1
.
6
4
6
0
,580
1
1
.
8
Mississippi
195
,389
9.
8
188,785
9
.
2
222,829
10.
6
230
,890
10.
9
251,450
1
1
.
8
2
4
1
,152
1
1
.
1
Missouri
434
,002
10.
6
502,586
1
1.
9
526,495
12.
5
508
,330
11.
9
579,825
1
3
.
4
6
2
7
,935
1
4
.
2
Montana
73,732
11.
4
78,547
1
1
.
8
9
7
,766
14.
5
76,242
11.
1
90,922
13
.
0
9
2
,065
1
2
.
6
Nebraska
106
,027
8.
7
106,309
8
.
4
134,251
10.
6
132
,872
10.
3
137,485
1
0
.
6
1
4
3
,333
1
0
.
8
Nevada
191
,582
13.
4
204,462
1
3.
3
201,143
12.
4
189
,390
11.
4
213,040
1
2
.
6
2
2
5
,997
1
2
.
6
New Hampshire
109
,430
12.
0
117,309
1
2.
5
132,599
13.
9
125
,421
12.
9
148,349
1
5
.
0
1
4
7
,998
1
4
.
7
New Jersey
542
,781
8.
7
610,724
9
.
4
757,385
11.
8
710
,625
10.
9
887,629
1
3
.
6
7
6
7
,067
1
1
.
7
New Mexico
124
,406
10.
0
141,099
1
0.
7
155,098
11.
7
142
,570
10.
5
202,131
1
4
.
7
2
0
8
,641
1
4
.
5
New York
1,475,831
10.
7
1
,603,109
1
1
.
0
1
,645,388
11.
5
1
,697,945
11.
7
2
,072,314
14
.
2
2,029,807
13.
8
North Carolina
595
,899
10.
1
624,605
1
0.
1
678,962
10.
9
720
,819
11.
3
843,869
1
3
.
2
6
6
0
,762
1
0
.
1
North Dakota
42,458
9.
2
42,783
9.
1
4
9,026
10.
3
48,224
10.
1
53,717
11
.
0
5
5
,518
1
1
.
1
Ohio
912
,891
10.
9
832,186
9
.
8
872,153
10.
3
931
,899
10.
8
1
,054,109
12
.
3
98
3,657
1
1
.
3
Oklahoma
229
,026
9.
2
259,907
1
0.
1
289,843
11.
2
309
,038
11.
8
353,966
1
3
.
4
3
5
8
,375
1
3
.
3
Oregon
301
,185
12.
1
335,009
1
2.
9
369,041
14.
0
395
,124
14.
7
442,292
1
6
.
3
4
2
7
,040
1
5
.
3
Pennsylvania
851
,019
9.
3
1
,007,466
1
0
.
7
1
,079,272
11.
5
1
,129,529
11.
9
1
,245,840
13
.
1
1,182,384
12.
3
Rhode Island
89,469
11.
7
98,047
1
2
.
1
104,562
12.
8
118
,314
14.
4
122,950
1
4
.
6
1
2
7
,118
1
5
.
3
South Carolina
300
,905
10.
4
322,915
1
0.
7
305,845
10.
0
316
,653
10.
1
375,526
1
1
.
8
3
6
1
,523
1
1
.
2
South Dakota
42,490
8.
0
42,124
7.
7
4
7,763
8.
6
60,240
10.
7
58,867
10
.
3
6
1
,705
1
0
.
5
Tennessee
435
,098
10.
4
406,008
9
.
3
531,158
12.
2
523
,609
11.
8
655,730
1
4
.
7
5
3
0
,403
1
1
.
6
Texas
1
,534,031
10.
5
1
,466,052
9.
6
1
,806,359
11.
6
1
,791,427
11.
3
2
,077,901
12
.
9
1,851,772
11.
2
Utah
144
,407
10.
3
157,803
1
0.
7
191,128
12.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25283-25285]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08615]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0674; FRL-10596-02-R6]

Oklahoma; Excess Emission and Malfunction Reporting Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA, the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Oklahoma
through the Secretary of Energy & Environment on November 7, 2016. The
revision was submitted in response to a finding of substantial
inadequacy and SIP call as published by EPA on June 12, 2015,
concerning excess emissions during periods of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction (SSM) events. EPA is approving the SIP revision and finds
that it corrects the inadequacies identified in Oklahoma's SIP in the
June 12, 2015 SIP call.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 26, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0674. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Shar, Regional Haze and
SO2 Section, EPA Region 6 Office, 1201 Elm Street, Suite
500, Dallas, Texas 75270,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Region 6 office may be closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed above if
you need alternative access to material indexed but not provided in the
docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.

I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our
February 3, 2023 (88 FR 7378) proposal. In that document we proposed to
approve a revision to the Oklahoma SIP submitted on November 7, 2016,
in response to EPA's national SIP call of June 12, 2015, concerning
excess emissions during periods of SSM. Specifically, we proposed to
approve the removal of EPA-approved Subchapter 9 Excess Emission and
Malfunction Reporting Requirements, sections OAC 252:100-9-1, OAC
252:100-9-2, 252:100-9-3(a) and (b), OAC 252:100-9-4, OAC 252:100-9-5,
and OAC 252:100-9-6 from the Oklahoma SIP. We also proposed to
determine that the November 7, 2016, SIP revision corrects the
substantial inadequacies with the Oklahoma SIP identified in the June
12, 2015 SIP call.

II. Response to Comments

    The public comment period for our proposed approval and
determination ended on March 6, 2022, and no adverse comments were
received. We received one comment supporting removal of sections OAC
252:100-9-1, OAC 252:100-9-2, 252:100-9-3(a) and (b), OAC 252:100-9-4,
OAC 252:100-9-5, and OAC 252:100-9-6 from the Oklahoma SIP. Therefore,
we are finalizing our approval action as proposed.

