[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 198 (Monday, October 18, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57571-57574]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22467]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0496; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00393-R;
Amendment 39-21700; AD 2021-17-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Helicopters and Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1, AS350B,
AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1,
AS355F2, AS355N, AS355NP, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, EC120B, EC130B4,
EC130T2, EC 155B, EC155B1, SA-365N, and SA-365N1 helicopters; and
Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Model EC135P1, EC135P2,
EC135P2+, EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3, MBB-BK117 C-2,
and MBB-BK117 D-2 helicopters. This AD was prompted by failure of an
Emergency Flotation System (EFS) float compartment to inflate during
maintenance of the EFS. This AD requires inspecting certain EFSs and
depending on the results, marking certain parts or removing certain
parts from service, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference (IBR). The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective November 22, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 22,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For EASA material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Safran Aerosystems service information
identified in this final rule, contact Safran Aerosystems, Technical
Publication Department, 61 rue Pierre Curie CS20001, 78373 Plaisir
Cedex, France; telephone (33) 1 61 34 23 23; fax (33) 1 61 34 24 41; or
at https://www.safran-aerosystems.com/customers-0. You may view this
material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,
10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817)
222-5110. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0496.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0496; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(516) 794-5531; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0064, dated March 19, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0064), to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus
Helicopters (AH), formerly Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale
Model EC 120 B, EC 175 B, AS 332 C, AS 332 C1, AS 332 L, AS 332 L1, AS
350 B, AS 350 B1, AS 350 B2, AS 350 BA, AS 350 BB, AS 350 B3, AS 350 D,
EC 130 B4, EC 130 T2, AS 355 E, AS 355 F, AS 355 F1, AS 355 F2, AS 355
N, AS 355 NP, SA 365 N, SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, AS 365 N3, EC 155 B, and
EC 155 B1 helicopters. EASA AD 2020-0064 also corrects an unsafe
condition for Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD), formerly
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH; and Airbus Helicopters Inc., formerly
American Eurocopter LLC, Eurocopter Espa[ntilde]a S.A. Model MBB-BK117
C-2, MBB-BK117 D-2, EC 135 P1, EC 135 P2, EC 135 P2+, EC 135 P3, EC 135
T1, EC 135 T2, EC 135 T2+, EC 135 T3, EC 635 P2+, EC 635 P3, EC 635 T1,
EC 635 T2+, and EC 635 T3 helicopters. Model EC635 P2+, EC635 P3, EC635
T1, EC635 T2+, and EC635 T3 helicopters are not certificated by the FAA
and are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet except
where the U.S. type certificate data sheet explains that the Model
EC635T2+ helicopter having serial number 0858 was converted from Model
EC635T2+ to Model EC135T2+; this AD therefore does not include Model
EC635 P2+, EC635 P3, EC635 T1, EC635 T2+, and EC635 T3 helicopters in
the applicability.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus
Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1, AS350B, AS350BA,
AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2,
AS355N, AS355NP, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, EC120B, EC130B4, EC130T2, EC
155B, EC155B1, SA-365N, and SA-365N1 helicopters, and Airbus
Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Model EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+,
EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3, MBB-BK117 C-2, and MBB-
BK117 D-2 helicopters. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
June 16, 2021 (86 FR 31995). The NPRM was prompted by failure of an
Emergency Flotation System (EFS) float compartment to inflate during
maintenance of the EFS. The NPRM proposed to require inspecting certain
EFSs and depending on the results, marking certain parts or removing
certain parts from service specified in EASA AD 2020-0064.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for a minor change. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require
actions specified in EASA AD 2020-0064 through incorporation by
reference, except for certain differences. The FAA has obtained
approval to use this process from certain manufacturers, including
Airbus Helicopters and Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD);
however, the FAA has not worked with Safran Aerosystems for approval of
this process. EASA AD 2020-0064 requires using Safran Aerosystems
Service Bulletin (SB) 025-69-18, original issue (Revision 0), dated
December 11, 2019 or Revision 1, dated February 4, 2020 (SB 025-69-18
Rev 0 or SB 025-69-18 Rev 1), and allows the use of later approved
revisions, to accomplish certain actions. In this AD, a clarification
has been added into this final rule to directly use SB 025-69-18 Rev 1
or Safran Aerosystems SB 025-69-18, Revision 2, dated March 24, 2021
(SB 025-69-18 Rev 2), instead of using SB 025-69-18 Rev 0 or SB 025-69-
18 Rev 1 through incorporation by reference of EASA AD 2020-0064.
    The FAA has determined that this minor change:

     Is consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Does not add any additional burden upon the public than
was already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies inspecting certain EFSs and depending
on the results, marking a float supply hose with a green dot with
indelible ink if the float supply hose passes an inspection, replacing
the float supply hose with a serviceable float supply hose, or
replacing an affected EFS with a serviceable EFS. EASA AD 2020-0064
also prohibits installing a float supply hose unless it passes the
inspection and is marked.
    The FAA reviewed SB 025-69-18 Rev 1 and SB 025-69-18 Rev 2, which
apply to certain Safran Aerosystems EFS and float supply hoses. Each
revision of this service information specifies procedures for
inspecting single- and multi-section EFS inflation system float supply
hoses for blockage, and depending on the results, replacing the hose
and contacting Safran Aerosystems, or marking the hose. SB 025-69-18
Rev 2 was issued to correct a list of possibly affected parts (Table
3).
    This material 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.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    EASA AD 2020-0064 applies to Airbus Helicopters Model EC120B,
EC175B, AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1, AS350B, AS350B1, AS350B2,
AS350BA, AS350BB, AS350B3, AS350D, EC130B4, EC130T2, AS355E, AS355F,
AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, AS355NP, SA-365N, SA-365N1, AS-365N2, AS 365
N3, EC155 B, and EC155B1 helicopters and Airbus Helicopters Deutschland
GmbH Model MBB-BK 117 C-2, MBB-BK 117 D-2, EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+,
EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3, EC635 P2+, EC635P3,
EC635T1, EC635T2+, and EC635T3 helicopters, whereas this AD does not
include Model AS350BB, EC175B, EC635P2+, EC635P3, EC635T1, EC635T2+,
and EC635T3 helicopters because these models are not FAA type-
certificated. Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 requires certain compliance times depending on whether the
helicopter is operated over water, this AD requires compliance within
100 hours time-in-service (TIS) instead. Where the service information
referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies ``work must be performed on
the helicopter by the operator,'' this AD requires that the work be
accomplished by a mechanic that meets the requirements of 14 CFR part
65 subpart D. Where some of the service information referenced in EASA
AD 2020-0064 specifies replacing or removing an affected hose that
fails the inspection, this AD requires removing the hose from service
instead. Where some of the service information referenced in EASA AD
2020-0064 specifies to discard certain parts, this proposed AD requires
removing those parts from service instead. Where some of the service
information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies to return the EFS
to the Safran Aerosystems network or clogged hoses to Safran
Aerosystems Services, this AD does not include those requirements.
Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies
to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not
include that requirement.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,900 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD.
    Inspecting the EFS takes up to about 8 work-hours for an estimated
cost of up to $680 per helicopter and $1,292,000 for the U.S. fleet.
    Replacing an EFS hose takes about 1 work-hour and parts cost
between $500 and $2,000 per hose, and up to $11,000 for a set of float
supply hoses, for an estimated cost of up to $11,085 per helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-17-17 Airbus Helicopters and Airbus Helicopters Deutschland
GmbH (AHD): Amendment 39-21700; Docket No. FAA-2021-0496; Project
Identifier MCAI-2020-00393-R.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective November 22,
2021.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    None.

