of the fitting and a catastrophic failure
of the center wing.

FAA's Determination

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined that the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires replacing the CWB and certain outer wings.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
fatigue cracking of the outer wing and the lower surface of the CWB
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
Therefore, we find that notice and opportunity for prior public comment
are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment
effective in less than 30 days.

Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance times for the replacements required by this AD for
addressing WFD were established to ensure that discrepant structure is
replaced before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard inspection
techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it becomes a hazard
to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the compliance time to
complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to WFD without
extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly warrant such an
extension.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2014-0779 and
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed the following service information.
     Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Service Bulletin 382-
57-90, dated November 5, 2010, which describes procedures for replacing
the CWB with a new CWB.
     Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Service Bulletin 382-
57-94, dated December 3, 2013, which also describes procedures for
replacing the CWB with a new CWB.
     Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Service Bulletin 382-
57-96, dated December 16, 2013, which describes procedures for
replacing certain outer wings with new or certain serviceable outer
wings.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this
AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 20 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CWB replacement....................  4,800 work-hours x $85 per       $5,000,000      $5,408,000    $108,160,000
                                      hour = $408,000.
Outer wing replacement.............  1,500 work-hours x 85 per         8,000,000       8,127,500     162,550,000
                                      hour = 127,500.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 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):

2015-18-02 Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
Company: Amendment 39-18260; Docket No. FAA-2014-0779; Directorate
Identifier 2014-NM-052-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 17, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder (DAH) indicating that the outer wings and center wing box
(CWB) are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing
this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the outer wings and the lower
surface of the CWB, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Outer Wing Replacement

    For airplanes with outer wings having serial numbers (S/Ns) 3946
through 4541 inclusive, or manufacturing end product (MEP)
replacement outer wings 14Y series having part numbers (P/Ns)
388021-9/-10: At the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, except as specified in paragraph (i)
of this AD, replace each outer wing with a replacement wing
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-96,
dated December 16, 2013.
    (1) Before the outer wing accumulates 30,000 total flight hours.
    (2) Within 30 days or 50 flight hours after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(h) Acceptable Replacement Outer Wings

    (1) Outer wings having S/Ns 3946 through 4541 inclusive, and MEP
replacement outer wings 14Y series having P/Ns 388021-9/-10, are
acceptable for the outer wing replacement required by paragraph (g)
of this AD, provided that the replacement outer wing has accumulated
less than 30,000 total flight hours. The replacement outer wing must
be replaced before it accumulates 30,000 total flight hours, as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD. Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-
57-96, dated December 16, 2013, describes an option to salvage
certain system components when replacing an outer wing. If salvaged
components are used in a replacement wing, an operator may need to
comply with the following:
    (i) AD 2011-09-04, Amendment 39-16666 (76 FR 28626, May 18,
2011);
    (ii) AD 2011-15-02, Amendment 39-16749 (76 FR 41647, July 15,
2011);
    (iii) AD 2012-06-09, Amendment 39-16990 (77 FR 21404, April 10,
2012);
    (iv) AD 2015-05-08, Amendment 39-18118 (80 FR 14805, March 20,
2015); and
    (v) AD 2015-06-08, Amendment 39-18126 (80 FR 19013, April 9,
2015).
    (2) Outer wings having S/Ns 4542 and subsequent, and MEP
replacement outer wings except for 14Y series having P/Ns 388021-9/-
10, that have accumulated less than 75,000 total flight hours, are
acceptable for the outer wing replacement required by paragraph (g)
of this AD.

(i) Wings With Previous Military Usage

    For airplanes that have any outer wing with previous military
usage: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, contact
the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, to
determine a compliance time for accomplishing the actions required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, by using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this
AD.

(j) CWB Replacement

    At the applicable time specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2)
of this AD: Replace the CWB, as specified in paragraph (j)(1) or
(j)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Replace the CWB with a new CWB, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-94,
dated December 3, 2013. Although a note in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-94, dated December
3, 2013, instructs operators to contact Lockheed if any assistance
is needed in accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information, any deviation from the instructions provided

in the service information must be approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
    (2) Replace the CWB with a serviceable CWB using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(n) of this AD.

(k) Compliance Time for CWB Replacement

    Replace the CWB at the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Before the CWB accumulates 50,000 total flight hours.
    (2) Within 30 days or 50 flight hours after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(l) Alternative Service Information for CWB Replacement

    For airplanes identified in Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-90,
dated November 5, 2010: Replacement of the CWB with a new CWB, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Service
Bulletin 382-57-90, dated November 5, 2010, is acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (j) of this AD.

(m) Terminating Action for AD 2011-09-04, Amendment 39-16666 (76 FR
28626, May 18, 2011)

    Replacement of the CWB as required by paragraph (j) of this AD
terminates the inspections required by AD 2011-09-04, Amendment 39-
16666 (76 FR 28626, May 18, 2011), for that CWB.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph
(o) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) As of the effective date of this AD, an AMOC that provides
an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by
this AD, if it is approved by a Delegated Engineering Representative
(DER) for the Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company who has been
authorized by the Manager, Atlanta ACO, to make those findings. For
a repair method to be approved, the repair approval must meet the
certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(o) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Carl Gray, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE-117A, Atlanta ACO, FAA, 1701 Columbia
Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 404-474-
5605; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(p) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Service Bulletin 382-57-
90, dated November 5, 2010.
    (ii) Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Service Bulletin 382-
57-94, dated December 3, 2013.
    (iii) Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Service Bulletin 382-
57-96, dated December 16, 2013.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company,
Airworthiness Office, Dept. 6A0M, Zone 0252, Column P-58, 86 S. Cobb
Drive, Marietta, GA 30063; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ams/tools/TechPubs.html.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 21, 2015.
Kevin Hull,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-21465 Filed 9-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 75399]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26188]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2457-041-NH]

Public Service Company of New Hampshire; Notice of Availability
of Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office
of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for a new license for
the Eastman Falls Hydroelectric Project, located on the Pemigewasset
River in the town of Franklin, in Merrimack and Belknap Counties, New
Hampshire, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA).
    The EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental
impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with
appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a
major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the
human environment.
    A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access documents. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY).
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this
notice. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please
file comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support. In lieu
of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-
2457-041.
    For further information, contact Steve Kartalia at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 24, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-26188 Filed 10-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 111 (Tuesday, June 9, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 35305]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP20-884-000]

Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Petition for
Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on May 26, 2020, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) \1\ of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC filed a
petition for declaratory order (Petition) finding that the Commission
has concurrent jurisdiction with U.S. Bankruptcy Courts under sections
4 and 5 of the Natural Gas Act \2\ and Part 154 of the Commission's
regulations,\3\ regarding Gulf South's negotiated rate firm
transportation service agreement with Chesapeake Energy Marketing,
L.L.C., all as more fully explained in the petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.207 (2019). As required by Rule 381.302(a), 18
CFR 381.302(a) (2019).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 717c and 717d (2012).
    \3\ 18 CFR part 154.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar
pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the
Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free, (886) 208-
3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on June 25, 2020.

    Dated: June 2, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-12405 Filed 6-8-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P