III. Impacts on Areas of Indian Country

    Section III of our February 3, 2023 (88 FR 7378) proposal discusses
in detail the background for EPA's October 1, 2020 approval of
Oklahoma's request under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (SAFETEA) to administer in certain
areas of Indian country (as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151) the State's
environmental regulatory programs that were previously approved by EPA
for areas outside of Indian country.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On December 22, 2021, the EPA proposed to withdraw and
reconsider the October 1, 2020, SAFETEA approval. See https://www.epa.gov/ok/proposed-withdrawal-and-reconsideration-and-supporting-information. The EPA expects to have further discussions
with tribal governments and the State of Oklahoma as part of this
reconsideration. The EPA also notes that the October 1, 2020,
approval is the subject of a pending challenge in federal court.
Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma v. Regan, No. 20-9635 (10th Cir.). The EPA
may make further changes to any approval of Oklahoma's program to
reflect the outcome of the proposed withdrawal and reconsideration
of the October 1, 2020, SAFETEA approval.

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

    As explained below, the EPA is finalizing a revision to the
Oklahoma SIP submitted by the State of Oklahoma on November 7, 2016.
More specifically, we are approving the removal of OAC 252:100-9-1, OAC
252:100-9-2, OAC 252:100-9-3(a) and (b), OAC 252:100-9-4, OAC 252:100-
9-5, and OAC 252:100-9-6 of Subchapter 9 Excess Emission and
Malfunction Reporting Requirements of the Oklahoma SIP. Consistent with
the D.C. Circuit's decision in ODEQ v. EPA and with EPA's October 1,
2020 SAFETEA approval, these SIP revisions will apply to all Indian
country within the State of Oklahoma, other than the excluded Indian
country lands.\2\ Because--per the State's request under SAFETEA--EPA's
October 1, 2020 approval does not displace any SIP authority previously
exercised by the State under the CAA as interpreted in ODEQ v. EPA, the
SIP will also apply to any Indian allotments or dependent Indian
communities located outside of an Indian reservation over which there
has been no demonstration of tribal authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As requested by Oklahoma, the EPA's approval under SAFETEA
does not include Indian country lands, including rights-of-way
running through the same, that: (1) Qualify as Indian allotments,
the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, under 18
U.S.C. 1151(c); (2) are held in trust by the United States on behalf
of an individual Indian or Tribe; or (3) are owned in fee by a
Tribe, if the Tribe (a) acquired that fee title to such land, or an
area that included such land, in accordance with a treaty with the
United States to which such Tribe was a party, and (b) never
allotted the land to a member or citizen of the Tribe (collectively
``excluded Indian country lands'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    The EPA is approving a revision to the Oklahoma SIP submitted on
November 7, 2016, in response to EPA's national SIP call of June 12,
2015, concerning excess emissions during periods of SSM. Specifically,
we are approving the removal of sections OAC 252:100-9-1, OAC 252:100-
9-2, 252:100-9-3(a) and (b), OAC 252:100-9-4, OAC 252:100-9-5, and OAC
252:100-9-6 of Subchapter 9 Excess Emission and Malfunction Reporting
Requirements from the Oklahoma SIP. We are approving these revisions in
accordance with section 110 of the Act. EPA is also determining that
this SIP revision corrects the deficiencies in Oklahoma's SIP
identified in the June 12, 2015 SIP call.

V. Environmental Justice Considerations

    As stated in the proposal and for informational purposes only, EPA
provided additional information regarding this action and potentially
impacted populations. EPA reviewed individual demographic data,
education level, and percent of people living below the poverty level
in Oklahoma and then compared the data to the national average.\3\ As
discussed in the proposal, this action is intended to ensure that all
communities and populations across Oklahoma, and downwind areas,
including people of color and low-income and indigenous populations
overburdened by pollution, receive the full human health and
environmental protection provided by the CAA through the removal of
director discretion provisions that have interfered with the
enforcement structure of the CAA by raising inappropriate impediments
to enforcement by states, the EPA, or citizens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section V, February 3, 2023 (88 FR 7380).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is removing the incorporation by reference of Subchapter
9 Excess Emission and Malfunction Reporting in 40 CFR 52.1960, as
described in the Final Action above. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for
removal from the Oklahoma SIP, have been removed from incorporation by
reference by EPA into that plan, are no longer federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and incorporation by reference will
be removed in the next update to the SIP compilation.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA.
     This approval of a revision to the Oklahoma SIP removing
provisions providing discretionary exemptions from excess emission
violations as discussed more fully in our proposal will apply to
certain areas of Indian country as discussed in the preamble, and
therefore has tribal implications as specified in E.O. 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). However, this action will neither impose
substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized tribal
governments, nor preempt tribal law. This action will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized tribal
governments because no actions will be required of tribal governments.
This action will also not preempt tribal law as no Oklahoma tribe
implements a regulatory program under the CAA, and thus does not have
applicable or related tribal laws. Consistent with the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), the EPA
held a virtual

consultation meeting with the Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma on
February 14, 2023, and provided additional information concerning this
action.
     Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to
identify and address ``disproportionately high and adverse human health
or environmental effects'' of their actions on minority populations and
low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted
by law. EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment
and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.'' The air agency did
not evaluate environmental justice considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA performed an
environmental justice analysis, as is described above in the section
titled, ``Environmental Justice Considerations.'' The analysis was done
for the purpose of providing additional context and information about
this rulemaking to the public, not as a basis of the action. Due to the
nature of the action being taken here, this action is expected to have
a neutral to positive impact on the air quality of the affected area by
removal of director discretion provisions of the Oklahoma SIP. In
addition, there is no information in the record upon which this
decision is based inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of
achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 26, 2023. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 17, 2023.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental Protection
Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as follows:

PART 52-APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart LL--Oklahoma

Sec.  52.1920  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  52.1920, the table in paragraph (c) entitled ``EPA Approved
Oklahoma Regulations'' is amended by removing the heading ``Subchapter
9 Excess Emission and Malfunction Reporting Requirements'' and the
entries for 252:100-9-1 through 252:100-9-6.