 (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following helicopters, certificated in
any category, with an affected part as defined in European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0064, dated March 19, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0064), installed:
    (1) Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1,
AS350B,

AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1,
AS355F2, AS355N, AS355NP, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, EC120B, EC130B4,
EC130T2, EC 155B, EC155B1, SA-365N, and SA-365N1 helicopters, and
    Note 1 to paragraph (c)(1): Helicopters with an AS350B3e
designation are Model AS350B3 helicopters.
    (2) Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Model EC135P1,
EC135P2, EC135P2+, EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3,
MBB-BK117 C-2, and MBB-BK117 D-2 helicopters.
    Note 2 to paragraph (c)(2): Helicopters with an EC135P3H
designation are Model EC135P3 helicopters. Helicopters with an
EC135T3H designation are Model EC135T3 helicopters. Helicopters with
an MBB-BK117 C-2e designation are Model MBB-BK117 C-2 helicopters.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code: 2500, Cabin
Equipment/Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by failure of an Emergency Flotation System
(EFS) float compartment to inflate during maintenance of the EFS.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address a blocked float supply hose.
The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in partial
inflation of an EFS float during an emergency landing on water and
subsequently preventing a timely egress from the helicopter, which
could result in injury to helicopter occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2020-0064.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0064

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0064 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (1) of the EASA AD requires inspecting each
affected part within the compliance time defined in section 1.E of
the applicable ASB, this AD requires inspecting each affected part
within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date of
this AD.
    (3) Where the service information referenced in paragraph (1) of
EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies that ``the work must be performed on the
helicopter by the operator,'' this AD requires that the work be
accomplished by a mechanic that meets the requirements of 14 CFR
part 65 subpart D.
    (4) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 specifies replacing or removing an affected hose that fails the
inspection, this AD requires removing the hose from service.
    (5) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 specifies to discard certain parts, this AD requires removing
those parts from service.
    (6) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 specifies returning the EFS to the Safran Aerosystems network
for compliance or returning clogged hoses to Safran Aerosystems
Services, this AD does not include those requirements.
    (7) This AD does not mandate compliance with the ``Remarks''
section of EASA AD 2020-0064.

(i) Clarification of Required Service Information

    As required by the Definitions section and paragraph (4.2) of
EASA AD 2020-0064, this AD requires using Safran Aerosystems Service
Bulletin (SB) 025-69-18, Revision 1, dated February 4, 2020, or
Safran Aerosystems SB 025-69-18, Revision 2, dated March 24, 2021.

(j) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (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.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(m) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0064,
dated March 19, 2020.
    (ii) Safran Aerosystems Service Bulletin (SB) 025-69-18,
Revision 1, dated February 4, 2020.
    (iii) Safran Aerosystems SB 025-69-18, Revision 2, dated March
24, 2021.
    (3) For EASA AD 2020-0064, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; Internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Safran
Aerosystems service information identified in this AD, contact
Safran Aerosystems, Technical Publication Department, 61 rue Pierre
Curie CS20001, 78373 Plaisir Cedex, France; telephone (33) 1 61 34
23 23; fax (33) 1 61 34 24 41; or at https://www.safran-aerosystems.com/customers-0.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-0496.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on September 16, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-22467 Filed 10-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


From:
Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Tuesday, June 23, 2020 4:32 PM
To:
Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Skolnekovich, Danielle L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Benoit, Simonne T<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
RE: Coke ICR QA - EPA follow-up questions - Monessen Response to EPA's 5/22/20 Questions - EPA responses to Monessen 6/19/2020 email

Hello,

Thank you for providing your responses for the Monessen facility to the 5/22/2020 EPA questions.

Please see the attached file:
"EPAreview2-AM-Monessen-PA_IndustryQA_CokeOvens-Enclosure2_AMMreply 6.19.20_EPAQuestions6.23.20.xlsx"

The EPA responses to the 6/19/2020 Monessen email are in first tab `Facility&EPA Emails 6.19&23.20'.

Please review and revise as soon as you can.

Let us know if there are any questions.

Thank you again for your help!
Gabrielle

Gabrielle Raymond
RTI International
3040 Cornwallis Road
P.O. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Cell Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Office Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

<< EPAreview-AM-Monessen-PA_IndustryQA_CokeOvens-Enclosure2_AMMreply 6.19.20_EPAQuestions6.23.20.xlsx >>

From: Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Friday, June 19, 2020 1:46 PM
To: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Skolnekovich, Danielle L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Benoit, Simonne T<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: FW: Coke ICR QA - EPA follow-up questions - Monessen Response to EPA's 5/22/20 Questions - Stay Safe During the COVID Pandemic

Dr. Jones and Gabrielle,

Please see the attached ArcelorMittal Monessen Coke ICR data file that was updated to address your questions. We have also provided the following description of the revisions below to assist with your review.
Excel file Tab A-1 revisions:
 We added column AD (shaded light green) to show that EPA column AC data (Total Pushing process time of 12 minutes) is incorrect. Total Pushing time is only relevant to Pushing Baghouse test and Total Pushing process time needs to be deleted for Battery Combustion Stack #2 and Quench Tower testing.
 Similarly, Total Charging process time of 11 minutes appears incorrect and is now column AE. This time is not relevant to Battery Combustion Stack #2 and Boiler #1 and #2, Pushing Baghouse tests or Quench Tower testing results and should be deleted.
 We added, as comments, in Column BG in rows 812 & 815 showing the corrected lb/hr values for Quench tower testing PM filterable and PM2.5 Condensable. For the relevant Pushing Baghouse test only, we filled in new Column BI, shaded light green, (Pushing Time min/hr), and RTI/EPA said in the 5/22/20 email below that they would fill in BH (Industry Revised Emission Rate  -  NOT ADJUSTED for non-detectable values).  Please let us know when and how the emissions will be properly corrected to account for testing with non-detectable results so that EPA's emission estimates do not overestimate the emissions.
 Battery Combustion Stack #2  -  "USEPA is asking for PM2.5 filterable and PM2.5 condensable (highlighted orange in rows (39-44), TSO (Rows 174-176), SO2, CO and HCl (Rows 183-191).  In the test report (page 8 of pdf), it states that USEPA approved previously submitted testing which exempted them from conducting additional testing for TSO, HCl, PM2.5, condensable PM, SO2 and CO at the Battery 2 Combustion Stack.  Therefore, testing was not completed for the aforementioned constituents." Response: See attached Battery Combustion Stack #2 requested 2016 test results.
 Pushing Baghouse  -  "USEPA is asking for PM2.5 filterable and PM2.5 condensable (highlighted orange in rows (549-39-554, TSO (Rows 786-788), SO2, CO and HCl (Rows 795-803).  In the test report (page 8 of pdf), it states that USEPA approved previously submitted testing which exempted them from conducting additional testing for TSO, HCl, PM2.5, condensable PM, SO2 and CO at the Pushing Baghouse Stack.  Therefore, testing was not completed for the aforementioned constituents."  Response: Requested Pushing Baghouse 2016 test results will be provided in a second email due to the size of the requested test results files.