[FR Doc. 2023-08615 Filed 4-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26389-26391]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12135]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0503; Product Identifier 2018-NM-048-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; 328 Support Services GmbH (Type
Certificate Previously Held by AvCraft Aerospace GmbH; Fairchild
Dornier GmbH; Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
328 Support Services GmbH Model 328-100 and -300 airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports indicating corrosion on the
horizontal stabilizer bearing supports at the contact surface to the
horizontal stabilizer rear spar. This proposed AD would require
inspections for corrosion and any other damage (i.e., cracking and
chafing) of the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports,
replacement of the affected horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports
if necessary, and modification of the horizontal stabilizer rear spar.
We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact 328
Support Services GmbH, Global Support Center, P.O. Box 1252, D-82231
Wessling, Federal Republic of Germany; telephone +49 8153 88111 6666;
fax +49 8153 88111 6565; email [email protected]; internet http://www.328support.de. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0503; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0503;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-048-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2017-0239, dated November 30, 2017 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all 328 Support
Services GmbH Model 328-100 and -300 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported on horizontal stabilizer bearing
supports being found corroded at the contact surface to the
horizontal stabilizer rear spar. The corroded area was at the lower
flange position, which is connected to the stabilizer rear spar and
not visible without detachment of the fitting. Investigation
determined that the corrosion is triggered by galvanic effect, due
to a direct contact between the horizontal stabilizer rear spar,
made from CFRP (carbon fibre reinforced plastic), and the aluminium
rear attachment fitting.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
failure of the fitting and loss of one load path of the horizontal
stabilizer attachment, possibly resulting in reduced control of the
aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, 328 Support Services
GmbH (328 SSG) issued Service Bulletin (SB) SB-328-55-557 and SB-
328J-55-324 to provide instructions for inspection of the affected
area, replacement of the parts, and modification to improve
corrosion behaviour by incorporating of glass fibre layer.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time inspection [detailed visual inspection and an eddy current
inspection for chafing and corrosion] of the horizontal stabilizer
rear bearing supports, and, depending on findings, accomplishment of
applicable corrective action(s) [replacement of the affected
horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports]. This [EASA] AD also
requires a modification of the horizontal stabilizer rear spar,
irrespective of findings.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http:/
/

www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0503.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    328 Support Services GmbH has issued Service Bulletin SB-328-55-
557, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018; and Service Bulletin SB-328J-
55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018. This service information
describes a detailed visual inspection and an eddy current inspection
for corrosion and any other damage (i.e., cracking and chafing) of the
horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports, modification of the
horizontal stabilizer rear spar, and replacement of the affected
horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports if necessary. These
documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 27 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed visual inspection and eddy     4 work-hours x $85 per                $0            $340          $9,180
 current inspection.                     hour = $340.
Modification..........................  16 work-hours x $85 per                0           1,360          36,720
                                         hour = $1,360.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement
that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need
this replacement:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement...................................  24 work-hours x $85 per hour =               (*)          $2,040
                                                 $2,040.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide part cost estimates for the on-condition
  action specified in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 proposed
regulation:
    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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

39.13  [Amended]

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

328 Support Services GmbH (Type Certificate Previously Held by
AvCraft Aerospace GmbH; Fairchild Dornier GmbH; Dornier Luftfahrt
GmbH): Docket No. FAA-2018-0503; Product Identifier 2018-NM-048-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 23, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all 328 Support Services GmbH (Type
Certificate previously held by AvCraft Aerospace GmbH; Fairchild
Dornier GmbH; Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH) Model 328-100 and -300
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports indicating corrosion on the
horizontal stabilizer bearing supports at the contact surface to the
horizontal stabilizer rear spar. We are issuing this AD to address
corrosion on the horizontal stabilizer bearing supports and rear
spar, which could lead to failure of the fitting and loss of one
load path of the horizontal stabilizer attachment, and possibly
result in reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Modification

    (1) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or
(g)(3)(ii) of this AD, do a detailed visual inspection and an eddy
current inspection for corrosion and any other damage (i.e.,
cracking and chafing) of the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing
supports in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 328
Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1,
dated February 1, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support
Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated
February 1, 2018 (for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or
(g)(3)(ii) of this AD, modify the horizontal stabilizer rear spar in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 328 Support
Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated
February 1, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support
Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated
February 1, 2018 (for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable.
    (3) Do the actions in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) at the
applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or
(g)(3)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For Group 1 airplanes as identified in 328 Support Services
GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated February 1,
2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018
(for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable: Within 1,000 flight
cycles or 8 months, whichever occurs first after the effective date
of this AD.
    (ii) For Group 2 airplanes as identified in 328 Support Services
GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated February 1,
2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018
(for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable: Within 5,000 flight
hours or 30 months, whichever occurs first after the effective date
of this AD.

(h) Corrective Action

    If, during the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
corrosion or any other damage (i.e., cracking and chafing) is
detected, before further flight, replace the affected horizontal
stabilizer rear bearing supports in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of 328 Support Services GmbH Service
Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018 (for
Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH Service
Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018 (for
Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or
(i)(2) of this AD, no person may install a horizontal stabilizer
rear bearing support, part number 001B551A1441000, on any airplane.
    (1) For Group 1 airplanes as identified in 328 Support Services
GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated February 1,
2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018
(for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable: After replacement of
the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports as required by
paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (2) For Group 2 airplanes as identified in 328 Support Services
GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated February 1,
2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018
(for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable: As of the effective
date of this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-
328-55-557, dated September 1, 2017 (for Model 328-100 airplanes);
or 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, dated
September 1, 2017 (for Model 328-300 airplanes).

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. 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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or 328 Support Services GmbH's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2017-0239, dated November 30,
2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0503.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Todd Thompson,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 328
Support Services GmbH, Global Support Center, P.O. Box 1252, D-82231
Wessling, Federal Republic of Germany; telephone +49 8153 88111
6666; fax +49 8153 88111 6565; email [email protected]; internet
http://www.328support.de. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on May 24, 2018.
James Cashdollar,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-12135 Filed 6-6-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11447-11449]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03959]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0105; Notice 1]

BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC (BMW), a subsidiary of BMW AG, has
determined that certain model year (MY) 2019 BMW F750 GS and F850 GS
motorcycles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. BMW filed a noncompliance
report dated October 19, 2018. BMW subsequently petitioned NHTSA on
October 29, 2018, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is March 30, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket number and notice number cited in the title of this notice and
may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal Holidays.

     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Overview: BMW has determined that certain MY 2019 BMW F750 GS
and F850 GS motorcycles do not fully comply with paragraph S6.3 of
FMVSS No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). BMW filed a
noncompliance report dated October 19, 2018, pursuant to 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. BMW
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on October 29, 2018, for an exemption
from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301
on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates
to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt of BMW's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercises of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 604 MY 2019 BMW F750 GS and
F850 GS motorcycles, manufactured between June 21, 2018, and September
19, 2018, are potentially involved.
    III. Noncompliance: BMW explains that the noncompliance is that the
subject motorcycles are equipped with windscreens that do not comply
with paragraph S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205. Specifically, the subject
windscreens were marked with the AS4 marking instead of the AS6
marking.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205 includes the
requirements relevant to this petition. A manufacturer or distributor
who cuts a section of glazing material to which this standard applies,
for use in a motor vehicle or camper, must mark that material in
accordance with section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 and certify that its
product complies with this standard in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115.
    AS4 certified windscreens are rigid plastic and only for use on
certain locations, not including motorcycle windscreens and they are
not subject to a flexibility test, whereas AS6 marked windscreens are
subject to this test. AS6 certified windscreens are flexible plastic
and, unlike AS4 certified windscreens, can be used as a motorcycle
windscreen. Additionally, AS6 certified windscreens are not required to
be subject to an impact test or an abrasion test, whereas, AS4
certified windscreens are.
    V. Summary of BMW's Petition: BMW described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, BMW submitted the following reasoning:
    1. FMVSS No. 205 Section 2 (Purpose) states, ``The purpose of this
standard is to reduce injuries resulting from impact to glazing
surfaces, to ensure a necessary degree of transparency in motor vehicle
windows for driver visibility, and to minimize the possibility of
occupants being thrown through the vehicle windows in collisions.''
    2. Potentially affected vehicles conform to all of the FMVSS No.
205 performance requirements. Therefore, they satisfy the stated
purpose of FMVSS No. 205 regarding (a) injury reduction, and (b) rider
visibility.
    3. Potentially affected vehicles conform to all the FMVSS No. 205
performance requirements. Therefore, there are no safety performance
implications associated with this potential noncompliance.
    4. BMW has not received any contacts from vehicle owners regarding
this issue. Therefore, BMW is unaware of any vehicle owners that have
encountered this issue.
    5. BMW is unaware of any accidents or injuries that may have
occurred as a result of this issue.
    6. NHTSA has previously granted petitions for inconsequential
noncompliance regarding FMVSS No. 205 involving marking of window
glazing. BMW believes that its petition is similar to other
manufacturers' petitions in which NHTSA has granted approval. Examples
of similar petitions, in which NHTSA has granted approval, include the
following:
     Ford Motor Company, 80 FR 11259 (March 2, 2015).
     Ford Motor Company, 78 FR 32531 (May 30, 2013).
     Ford Motor Company, 64 FR 70115 (December 15, 1999).
     General Motors, LLC, 79 FR 23402 (September 25, 2015).
     General Motors, LLC, 70 FR 49973 (August 25, 2005).
     Toyota Motor North America Inc., 68 FR 10307 (March 4,
2003).
     Fuji Heavy Industries USA, Inc., 78 FR 59088 (September
25, 2013).
     Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., 80 FR 72482 (August
22, 2015).
     Pilkington North America, Inc., 78 FR 22942 (April 17,
2003).
     Supreme Corporation, 81 FR 72850 (October 21, 2016).
     Custom Glass Solutions Upper Sandusky Corp., 80 FR 3737
(January 23, 2015).
    7. Vehicle production has been corrected to conform to FMVSS No.
205 S6.
    8. BMW also provided a copy of the FMVSS No. 205 Certification
Report from AIB-Vincotte International N.V.
    BMW's complete petition and all supporting documents are available
by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at:
https://www.regulations.gov and following the online search
instructions to locate the docket number listed in the title of this
notice.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to

exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a
defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance.
Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject
vehicles that BMW no longer controlled at the time it determined that
the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does
not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the
sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control
after BMW notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-03959 Filed 2-26-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 183 (Monday, September 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56577-56578]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22475]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9916-98-Region 10]

Re-Proposal of the NPDES General Permit for Oil and Gas
Geotechnical Surveying and Related Activities in Federal Waters of the
Beaufort and Chukchi Seas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Reopening of public comment period for the re-proposal of the
Geotechnical General Permit.

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

SUMMARY: On August 15, 2014, EPA provided public notice on the re-
proposal of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Oil and Gas Geotechnical Surveys and Related
Activities in Federal Waters of the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas (Permit
No. AKG-28-4300), and established a comment deadline of September 15,
2014. In response to a request from the Alaska Eskimo Whaling
Commission to reopen the comment period deadline, EPA is reopening the
comment period to September 30, 2014.