Rich Zavoda | Regional Manager, Air Quality Program
ArcelorMittal USA
Environmental Affairs| 4020 Kinross Lakes Parkway, Richfield, Ohio 44286-9000
T +1<PHONE_NUMBER> | F +1<PHONE_NUMBER> | www.arcelormittal.com
From: Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Friday, May 22, 2020 9:33 AM
To: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Gammon, Marian<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Skolnekovich, Danielle L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: RE: Coke ICR QA - EPA follow-up questions

**This Message originated from a Non-ArcelorMittal source**
Hello,

After sending the EPA follow-up questions file, Donna Lee realized we could enter the previous test data.

We've updated those EPA comments to "EPA will fill in previous data" in the attached file.
EPAreview-AM-Monessen-PA_IndustryQA_CokeOvens-Enclosure2_EPA-Questions-R.xlsx

Thank you,
Gabrielle

Gabrielle Raymond
RTI International
3040 Cornwallis Road
P.O. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

From: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 8:04 PM
To: Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Gammon, Marian<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Skolnekovich, Danielle L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: Coke ICR QA - EPA follow-up questions

Hello Rich, et al. Hope everyone is doing OK. Thank you for your review of the ICR data for AM-Monessen-PA. We have comments and requests for corrections/additional data, and also responded to your questions&comments. These are listed in the first new worksheet (shown partially below) and in column BO of worksheet A-1.

Please provide your changes/additions in 30 days from receipt of this email. Thank you again for all your work on this ICR. Your effort is greatly appreciated.

EPA Questions for Facility
1. Please provide revised concentration data (in Column BC) and emission rate data (in Column BG) WITHOUT adjusting for non-detect runs.
2. Please provide the Pushing Time (min/hr) to use to adjust the pushing lb/hr values in column BH for the applicable pushing tests. [We tried using 12 minutes from Table 10 of test report, but that doesn't seem to match the revised values industry provided].
3. Please provide missing data highlighted in brown
4. See EPA Review Comments of Industry QA Revisions/Comments in Column BO.

Note, EPA edits made in worksheet #A-1. Air Stack Tests" to fix transcription errors are in green font and are blue highlighted.

Facility email notes with added EPA responses/questions in green font, below.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>  Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5039-5041]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2119]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2011-0641]

Accommodation Service Provided on Vessels Engaged in U.S. Outer
Continental Shelf Activities

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard requests public comment on the appropriate
standards for the design, construction, and operation of all vessels
providing accommodation service on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.

DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before May 1, 2012
or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-0641 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call Mr. William Peters, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design and
Engineering Standards, Naval Architecture Division (CG-5212), telephone
(202) 372-1371. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material
to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    All comments received will be posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have
provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation
(DOT) to use the Docket Management Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy
Act'' paragraph below.

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (USCG-2011-0641), indicate the specific section of this document
to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion
or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or
by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can
contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
insert ``USCG-2011-0641'' in the ``Keyword'' box. Click ``Search'' then
click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions'' column. If you submit
your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to
know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope.

B. Viewing Comments

    To view comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the
``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In
the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2011-0641'' and click ``Search.''
Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may
also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement
with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility.

C. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

II. Background

A. General

    The offshore mineral and energy exploration and production industry
has progressively moved Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities into
deeper waters and further offshore. Because of this, we believe that
the use of vessels providing accommodation service on the U.S. OCS will
continue to grow.
    Vessels that provide accommodation service are commonly referred to
as ``floating hotels,'' ``floatels,'' or ``flotels,'' and typically
supply hotel-like services (such as dining, berthing, and access to
recreational facilities) for personnel who are not engaged in work
aboard the vessel itself but are engaged in work on a nearby OCS
installation (referred to hereafter as ``accommodated personnel'').
These vessels support OCS installations during various phases of
construction and operation, including initiation, commissioning,
maintenance, repair, modification, and decommissioning. During these
phases, the OCS installation may not always be fully operational and
may not have necessary safety systems in place for the accommodation of
any personnel.
    There are several vessel types that are capable of providing
accommodation service, including purpose-built accommodation vessels,
passenger vessels, industrial vessels, and multi-purpose support
vessels. The number of accommodated personnel can range from a handful
to several hundreds. The designs of these vessels range from the
traditional ship-shape monohull to column-stabilized Mobile Offshore
Units (MOUs) and box-shape barges. It is not uncommon for these vessels
to maintain station near an OCS installation by using a dynamic
positioning system (DPS) while accommodated personnel are transferred
to and from the OCS installation, often by means of a motion-
compensated gangway or personnel transfer baskets.

B. Existing Standards

    U.S. law grants broad authority to the Coast Guard for the
promulgation of regulations governing vessels providing

accommodation service on the U.S. OCS.\1\ While there are no current
federal regulations for vessels providing accommodation service, U.S.
flag vessels must comply with Coast Guard requirements, which are
organized according to intended service. The current vessel categories
include, among others, passenger vessels, Mobile Offshore Drilling
Units (MODUs), offshore supply vessels (OSVs), and cargo and
miscellaneous vessels. These categories of vessels are inspected under
Title 46, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Chapter I, Subchapters H,
I-A, L, and I, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The ``Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act'', 43 U.S.C. 1331,
et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Federal regulations also currently do not contain a category for
accommodated personnel. Existing categories used by the Coast Guard on
Certificates of Inspection are: Passengers, crew, other persons in
crew, and persons in addition to crew. On specific vessel types, the
Coast Guard uses additional personnel categories, including industrial
personnel, offshore workers, scientific personnel, cadets, instructors,
and sailing school students.
    In the absence of applicable U.S. regulations, the Coast Guard has
not inspected any U.S. flag vessels engaged in accommodation service.
Foreign flag vessels providing accommodation service must meet
requirements established by their flag Administration.
    In mandatory provisions of the International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea Convention (SOLAS), vessels are characterized
either as passenger or cargo ships, and personnel as either passengers
or crew.\2\ In addition, the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
promulgates voluntary codes and guidelines, which also identify another
personnel category--special personnel who are carried on board in
connection with the special purpose of or the special work carried out
on the ship. Voluntary codes also often mention other specialized
vessel types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``* * *or other persons employed or engaged in any capacity
on board a ship on the business of that ship;'' SOLAS, 1974, as
amended, Regulation I/2(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These existing requirements, voluntary codes, and guidelines take
into account the risks generally associated with each ship type's
operation, and include design and operation standards for damage
stability, fire safety, safe means of escape, and training. Despite the
lack of current federal regulations that specifically address the
design, construction, and operation of vessels providing accommodation
service, we are aware that some of these vessels have been built to
certain classification society or proprietary standards.