DATES: Comments. The public comment period for the Geotechnical General
Permit re-proposal is reopened until September 30, 2014. EPA will only
consider comments on the re-proposed permit provisions. Comments
submitted previously on the initial draft Geotechnical General Permit
need not be resubmitted; comments addressing permit provisions or
issues beyond the scope of this re-proposal will not be considered.
Comments must be received by or post-marked no later than midnight
Pacific Standard Time on September 30, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods.
Include your name, address, telephone number, the General Permit number
(AKG-28-4300) and a concise statement of the basis and facts supporting
the comment.
    Mail: Send paper comments to Erin Seyfried, Office of Water and
Watersheds, Mail Stop OWW-130, 1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA
98101-3140.
    Email: Send electronic comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Fax: Fax comments to the attention of Erin Seyfried at (206) 553-
0165.
    Hand Delivery/Courier: Deliver comments to Erin Seyfried, Office of
Water and Watersheds, Mail Stop OWW-191, 1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900,
Seattle, WA 98101-3140. Call<PHONE_NUMBER> before delivery to verify
business hours.
    Viewing and/or Obtaining Copies of Documents. A copy of the re-
proposed Geotechnical General Permit, the Fact Sheet, which explains
the proposal in detail, and the revised Ocean Discharge Criteria
Evaluation (ODCE) may be obtained by contacting EPA at 1 (800) 424-
4372. Copies of the documents are also available for viewing and
downloading at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/water.nsf/npdes+permits/DraftPermitsAK http://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/water.nsf/npdes+permits/arctic-gp
    See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for other document viewing locations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Seyfried, Office of Water and
Watersheds, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Mail Stop
OWW-191, 1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101-3140, (206) 553-
1448<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA seeks public comment only on the
following proposed changes: (1) Inclusion of seasonal prohibitions on
wastewater discharges specific to the 3-25 mile lease deferral area in
the Chukchi Sea; (2) Clarification of drilling fluid testing
requirements (Discharge 001); (3) Clarification of Environmental
Monitoring Program requirements and inclusion of language regarding
pre-existing baseline data; (4) Revision of sampling frequencies for
fecal coliform and total residual chlorine (Sanitary Wastewater,
Discharge 003); and (5)

Clarification of Notice of Intent submission requirements.
    Document Viewing Locations.
    (1) EPA Region 10 Library, Park Place Building, 1200 6th Avenue,
Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) EPA Region 10, Alaska Operations Office, 222 W 7th Avenue,
19, Room 537, Anchorage, AK 99513;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Z. J. Loussac Public Library, 3600 Denali Street, Anchorage, AK
99503;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) North Slope Borough School District Library/Media Center, Pouch
169, 829 Aivak Street, Barrow, AK 99723;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    EPA's current administrative record for the draft and re-proposed
Geotechnical General Permit is available for review at the EPA Region
10 Office, Park Place Building, 1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA
98101, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Contact
Erin Seyfried at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Oil Spill Requirements. Section 311 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1321,
prohibits the discharge of oil and hazardous materials in harmful
quantities. Discharges authorized under the Geotechnical General Permit
are excluded from the provisions of CWA Section 311, 33 U.S.C. 1321.
However, the Geotechnical General Permit will not preclude the
institution of legal action, or relieve the permittees from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties for other unauthorized
discharges of oil and hazardous materials, which are covered by Section
311.
    Executive Order 12866. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
exempts this action from the review requirements of Executive Order
12866 pursuant to Section 6 of that order.
    Paperwork Reduction Act. EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed
on regulated facilities in the Geotechnical General Permit and finds
them consistent with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., a federal agency must prepare an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis ``for any proposed rule'' for which the
agency ``is required by section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA), or any other law, to publish general notice of proposed
rulemaking.'' The RFA exempts from this requirement any rule that the
issuing agency certifies ``will not, if promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' EPA has
concluded that NPDES general permits are permits, not rulemakings,
under the APA and thus not subject to APA rulemaking requirements or
the FRA. Notwithstanding that general permits are not subject to the
RFA, EPA has determined that the Geotechnical General Permit will not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This determination is based on the fact that the regulated companies
are not classified as small businesses under the Small Business
Administration regulations established at 49 FR 5023 et seq. (February
9, 1984). These facilities are classified as Major Group 13--Oil as Gas
Extraction SIC 1311 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas.

    Authority: This action is taken under the authority of Section
402 of the Clean Water Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1342. I hereby
provide notice that the public comment period for the Geotechnical
General Permit re-proposal is reopened until September 30, 2014, in
accordance with 40 CFR 124.10 and 124.13.

    Dated: September 12, 2014.
Christine Psyk,
Associate Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2014-22475 Filed 9-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 43962]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17564]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Meeting: RTCA Program Management Committee

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

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Program Management Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Program Management Committee.

DATES: The meeting will be held August 12, from 10:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a Program Management Committee meeting. The agenda
will include the following:

Aug 12, 2013

 Welcome and Introductions.
 Review/Approve Meeting Summary.
     June 19, 2013, RTCA Paper no. 137-13/PMC-1106
 Action Item Review
     SC-214--Standards for Air Traffic Data Communication
Services-Discussion-Review/Approve Terms of Reference Revision 5-RTCA
Paper No. 134-13/PMC-1103.
     Include 4D trajectory with dynamic RNP, fixed radius
transitions, advanced interval management, and transmission of ATC
winds into the operational capabilities of the message set for Baseline
2.
     Extend the completion dates from January 2014 to March
2015 for Baseline 2-Interoperability Standards.
 Other Business.
 Schedule for Committee Deliverables and Next Meeting Date.
 Adjourn.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting.
    Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the
committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 28, 2013.
Paige Williams,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Business Operations Group, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-17564 Filed 7-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 7, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9555-9558]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02475]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0032; FRL-9956-86]