III. Discussion

A. Areas of Concern and Casualties

    Under federal statutes and regulations, the Coast Guard is
responsible for promoting the safety of life and property and
protection of the marine environment on, under and over waters subject
to the jurisdiction of the United States.\3\ The Coast Guard is
concerned about the safety of operations of vessels providing
accommodation service on the U.S. OCS because those operations are
typically far offshore, distant from search and rescue assets, and
located near high risk industrial activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, e.g., 14 U.S.C. 2, 43 U.S.C. 1331, et seq., and 33 CFR
140.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More critically, those operations may involve large numbers of
accommodated personnel, many of whom may not have received adequate
training in firefighting, personal survival, lifeboat/raft procedures,
modes of evacuation, or personal safety and may not be sufficiently
familiar with the vessel. Accommodated personnel might not be
credentialed mariners and their marine experience, capability and
training may range from none to extensive. Additionally, the number of
marine crew, who are responsible for shipboard safety, may not be
sufficient to direct and assist the number of accommodated personnel in
the event of an emergency.
    These risk factors drive concerns about requirements governing
vessel manning and design, emergency systems, design and operation of
DPS, design and operation of systems used to transfer personnel between
a vessel providing accommodation service and an OCS installation, and
training. Many of these safety concerns, which are common for most
vessels, are associated with fire safety systems, lifesaving equipment,
means of escape, subdivision and stability. In the case of a vessel
providing accommodation service, these systems should be appropriate
for the number of personnel being accommodated, their experience level
as mariners, and their familiarity with those systems.
    There are other concerns, too. When a vessel is providing
accommodation service for an OCS installation, the vessel is relatively
close to the installation and often uses a DPS to maintain position. In
the event of a malfunction of the DPS, there is increased risk of
collision with the OCS installation or uncontrolled movement of the
vessel. In addition, the risks associated with the operation or failure
of the system used to transfer personnel between the OCS installation
and the vessel providing the accommodation service are a source of
concern.
    The degree of concern in these areas may be elevated if the vessel
providing accommodation service was designed and constructed using
standards appropriate for vessels with fewer people on-board and/or
with people with greater familiarity with the vessel and its systems.
In this context, we note that neither Coast Guard nor international
standards for MODUs, OSVs, cargo and miscellaneous vessels were
developed for vessels providing accommodation service. The factors
associated with the concerns cited above, combined with greater
distances from available search and rescue assets, could affect the
outcome of an emergency on board a vessel providing accommodation
service.
    There have also been a number of casualties over the years
involving vessels providing accommodation service. The most recent of
these involved the April 12, 2011, capsizing of the Mexican flagged,
column-stabilized accommodation vessel Jupiter 1 with over 700 persons
aboard in relatively shallow, calm water in the Bay of Campeche. The
people were safely evacuated by ship in this case, but the outcome
could have been tragically worse had it occurred in deep water, far
from shore and rescue assets, or in more severe environmental
conditions. Other casualties \4\ further highlight our concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The capsizing of the semi-submersible accommodation vessel
Alexander L. Kielland on March 27, 1980, while positioned in the
central North Sea resulted in the loss of 123 lives. In February
1992, eleven people died in a helicopter crash in very high gusting
winds during a 200 meter transport of workers from the Cormorant
Alpha production platform to the accommodation vessel Safe Supporter
in the North Sea. On July 21, 2010, five oil cleanup workers were
injured in a mess hall fire aboard a barge on Baptiste Collette
Bayou, Louisiana that was fitted with stacked shipping containers
converted to accommodation modules sufficient to quarter more than
500 workers. On August 10, 2010, while accommodating 270 workers off
Barrow Island, Western Australia, the Norwegian flag passenger ship
Finnmarken was holed by a barge after it broke free from moorings
during severe weather--the vessel subsequently sailed under its own
power to port for repairs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of these risk factors, concerns and casualties, and the
lack of regulations written specifically to govern the design,
construction and operation of U.S. and foreign flag vessels providing
accommodation service on the U.S. OCS, the Coast Guard is soliciting
public input on the most appropriate standards for all vessels
providing accommodation service on the U.S. OCS.

B. Standards for Vessels Providing Accomodation Service

    We recognize that accommodated personnel are neither marine crew
nor explicitly included in other personnel categories, and are not
treated as traditional passengers either. While passengers would
generally be expected to have little or no sea-going experience or
familiarity with vessel systems, the level of that experience and
familiarity may vary widely among accommodated personnel. For this
reason, some accommodated personnel could be expected to behave like
passengers in an emergency.
    Because accomodated personnel are not marine crew or explicitly
included in another personnel category, and in view of the risks,
concerns and casualties described above in section III.A., the use of
MODU, OSV, or cargo and miscellaneous vessel standards may not be
appropriate for vessels providing accommodation service. Instead,
passenger ship safety standards, supplemented by requirements
addressing DPS and personnel transfer, may be more appropriate for
these vessels.

IV. Request for Comments

    In summary, the Coast Guard recognizes that federal statutes or
regulations that explicitly address the design, construction, and
operation of vessels providing accommodation services do not exist,
that cargo ship or MODU safety standards may not be appropriate for
these vessels, and that passenger ship safety standards supplemented by
DPS and personnel transfer standards may be more appropriate.
    We request comment on the standards appropriate for existing, new,
and planned U.S. and foreign flag vessels that are engaging or would
engage in accommodation service on the OCS, including appropriate DPS,
personnel transfer system, manning, and training standards. We also
request views on whether accommodated personnel should be treated as
passengers, marine crew, special personnel, another personnel category,
or a combination thereof. We further request information on the impact
appropriate standards might have on such vessels and their operation.
Additionally, we are interested in obtaining information about the
scope of accommodation service provided by U.S. and foreign flag
vessels on the U.S. OCS since January 1, 2002, including:

    A. On vessels that are providing, or have provided, accommodation
service:
    1. The type of vessel used (e.g., column-stabilized mobile offshore
unit, passenger ship, offshore supply vessel, liftboat, barge, etc.);
    2. The number and size of such vessels, including the length,
breadth, depth, number of crew, number of accommodated persons, tonnage
and any other information relevant to vessel capability;
    3. The time interval that a vessel provided accommodation service;
    4. The safety standards the vessel uses (e.g., SOLAS Cargo Ship,
SOLAS Passenger Ship, 2009 IMO MODU Code, etc.);
    5. The DPS used, if any, and the standards associated therewith;
    6. The personnel transfer system used and the standards associated
therewith; and,
    7. Any other pertinent vessel information, including construction
and operation costs, charter rates, and the average day rate per
accommodated person on a vessel.
    B. On crew and accommodated personnel:
    1. The training, including special training, that crew receive in
crowd or crisis management, passenger safety, or similar training
required to be provided to crew on SOLAS passenger ships by the
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, (STCW);
    2. The crew size, both licensed and other credentialed, and
variations based on the number of accommodated personnel;
    3. The frequency or degree to which the population of accommodated
personnel changes over the course of a job or a given period of time;
    4. The degree of training and experience of accommodated personnel
(e.g., marine credentials, STCW basic safety training or similar,
training provided by vessel crew, frequency and degree of participation
in drills); and,
    5. Any other pertinent information on the scope of accommodation
service (e.g., crew cycling, replenishment, shore-based and on-board
training, repatriation).

    Please provide any comments in accordance with the procedures in
the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' section above.

V. Authority

    This document is issued under the authority of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. Sec.  1331, et seq., 5 U.S.C.
552(a), and 33 CFR 1.05-1.

    Dated: January 26, 2012.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012-2119 Filed 1-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 84 (Thursday, April 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24061-24064]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09121]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33853; 812-15008]

Legg Mason Partners Equity Trust, et al.; Notice of Application

April 24, 2020.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a) of
the Act, as well as from certain disclosure requirements in rule 20a-1
under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A, Items 22(c)(1)(ii),
22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``1934 Act''), and sections 6-
07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X (``Disclosure Requirements'').
    Applicants: Legg Mason Partners Equity Trust (the ``Trust''), a
Maryland statutory trust registered under the Act as an open-end
management investment company with multiple series (each a ``Fund'')
and Legg Mason Partners Fund Advisor, LLC (``Adviser''), a Delaware
limited liability company registered as an investment adviser under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act'') that serves an
investment adviser to the Funds (collectively with the Trust, the
``Applicants'').
    Summary of Application: The requested exemption would permit
Applicants to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements
with subadvisers without shareholder approval and would grant relief
from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to the
subadvisers. The requested order would supersede a prior order.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See In the Matter of Legg Mason Partners Equity Trust, Legg
Mason Partners Variable Equity Trust and Permal Asset Management
LLC, Investment Company Act Release Nos. 30923 (Feb. 24, 2014)
(notice) and 30990 (Mar. 24, 2014) (order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 8, 2019, and
amended on December 6, 2019, and March 16, 2020.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and serving applicants with a
copy of the request by email. Hearing requests should be received by
the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on May 19, 2020, and should be accompanied
by proof of service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or,
for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the
Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest,
any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the
reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to
be notified of a hearing may request notification by emailing the
Commission's Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
ADDRESSES: The Commission<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The Trust and the
Adviser<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(with a copy to
roger.joseph@morganlewis.com).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benjamin Kalish, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-7361, or David Nicolardi, Branch Chief at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

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

I. Requested Exemptive Relief

    1. Applicants request an order to permit the Adviser,\2\ subject to
the approval of the board of trustees of the Trust (collectively, the
``Board''),\3\ including a majority of the trustees who are not
``interested persons'' of the Trust or the Adviser, as defined in
section 2(a)(19) of the Act (the ``Independent Trustees''), without
obtaining shareholder approval, to: (i) Select investment subadvisers
(``Subadvisers'') for all or a portion of the assets of one or more of
the Funds pursuant to an investment subadvisory agreement with each
Subadviser (each a ``Subadvisory Agreement''); and (ii) materially
amend Subadvisory Agreements with the Subadvisers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The term ``Adviser'' means (i) Legg Mason Partners Fund
Advisor, LLC, (ii) its successors, and (iii) any entity controlling,
controlled by or under common control with, the Adviser or its
successors that serves as the primary adviser to a Subadvised Fund
(as defined below). For the purposes of the requested order,
``successor'' is limited to an entity that results from a
reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change in the type of
business organization.
    \3\ The term ``Board'' also includes the board of trustees or
directors of a future Subadvised Fund (as defined below), if
different from the board of trustees of the Trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants also request an order exempting the Subadvised Funds
(as defined below) from the Disclosure Requirements, which require each
Fund to disclose fees paid to a Subadviser. Applicants seek relief to
permit each Subadvised Fund to disclose (as a dollar amount and a
percentage of the Fund's net assets): (i) The aggregate fees paid to
the Adviser and any Wholly-Owned Subadvisers; and (ii) the aggregate
fees paid to Affiliated and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers (``Aggregate Fee
Disclosure'').\4\ Applicants seek an exemption to permit a Subadvised
Fund to include only the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A ``Wholly-Owned Subadviser'' is any investment adviser that
is (1) an indirect or direct ``wholly-owned subsidiary'' (as such
term is defined in section 2(a)(43) of the 1940 Act) of the Adviser,
(2) a ``sister company'' of the Adviser that is an indirect or
direct ``wholly-owned subsidiary'' of the same company that
indirectly or directly wholly owns the Adviser (the Adviser's
``parent company''), or (3) a parent company of the Adviser. A
``Non-Affiliated Subadviser'' is any investment adviser that is not
an ``affiliated person'' (as defined in the 1940 Act) of a Fund or
the Adviser, except to the extent that an affiliation arises solely
because the Subadviser serves as a subadviser to one or more Funds.
Section 2(a)(43) of the 1940 Act defines ``wholly-owned subsidiary''
of a person as a company 95 per centum or more of the outstanding
voting securities of which are, directly or indirectly, owned by
such a person.
    \5\ Applicants note that all other items required by sections 6-
07(2)(a), (b) and (c) of Regulation S-X will be disclosed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Applicants request that the relief apply to Applicants, as well
as to any future Fund and any other existing or future registered open-
end management investment company or series thereof that intends to
rely on the requested order in the future and that: (i) Is advised by
the Adviser; (ii) uses the multi-manager structure described in the
application; and (iii) complies with the terms and conditions of the

application (each, a ``Subadvised Fund'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ All registered open-end investment companies that currently
intend to rely on the requested order are named as Applicants. Any
entity that relies on the requested order will do so only in
accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the
application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Management of the Subadvised Funds