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces EPA's receipt of several initial
filings of

pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 9, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the Docket
Identification (ID) Number and the Pesticide Petition Number (PP) of
interest as shown in the body of this document, by one of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert McNally, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) (7511P), main telephone number:
(703) 305-7090, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Michael
Goodis, Registration Division (RD) (7505P), main telephone number:
(703) 305-7090, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The mailing address
for each contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's
name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the
end of each pesticide petition summary.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for the division listed at the end of the
pesticide petition summary of interest.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, EPA
seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a
result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may
have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health
impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in
or on various food commodities. EPA is taking public comment on the
requests before responding to the petitioners. EPA is not proposing any
particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the pesticide
petitions described in this document contain the data or information
prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however,
EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at
this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide
petitions. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to
evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may
be needed before EPA can make a final determination on these pesticide
petitions.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions
that are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket
for each of the petitions is available at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA
is publishing notice of the petitions so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on these requests for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petitions may be obtained
through the petition summaries referenced in this unit.
New Tolerances
    1. PP 6E8495. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0661). Taminco US LLC, a subsidiary
of Eastman Chemical Company, Two Windsor Plaza, Suite 400, 7540 Windsor
Dr., Allentown, PA 18195, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of the plant regulator chlormequat chloride in or
on barley grain at 3 parts per million (ppm); bovine, sheep, goat-fat
at 0.06 ppm; bovine, sheep, goat-kidney at 0.5 ppm; bovine, sheep,
goat-liver at 0.15 ppm; bovine, sheep, goat-muscle at 0.2 ppm; cattle-
milk at 0.5 ppm; eggs at 0.1 ppm; oat grain at 15 ppm; poultry-fat at
0.03 ppm; poultry-liver at 0.1 ppm; poultry-muscle at 0.04 ppm; swine-
fat at 0.02 ppm; swine-kidney at 0.5 ppm; swine-liver at 0.15 ppm;
swine-muscle at 0.2 ppm; and wheat grain at 4 ppm. The Liquid
Chromatography with tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method is used
to measure and evaluate the chemical chlormequat chloride. Contact: RD.
    2. PP 6F8445. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0254). Syngenta Crop Protection,
LLC,