    4. The Adviser serves or will serve as the investment adviser to
each Subadvised Fund pursuant to an investment advisory agreement with
the Fund (each an ``Investment Advisory Agreement''). Each Investment
Advisory Agreement has been or will be approved by the Board, including
a majority of the Independent Trustees, and by the shareholders of the
relevant Subadvised Fund in the manner required by sections 15(a) and
15(c) of the Act. The terms of these Investment Advisory Agreements
comply or will comply with section 15(a) of the Act. Applicants are not
seeking an exemption from the Act with respect to the Investment
Advisory Agreements. Pursuant to the terms of each Investment Advisory
Agreement, the Adviser, subject to the oversight of the Board, will
provide continuous investment management for each Subadvised Fund. For
its services to each Subadvised Fund, the Adviser receives or will
receive an investment advisory fee from that Fund as specified in the
applicable Investment Advisory Agreement.
    5. Consistent with the terms of each Investment Advisory Agreement,
the Adviser may, subject to the approval of the Board, including a
majority of the Independent Trustees, and the shareholders of the
applicable Subadvised Fund (if required by applicable law), delegate
portfolio management responsibilities of all or a portion of the assets
of a Subadvised Fund to a Subadviser. The Adviser will retain overall
responsibility for the management and investment of the assets of each
Subadvised Fund. This responsibility includes recommending the removal
or replacement of Subadvisers, allocating the portion of that
Subadvised Fund's assets to any given Subadviser and reallocating those
assets as necessary from time to time.\7\ The Subadvisers will be
``investment advisers'' to the Subadvised Funds within the meaning of
section 2(a)(20) of the Act and will provide investment management
services to the Funds subject to, without limitation, the requirements
of sections 15(c) and 36(b) of the Act.\8\ The Subadvisers, subject to
the oversight of the Adviser and the Board, will determine the
securities and other investments to be purchased, sold or entered into
by a Subadvised Fund's portfolio or a portion thereof, and will place
orders with brokers or dealers that they select.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Applicants represent that if the name of any Subadvised Fund
contains the name of a subadviser, the name of the Adviser that
serves as the primary adviser to the Fund, or a trademark or trade
name that is owned by or publicly used to identify the Adviser, will
precede the name of the subadviser.
    \8\ The Subadvisers will be registered with the Commission as an
investment adviser under the Advisers Act or not subject to such
registration.
    \9\ A ``Subadviser'' also includes an investment subadviser that
provides or will provide the Adviser with a model portfolio
reflecting a specific strategy, style or focus with respect to the
investment of all or a portion of a Subadvised Fund's assets. The
Adviser may use the model portfolio to determine the securities and
other instruments to be purchased, sold or entered into by a
Subadvised Fund's portfolio or a portion thereof, and place orders
with brokers or dealers that it selects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Subadvisory Agreements will be approved by the Board,
including a majority of the Independent Trustees, in accordance with
sections 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act. In addition, the terms of each
Subadvisory Agreement will comply fully with the requirements of
section 15(a) of the Act. The Adviser may compensate the Subadvisers or
the Subadvised Funds may compensate the Subadvisers directly.
    7. Subadvised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadviser pursuant to the following procedures (``Modified Notice and
Access Procedures''): (a) Within 90 days after a new Subadviser is
hired for any Subadvised Fund, that Fund will send its shareholders
either a Multi-manager Notice or a Multi-manager Notice and Multi-
manager Information Statement; \10\ and (b) the Subadvised Fund will
make the Multi-manager Information Statement available on the website
identified in the Multi-manager Notice no later than when the Multi-
manager Notice (or Multi-manager Notice and Multi-manager Information
Statement) is first sent to shareholders, and will maintain it on that
website for at least 90 days.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A ``Multi-manager Notice'' will be modeled on a Notice of
Internet Availability as defined in Rule 14a-16 under the 1934 Act,
and specifically will, among other things: (a) Summarize the
relevant information regarding the new Subadviser (except as
modified to permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure); (b) inform
shareholders that the Multi-manager Information Statement is
available on a website; (c) provide the website address; (d) state
the time period during which the Multi-manager Information Statement
will remain available on that website; (e) provide instructions for
accessing and printing the Multi-manager Information Statement; and
(f) instruct the shareholder that a paper or email copy of the
Multi-manager Information Statement may be obtained, without charge,
by contacting the Subadvised Fund. A ``Multi-manager Information
Statement'' will meet the requirements of Regulation 14C, Schedule
14C and Item 22 of Schedule 14A under the 1934 Act for an
information statement, except as modified by the requested order to
permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure. Multi-manager Information
Statements will be filed with the Commission via the EDGAR system.
    \11\ In addition, Applicants represent that whenever a
Subadviser is hired or terminated, or a Subadvisory Agreement is
materially amended, the Subadvised Fund's prospectus and statement
of additional information will be supplemented promptly pursuant to
rule 497(e) under the Securities Act of 1933.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Applicable Law

    8. Section 15(a) of the Act states, in part, that it is unlawful
for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered
investment company ``except pursuant to a written contract, which
contract, whether with such registered company or with an investment
adviser of such registered company, has been approved by the vote of a
majority of the outstanding voting securities of such registered
company.''
    9. Form N-1A is the registration statement used by open-end
investment companies. Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A requires a registered
investment company to disclose in its statement of additional
information the method of computing the ``advisory fee payable'' by the
investment company with respect to each investment adviser, including
the total dollar amounts that the investment company ``paid to the
adviser (aggregated with amounts paid to affiliated advisers, if any),
and any advisers who are not affiliated persons of the adviser, under
the investment advisory contract for the last three fiscal years.''
    10. Rule 20a-1 under the Act requires proxies solicited with
respect to a registered investment company to comply with Schedule 14A
under the 1934 Act. Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and
22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A, taken together, require a proxy statement for
a shareholder meeting at which the advisory contract will be voted upon
to include the ``rate of compensation of the investment adviser,'' the
``aggregate amount of the investment adviser's fee,'' a description of
the ``terms of the contract to be acted upon,'' and, if a change in the
advisory fee is proposed, the existing and proposed fees and the
difference between the two fees.
    11. Regulation S-X sets forth the requirements for financial
statements required to be included as part of a registered investment
company's registration statement and shareholder reports filed with the
Commission. Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X require
a registered investment company to include in its

financial statements information about investment advisory fees.
    12. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provisions of the Act, or
any rule thereunder, if such exemption is necessary or appropriate in
the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Applicants state that the requested relief meets this standard for the
reasons discussed below.

IV. Arguments in Support of the Requested Relief

    13. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the
shareholder, the role of the Subadvisers is substantially equivalent to
the limited role of the individual portfolio managers employed by an
investment adviser to a traditional investment company. Applicants also
assert that the shareholders expect the Adviser, subject to review and
approval of the Board, to select a Subadviser who is in the best
position to achieve the Subadvised Fund's investment objective.
Applicants believe that permitting the Adviser to perform the duties
for which the shareholders of the Subadvised Fund are paying the
Adviser--the selection, oversight and evaluation of the Subadviser--
without incurring unnecessary delays or expenses of convening special
meetings of shareholders is appropriate and in the interest of the
Fund's shareholders, and will allow such Fund to operate more
efficiently. Applicants state that each Investment Advisory Agreement
will continue to be fully subject to section 15(a) of the Act and
approved by the relevant Board, including a majority of the Independent
Trustees, in the manner required by section 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act.
    14. Applicants submit that the requested relief meets the standards
for relief under section 6(c) of the Act. Applicants state that the
operation of the Subadvised Fund in the manner described in the
Application must be approved by shareholders of that Fund before it may
rely on the requested relief. Applicants also state that the proposed
conditions to the requested relief are designed to address any
potential conflicts of interest or economic incentives, and provide
that shareholders are informed when new Subadvisers are hired.
    15. Applicants contend that, in the circumstances described in the
application, a proxy solicitation to approve the appointment of new
Subadvisers provides no more meaningful information to shareholders
than the proposed Multi-manager Information Statement. Applicants state
that, accordingly, they believe the requested relief is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, and consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act.
    16. With respect to the relief permitting Aggregate Fee Disclosure,
Applicants assert that disclosure of the individual fees paid to the
Subadvisers does not serve any meaningful purpose. Applicants contend
that the primary reasons for requiring disclosure of individual fees
paid to Subadvisers are to inform shareholders of expenses to be
charged by a particular Subadvised Fund and to enable shareholders to
compare the fees to those of other comparable investment companies.
Applicants believe that the requested relief satisfies these objectives
because the Subadvised Fund's overall advisory fee will be fully
disclosed and, therefore, shareholders will know what the Subadvised
Fund's fees and expenses are and will be able to compare the advisory
fees a Subadvised Fund is charged to those of other investment
companies. In addition, Applicants assert that the requested relief
would benefit shareholders of the Subadvised Fund because it would
improve the Adviser's ability to negotiate the fees paid to
Subadvisers. In particular, Applicants state that if the Adviser is not
required to disclose the Subadvisers' fees to the public, the Adviser
may be able to negotiate rates that are below a Subadviser's ``posted''
amounts. Applicants assert that the relief will also encourage
Subadvisers to negotiate lower subadvisory fees with the Adviser if the
lower fees are not required to be made public.