P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.475 for residues of the fungicide difenoconazole in or on
cottonseed subgroup 20C at 0.40 ppm; rice, grain at 7 ppm; and rice,
wild, grain at 7 ppm. Gas chromatography equipped with a nitrogen-
phosphorous detector or liquid chromatography (LC)/mass spectrometry
(MS)/(MS) is used to measure and evaluate the chemical difenoconazole.
Contact: RD.
    3. PP 6F8457. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0263). ISK Biosciences Corporation,
7470 Auburn Rd., Suite A, Concord, OH, 44077, requests to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.681 for residues of the fungicide isofetamid
in or on apple, wet pomace, at 2.0 ppm; bushberry, subgroup 13-07B at
6.0 ppm; caneberry, subgroup 13-07A at 3.0 ppm; cattle fat and meat
byproducts at 0.01 ppm; cherry subgroup 12-12A at 5.0 ppm; fruit, pome
group 11-10 at 0.6 ppm; fruit, small vine climbing, except grape,
subgroup 13-07E at 9.0 ppm; goat fat and meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm;
horse fat and meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C, except cowpea and field pea at 0.05 ppm;
pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B, except cowpea at 0.04
ppm; peach, subgroup 12-12B at 3.0 ppm; plum, prune, dried at 3.5 ppm;
plum subgroup 12-12C at 0.8 ppm; sheep fat and meat byproducts at 0.01
ppm; and vegetable, legume edible podded, subgroup 6A at 1.5 ppm. The
LC-MS/MS method is used to measure and evaluate the chemical
isofetamid, N-[1,1-dimethyl-2-[2-methyl-4-(1-methylethoxy)phenyl]-2-
oxoethyl]-3-methyl-2-thiophenecarboxamide (CA), and its metabolite
GPTC, N-[1,l-dimethyl-2-(4-[beta]-D-glucopyranosyloxy-2-methylphenyl)-
2-oxoethyl]-3-methyl-2-thiophenecarboxamide, expressed as isofetamid.
Contact: RD
    4. PP 6F8474. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0775). Syngenta Crop Protection,
LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide
pydiflumetofen in or on Barley, grain at 4.0 ppm; Barley, hay at 30.0
ppm; Barley, straw at 30.0 ppm; Corn, field, grain at 0.015 ppm; Corn,
field, forage at 6.0 ppm; Corn, field, stover at 15.0 ppm; Corn, field,
milled by products at 0.06 ppm; Corn, pop, grain at 0.015 ppm; Corn,
pop, forage at 6.0 ppm; Corn, pop, stover at 15.0 ppm; Corn, sweet, ear
at 0.01 ppm; Corn, sweet, forage at 5.0 ppm; Corn, sweet, stover at 9.0
ppm; Corn, sweet, cannery waste at 2.0 ppm; Crop Subgroup 4-15A, Leafy
greens subgroup at 40.0 ppm; Crop Subgroup 22B, Leaf petiole vegetable
subgroup at 15.0 ppm; Fruits, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwi
subgroup 13-07F at 1.5 ppm; Grape, raisin at 2.0 ppm; Grape, wet pomace
at 1.5 ppm; Grain, aspirated fractions at 100.0 ppm; Grain, cereal,
forage, fodder and straw, group 16 at 50 ppm; Oat, grain at 2.0 ppm;
Oat, forage at 10.0 ppm; Oat, hay at 40.0 ppm; Oat, straw at 20.0 ppm;
Peas and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C at 0.4 ppm;
Peas, hay at 40.0 ppm; Peas, vine at 6.0 ppm; Peanut, nutmeat at 0.02
ppm; Peanut, refined oil at 0.05 ppm; Peanut, hay at 20.0 ppm; Potato,
wet peel at 0.03 ppm; Potato, dried pulp at 0.05 ppm; Potato, processed
waste at 0.03 ppm; Quinoa, grain at 4.0 ppm; Rapeseed, subgroup 20A at
0.9 ppm; Rye, grain at 4.0 ppm; Rye, hay at 50.0 ppm; Rye, straw at
30.0 ppm; Soybean, seed at 0.4 ppm; Soybean, forage at 30.0 ppm;
Soybean, hay at 150 ppm; Tomato, dried pomace at 15.0 ppm; Tomato, wet
pomace at 1.5 ppm; Tomato, sun-dried at 3.0 ppm; Vegetables, fruiting,
crop group 8-10 at 0.6 ppm; Vegetables, tuberous and corm subgroup 1C
at 0.015 ppm; Vegetables, cucurbit, crop group 9 at 0.5 ppm; Wheat,
grain at 0.3 ppm; Wheat, forage at 15.0 ppm; Wheat, hay at 50.0 ppm;
and Wheat, straw at 30.0 ppm. The method GRM061.03A is used to measure
and evaluate the chemical pydiflumetofen. Contact: RD.
    5. PP 6F8474. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0775). Syngenta Crop Protection,
LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide
pydiflumetofen in or on cattle, fat at 0.03 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.02
ppm; cattle, liver at 0.04 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.02 ppm; cattle,
byproducts at 0.04 ppm; goat, fat at 0.03 ppm; goat, kidney at 0.02
ppm; goat, liver at 0.04 ppm; goat, meat at 0.02 ppm; goat, meat
byproducts at 0.04 ppm; horse, fat at 0.03 ppm; horse, kidney at 0.02
ppm; horse, liver at 0.04 ppm; horse, meat at 0.02 ppm; horse, meat
byproducts at 0.04 ppm; milk at 0.02 ppm; milk, cream at 0.04 ppm;
sheep, fat at 0.03 ppm; sheep, kidney at 0.02 ppm; sheep, liver at 0.04
ppm; sheep, meat at 0.02 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts at 0.04 ppm.
The method GRM061.07A for animal products is used to measure and
evaluate the chemicals pydiflumetofen and 2,4,6 trichlorophenol (free
and conjugated) for the purposes of post-registration monitoring.
Contact: RD.
Amended Tolerance
    1. PP 6F8445. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0254). Syngenta Crop Protection,
LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, requests to amend the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.475 for residues of the fungicide
difenoconazole in or on cotton, gin byproducts to 15 ppm. Gas
chromatography equipped with a nitrogen-phosphorous detector or liquid
chromatography (LC)/mass spectrometry (MS)/(MS) is used to measure and
evaluate the chemical difenoconazole (1-[2-[2-chloro-4-(4-
chlorophenoxy)phenyl]-4-methyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-ylmethyl]-1H-1,2,4-
triazole). Contact: RD.
New Tolerance Exemptions
    1. PP IN-10964. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0507). Lewis & Harrison, LLC, 122
C St. NW., Suite 505, Washington, DC 20001 (on behalf of Wacker Chemie
AG, Hanns-Seidel-Platz 4, D-81737 Munich, Germany), requests to
establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues
of [beta]-cyclodextrin, methyl ethers (CAS Reg. No. 128446-36-6) when
used as a pesticide inert ingredient (stabilizing agent, solvent) at a
concentration of not more than 40% by weight in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops under 40 CFR 180.920. The petitioner believes
no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
    2. PP IN-10981. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0616). Spring Trading Company,
LLC, on behalf of BASF Corporation, 100 Park Ave., Florham Park, NJ
07932, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of polyethyleneimine (CAS Reg. No. 9002-98-6)
when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops or to raw agricultural commodities after
harvest under 40 CFR 180.910. The petitioner believes no analytical
method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
    3. PP 6F8490. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0687). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis
Dr., P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to
establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of the fungicide Bacillus subtilis strain BU1814
in or on all food commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical
method is needed because it is expected that, when used as proposed,
Bacillus subtilis strain BU1814 would not result in residues in or on
food that are of toxicological concern. Contact: BPPD.
    4. PP 6F8508. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0641). Technology Sciences Group,
Inc., 1150 18th St. NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036 (on behalf of
Bee Vectoring Technology, Inc., 4160 Sladeview Crescent #7,
Mississauga,

Ontario L5L 0A1, Canada), requests to establish an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the
fungicide Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 in or on all food commodities.
The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is
expected that, when used as proposed, Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7
would not result in residues that are of toxicological concern.
Contact: BPPD.

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 346a.

    Dated: December 28, 2016.
Robert McNally,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2017-02475 Filed 2-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 246)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 78173-78175]
[DOCID:fr22de08-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0842; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-24-AD;
Amendment 39-15771; AD 2008-26-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier-Rotax GmbH 914 F Series
Reciprocating Engines

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) issued 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:

    Occurrence of cracks in the exhaust muffler in the area of the
exhaust bottom and exhaust flange were reported, which could lead to
toxic contamination inside the cabin.

    We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products, which could result in carbon monoxide
contamination in the cockpit, which can adversely affect the pilot, and
possibly result in loss of control of the aircraft.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 26, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Woldan, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park; Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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 September 12, 2008
(73 FR 52932). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. The MCAI states that:

    Occurrence of cracks in the exhaust muffler in the area of the
exhaust bottom and exhaust flange were reported, which could lead to
toxic contamination inside the cabin.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Suggestion To Pressurize the Muffler With Air To Detect Leaks

    One commenter, a private citizen, suggests that we change the
proposed AD to inspect for cracks by pressurizing the muffler with air
and using a soap solution to detect leaks. The commenter states that
this method would detect finer cracks than just a visual inspection
would find.
    We partially agree. The suggested inspection is likely more
sensitive, but the visual inspections specified in the

proposed AD are sensitive enough to detect an exhaust leak that could
create an unsafe condition. However, operators can request approval to
use another inspection method instead of using the method specified in
the AD, by requesting approval of an alternative method of compliance
(AMOC). We did not change the AD.