V. Relief for Affiliated Subadvisers

    17. The Commission has granted the requested relief with respect to
Wholly-Owned and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers through numerous exemptive
orders. The Commission also has extended the requested relief to
Affiliated Subadvisers.\12\ Applicants state that although the
Adviser's judgment in recommending a Subadviser can be affected by
certain conflicts, they do not warrant denying the extension of the
requested relief to Affiliated Subadvisers. Specifically, the Adviser
faces those conflicts in allocating fund assets between itself and a
Subadviser, and across Subadvisers, as it has an interest in
considering the benefit it will receive, directly or indirectly, from
the fee the Subadvised Fund pays for the management of those assets.
Applicants also state that to the extent the Adviser has a conflict of
interest with respect to the selection of an Affiliated Subadviser, the
proposed conditions are protective of shareholder interests by ensuring
the Board's independence and providing the Board with the appropriate
resources and information to monitor and address conflicts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Carillon Series Trust and Carillon Tower Advisers,
Inc., Investment Company Act Rel. Nos. 33464 (May 2, 2019) (notice)
and 33494 (May 29, 2019) (order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. With respect to the relief permitting Aggregate Fee Disclosure,
Applicants assert that it is appropriate to disclose only aggregate
fees paid to Affiliated Subadvisers for the same reasons that similar
relief has been granted previously with respect to Wholly-Owned and
Non-Affiliated Subadvisers.

VI. Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Before a Subadvised Fund may rely on the order requested in the
Application, the operation of the Subadvised Fund in the manner
described in the Application will be, or has been, approved by a
majority of the Subadvised Fund's outstanding voting securities as
defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Subadvised Fund whose public
shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus containing
the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the initial
shareholder before such Subadvised Fund's shares are offered to the
public.
    2. The prospectus for each Subadvised Fund will disclose the
existence, substance and effect of any order granted pursuant to the
Application. In addition, each Subadvised Fund will hold itself out to
the public as employing the multi-manager structure described in the
Application. The prospectus will prominently disclose that the Adviser
has the ultimate responsibility, subject to oversight by the Board, to
oversee the Subadvisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and
replacement.
    3. The Adviser will provide general management services to each
Subadvised Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the
general management and investment of the Subadvised Fund's assets, and
subject to review and oversight of the Board, will (i) set the
Subadvised Fund's overall investment strategies, (ii) evaluate, select,
and recommend

Subadvisers for all or a portion of the Subadvised Fund's assets, (iii)
allocate and, when appropriate, reallocate the Subadvised Fund's assets
among Subadvisers, (iv) monitor and evaluate the Subadvisers'
performance, and (v) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure
that Subadvisers comply with the Subadvised Fund's investment
objective, policies and restrictions.
    4. Subadvised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadviser within 90 days after the hiring of the new Subadviser
pursuant to the Modified Notice and Access Procedures.
    5. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be
Independent Trustees, and the selection and nomination of new or
additional Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of
the then-existing Independent Trustees.
    6. Independent Legal Counsel, as defined in Rule 0-1(a)(6) under
the Act, will be engaged to represent the Independent Trustees. The
selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-
existing Independent Trustees.
    7. Whenever a Subadviser is hired or terminated, the Adviser will
provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the
profitability of the Adviser.
    8. The Board must evaluate any material conflicts that may be
present in a subadvisory arrangement. Specifically, whenever a
subadviser change is proposed for a Subadvised Fund (``Subadviser
Change'') or the Board considers an existing Subadvisory Agreement as
part of its annual review process (``Subadviser Review''):
    (a) The Adviser will provide the Board, to the extent not already
being provided pursuant to section 15(c) of the Act, with all relevant
information concerning:
    (i) Any material interest in the proposed new Subadviser, in the
case of a Subadviser Change, or the Subadviser in the case of a
Subadviser Review, held directly or indirectly by the Adviser or a
parent or sister company of the Adviser, and any material impact the
proposed Subadvisory Agreement may have on that interest;
    (ii) any arrangement or understanding in which the Adviser or any
parent or sister company of the Adviser is a participant that (A) may
have had a material effect on the proposed Subadviser Change or
Subadviser Review, or (B) may be materially affected by the proposed
Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review;
    (iii) any material interest in a Subadviser held directly or
indirectly by an officer or Trustee of the Subadvised Fund, or an
officer or board member of the Adviser (other than through a pooled
investment vehicle not controlled by such person); and
    (iv) any other information that may be relevant to the Board in
evaluating any potential material conflicts of interest in the proposed
Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review.
    (b) the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees,
will make a separate finding, reflected in the Board minutes, that the
Subadviser Change or continuation after Subadviser Review is in the
best interests of the Subadvised Fund and its shareholders and, based
on the information provided to the Board, does not involve a conflict
of interest from which the Adviser, a Subadviser, any officer or
Trustee of the Subadvised Fund, or any officer or board member of the
Adviser derives an inappropriate advantage.
    9. Each Subadvised Fund will disclose in its registration statement
the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.
    10. In the event that the Commission adopts a rule under the Act
providing substantially similar relief to that in the order requested
in the Application, the requested order will expire on the effective
date of that rule.
    11. Any new Subadvisory Agreement or any amendment to an existing
Investment Advisory Agreement or Subadvisory Agreement that directly or
indirectly results in an increase in the aggregate advisory fee rate
payable by the Subadvised Fund will be submitted to the Subadvised
Fund's shareholders for approval.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-09121 Filed 4-29-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 121 (Monday, June 24, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 29511]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13344]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-2189-000]

Palmetto Plains Solar Project, 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
Palmetto Plains Solar Project, 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 July 8, 2019.
    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 website 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: June 18, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-13344 Filed 6-21-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 9320]
[DOCID:fr03mr09-128]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

In the Matter of Cincinnati Microwave, Inc., Core Technologies
Pennsylvania, Inc., First Central Financial Corp., Imark Technologies,
Inc. (n/k/a Pharm Control Ltd.), Molten Metal Technology, Inc., MRS
Technology, Inc., Sun Television & Appliances, Inc., and Telegroup,
Inc.; File No. 500-1; Order of Suspension of Trading

February 27, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Cincinnati Microwave, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 29, 1996.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Core Technologies Pennsylvania, Inc. because it has not filed any
periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 1998, except for
a Form 10-Q it filed for the period ended September 30, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
First Central Financial Corp. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended June 30, 1997.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Imark Technologies, Inc. (n/k/a Pharm Control Ltd.) because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the period ended March 31, 1998.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Molten Metal Technology, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 30, 1997.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
MRS Technology, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 1998.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Sun Television & Appliances, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended November 28, 1998.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Telegroup, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 1998.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST
on February 27, 2009, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on March 12, 2009.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-4594 Filed 2-27-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 83125]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28243]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting; Cancellation

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 85 FR 81258,
December 15, 2020.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING: Thursday, December
17, 2020 at 3:00 p.m.

CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
December 17, 2020 at 3:00 p.m., has been cancelled.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202)
551-5400.

    Dated: December 17, 2020.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28243 Filed 12-17-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 138)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 40955-40958]
[DOCID:fr17jy08-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0362; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-308-AD;
Amendment 39-15611; AD 2008-14-16]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; 328 Support Services GmbH Dornier Model
328-100 and -300 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    At least one incident has occurred where, immediately after
take-off, the passenger door of a Dornier 328 completely opened. * *
* Substantial damage to the door, handrails, door hinge arms and
fuselage skin were found.

    * * * Although final proof could not be obtained, the most
likely way in which the door opened was that the door handle was
inadvertently operated during the take-off run.
* * * * *
    [T]his Airworthiness Directive (AD) aims to prevent further
incidents of inadvertent opening and possible detachment of a
passenger door in-flight, likely resulting in damage to airframe and
systems and, under less favorable circumstances, loss of control of
the aircraft.
* * * * *
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 21, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 21,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2008 (73
FR 16219). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    At least one incident has occurred where, immediately after
take-off, the passenger door of a Dornier 328 completely opened. The
flight crew reportedly had no cockpit indication or audible chime
prior to this event. The aircraft returned to the departure airfield
and made an uneventful emergency landing. Substantial damage to the
door, handrails, door hinge arms and fuselage skin were found.

    The subsequent investigation could not find any deficiency in
the design of the main cabin door locking mechanism. In addition, no
technical failure could be determined that precipitated the event.
The flight data recorder showed that the door was closed and locked
before take-off and opened shortly afterward. Although final proof
could not be obtained, the most likely way in which the door opened
was that the door handle was inadvertently operated during the take-
off run.

    In response to the incident, AvCraft (the TC (type certificate)
holder at the time)

developed a placard set to warn the occupants against touching the
door handle, as well as a structural modification of the passenger
door hinge supports to make certain that the door does not separate
from the aircraft when inadvertently opened during flight, allowing
a safe descent and landing.

    Although the event described above did not prevent the flight
crew from landing the aircraft safely, the condition of the aircraft
immediately after the opening of the door has been determined to
have been unsafe. [T]his Airworthiness Directive (AD) aims to
prevent further incidents of inadvertent opening and possible
detachment of a passenger door in-flight, likely resulting in damage
to airframe and systems and, under less favorable circumstances,
loss of control of the aircraft.
* * * * *
Corrective actions include installing warning placards on the doors,
and doing a modification that includes replacing the hinge supports and
support struts of the passenger doors with new, improved hinge supports
and support struts. You may obtain further information by examining the
MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received. The commenter provided
information on an incident that occurred on a Dornier Model 228
airplane and asked for the procedure for reporting the incident to
additional agencies so that appropriate action is taken. The
applicability in the NPRM is for Dornier Model 328-100 and -300
airplanes; therefore, the comment does not apply to this AD. The
comment has been forwarded to the appropriate FAA office and will be
addressed by that office accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 106 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take 38 work-hours per product to comply
with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80
per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $11,961 per product.
Where the service information lists required parts costs that are
covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge
for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected
parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators
to be $1,590,106, or $15,001 per product.

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

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 AD:

2008-14-16 328 Support Services GmbH (Formerly AvCraft Aerospace
GmbH formerly Fairchild Dornier GmbH, formerly Dornier Luftfahrt
GmbH): Amendment 39-15611. Docket No. FAA-2008-0362; Directorate
Identifier 2007-NM-308-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective August
21, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to 328 Support Services GmbH Dornier Model
328-100 airplanes, having serial numbers (S/Ns) 3005 through 3098,
3100, 3101, 3106, 3107, 3109, 3110, 3112, 3113, 3115, 3117 and 3119;
and Model 328-300 airplanes, having S/Ns 3102, 3105, 3108, 3111,
3114, 3116, 3118, and 3120 through 3224; certificated in any
category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 11: Placards
and Markings; and Code 52: Doors.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    At least one incident has occurred where, immediately after
take-off, the passenger door of a Dornier 328 completely opened. The
flight crew reportedly had no cockpit indication or audible chime
prior to this event. The aircraft returned to the departure airfield
and made an uneventful emergency landing. Substantial damage to the
door, handrails, door hinge arms and fuselage skin were found.

    The subsequent investigation could not find any deficiency in
the design of the main cabin door locking mechanism. In addition, no
technical failure could be determined that precipitated the event.
The flight data recorder showed that the door was closed and locked
before take-off and opened shortly afterward. Although final proof
could not be obtained, the most likely way in which the door opened
was that the door handle was inadvertently operated during the take-
off run.

    In response to the incident, AvCraft (the TC (type certificate)
holder at the time) developed a placard set to warn the occupants
against touching the door handle, as well as a structural
modification of the passenger door hinge supports to make certain
that the door does not separate from the aircraft when inadvertently
opened during flight, allowing a safe descent and landing.

    Although the event described above did not prevent the flight
crew from landing the aircraft safely, the condition of the aircraft
immediately after the opening of the door has been determined to
have been unsafe. [T]his Airworthiness Directive (AD) aims to
prevent further incidents of inadvertent opening and possible
detachment of a passenger door in-flight, likely resulting in damage
to airframe and systems and, under less favorable circumstances,
loss of control of the aircraft.
* * * * *
Corrective actions include installing warning placards on the doors,
and doing a modification that includes replacing the hinge supports
and support struts of the passenger doors with new, improved hinge
supports and support struts.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, install
warning placards on the inside of the passenger door and service
doors, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dornier
Service Bulletin SB-328-11-454 (for Model 328-100 airplanes) or SB-
328J-11-209 (for Model 328-300 airplanes), both dated May 3, 2004,
as applicable.
    (2) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, modify
the hinge supports and support struts of the passenger doors, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dornier Service
Bulletin SB-328-52-460 (for Model 328-100 airplanes) or SB-328J-52-
213, (for Model 328-300 airplanes), both dated February 4, 2005, as
applicable.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:

 No differences.Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Airworthiness Directive 2007-0199, dated July 25, 2007 (corrected
July 26, 2007), and the service bulletins described in Table 1 of
this AD, for related information.

                      Table 1.--Service Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Dornier Service Bulletin                      Dated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB-328-11-454......................  May 3, 2004.
SB-328-52-460......................  February 4, 2005.
SB-328J-11-209.....................  May 3, 2004.
SB-328J-52-213.....................  February 4, 2005.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information specified in Table 2 of
this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.

              Table 2.--Material Incorporated by Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Dornier Service Bulletin                      Dated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB-328-11-454......................  May 3, 2004.
SB-328-52-460......................  February 4, 2005.
SB-328J-11-209.....................  May 3, 2004.
SB-328J-52-213.....................  February 4, 2005.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (Only the title page of these documents contains the revision
level and date of the documents.)
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact 328
Support Services GmbH, P.O. Box 1252, D-82231 Wessling, Federal
Republic of Germany.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or 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 June 26, 2008.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-15709 Filed 7-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P