Request To Allow Repair of a Cracked Muffler

    The same commenter requests that we change the proposed AD to allow
the repair of a cracked muffler instead of replacing the muffler. The
commenter infers that this would be more cost effective.
    We disagree. The cracks occurring in the mufflers are in weld areas
that were part of the original manufacturing process. The muffler
manufacturing process was changed to correct the cracking problem. A
repair in the area of the original weld might not correct the unsafe
condition and could make the muffler more susceptible to future
cracking, thereby requiring continued inspections. However, operators
can request approval of an AMOC for a muffler repair method, but
operators would have to address the repair concerns mentioned
previously. We did not change the AD.

Suggestion To Install a Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detector in the Cockpit

    The same commenter suggests that operators install a CO detector in
the cockpit to identify presence of harmful levels of CO. The commenter
infers that this would provide an additional level of protection.
    We disagree. The inspections specified in the proposed AD are
adequate to detect an exhaust leak that could create an unsafe
condition. Also, maintenance checks of the CO detector would be
required to ensure its correct operation, if it was being relied on as
a method to prevent the unsafe condition. We did not change the AD.

Conclusion

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 75 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
will take about 2 work-hours per product to comply with this AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about
$1,674 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the
AD on U.S. operators to be $137,550. Our cost estimate is exclusive of
possible warranty coverage.

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 this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is provided 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, 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:

2008-26-05 Bombardier-Rotax GmbH: (Formerly Rotax GmbH): Amendment
39-15771. Docket No. FAA-2008-0842; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-
24-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January
26, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier-Rotax GmbH 914 F series
reciprocating engines with engine exhaust muffler, part number (P/N)
979402 or 979404, with serial numbers (SNs) listed in Table 1 of
this AD, installed. These engines are installed on, but not limited
to, Aeromot-Industria Mecanico Metalurgica, AMT-300 (Turbo Ximango
Shark), Diamond Aircraft Industries, HK 36 TTS, HK 36 TTC, HK 36
TTC-ECO, and Stemme GmbH & Co. KG, S10-VT series powered sailplanes.

        Table 1--Affected Exhaust Mufflers by Group, P/N, and SN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Group                   P/N                    SN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A......................          979402  02.0001 through 02.0322,
                                              03.0002, 03.0005, 03.0011,
                                              03.0015, 03.0017, 03.0028,
                                              03.0029, 03.0037, 03.0038,
                                              03.0040, 03.0050, 03.0069,
                                              03.0072, 03.0073, 03.0078,
                                              03.0080 through 03.0086,
                                              03.0088 through 03.0090,
                                              03.0092 through 03.0101,
                                              03.0103, and 03.0108.
(2) B......................          979402  03.0001, 03.0003, 03.0004,
                                              03.0006, 03.0007 through
                                              03.0010, 03.0012 through
                                              03.0014, 03.0016, 03.0018
                                              through 03.0027, 03.0030
                                              through 03.0036, 03.0039,
                                              03.0041 through 03.0049,
                                              03.0051 through 03.0068,
                                              03.0070, 03.0071, 03.0074
                                              through 03.0077, 03.0079,
                                              03.0087, 03.0091, 03.0102,
                                              and 03.0104 through
                                              03.0107.
                                     979404  03.0200 through 04.0799.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reason

    (d) Occurrence of cracks in the exhaust muffler in the area of
the exhaust bottom and exhaust flange were reported, which could
lead to toxic contamination inside the cabin.

    We are issuing this AD to prevent carbon monoxide contamination
in the cockpit, which can adversely affect the pilot, and possibly
result in loss of control of the aircraft.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the
actions have already been done.

Initial Visual Inspection

Group A Exhaust Mufflers

    (f) For exhaust mufflers specified in Group A of Table 1 of this
AD, within 50 hours of operation after the effective date of this
AD, do the following:
    (1) Perform a visual inspection around the fillet weld of the
exhaust inlet flange and around the weld of the exhaust outlet for
evidence of leakage or cracks. Information on inspecting the exhaust
muffler can be found in Bombardier-Rotax GmbH 914 F Service Bulletin
(SB) No. SB-914-028 R1, dated November 8, 2004.
    (2) If you see evidence of an exhaust leak or cracks, replace
the exhaust muffler.

Group B Exhaust Mufflers

    (g) For exhaust mufflers specified in Group B of Table 1 of this
AD, within 50 hours of operation after the effective date of this
AD, do the following:
    (1) Perform a visual inspection around the weld of the exhaust
outlet for evidence of leakage or cracks. Information on inspecting
the exhaust muffler can be found in Bombardier-Rotax GmbH 914 F
Service Bulletin No. SB-914-028 R1, dated November 8, 2004.
    (2) If you see evidence of an exhaust leak or cracks, replace
the exhaust muffler.

Repetitive Visual Inspections

    (h) Within 50 hours of operation since the last inspection,
perform the actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(2)
and (g)(1) through (g)(2) of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    (i) None.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (k) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2006-0127, dated
May 18, 2006, and Bombardier-Rotax GmbH 914 F Service Bulletin No.
SB-914-028 R1, dated November 8, 2004, for related information.
Contact Bombardier-Rotax GmbH, Gunskirchen, Austria; telephone:
7246-601-423; fax: 7246-601-760, or go to: http://www.rotax-
aircraft-engines.com, for a copy of this service bulletin.
    (l) Contact Richard Woldan, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park; Burlington, MA 01803; telephone (781) 238-
7136; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information about this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (m) None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 11, 2008.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-30049 Filed 12-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P