[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9475-9477]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03690]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0106; FRL-9527-01-R9]

Air Plan Approval; Nevada; Clark County Department of Environment
and Sustainability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Clark County Department of Environment and
Sustainability (DES) portion of the Nevada State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions concern the title change of the Clark County
Department of Air Quality to the Department of Environment and
Sustainability. We are proposing to approve this title change. The
``department of air quality'' was deleted in the air quality
regulations and replaced with ``department.'' We are taking comments on
this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by March 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0106 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or by
email at [email protected].

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?

    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by Clark County DES and submitted by the Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Local agency                  Rule No.                  Rule title             Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DES.......................  Rule 2...................  Procedures for Adoption           1/21/20         3/13/20
                                                        and Revision of
                                                        Regulations and for
                                                        Inclusion of those
                                                        Regulations in the State
                                                        Implementation Plan.
DES.......................  Rule 33..................  Chlorine in Chemical              1/21/20         3/13/20
                                                        Processes.
DES.......................  Rule 41..................  Fugitive Dust............         1/21/20         3/13/20
DES.......................  Rule 53..................  Oxygenated Gasoline               1/21/20         3/13/20
                                                        Program.
DES.......................  Rule 90..................  Fugitive Dust from Open           1/21/20         3/13/20
                                                        Areas and Vacant Lots.
DES.......................  Rule 93..................  Fugitive Dust from Paved          1/21/20         3/13/20
                                                        Roads and Street
                                                        Sweeping Equipment.
DES.......................  Rule 94..................  Permitting and Dust               1/21/20         3/13/20
                                                        Control for Construction
                                                        Activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 13, 2020, the submitted rules in Table 1 were deemed
to be complete by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in
40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 2 into the SIP on August 27,
1981 (46 FR 43141). The Clark County DES adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us on
March 13, 2020.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 33 into the SIP on September
7, 2004 (69 FR 54006). The Clark County DES adopted a revision to the
SIP-approved version on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us
on March 13, 2020.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 41 into the SIP on October
6, 2014 (79 FR 60078). The Clark County DES adopted a revision to the
SIP-approved version on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us
on March 13, 2020.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 53 into the SIP on September
21, 2004 (69 FR 56351). The Clark County DES adopted a revision to the
SIP-approved version on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us
on March 13, 2020.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 90 into the SIP on October
6, 2014 (79 FR 60078). The Clark County DES adodpted a revision to the
SIP-approved version on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us
on March 13, 2020.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 93 into the SIP on October
6, 2014 (79 FR 60078). The Clark County DES adopted a revision to the
SIP-approved version on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us
on March 13, 2020.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 94 into the SIP on October
30, 2006 (71 FR 63250). The Clark County DES adopted a revision to the
SIP-approved vesion on January 21, 2020, and NDEP submitted it to us on
March 13, 2020.
    While we can act on only the most recently submitted version, we
have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

    The purpose of these submitted rule revisions is to delete ``the
department of air quality'' everywhere it appears in the submitted
rules and replacing it with ``department'' and to update formatting.
    The EPA's technical support document (TSD) and submitted staff
report have more information about these rules.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?

    Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)),
must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment
and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA
section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements
in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions
reductions (see CAA section 193).
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:

    1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,''
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January
11, 1990).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    These rules are consistent with CAA requirements and relevant
guidance regarding enforceability. The TSD has more information on our
evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rules because they fulfill all relevant
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
until March 24, 2022. If we take final action to approve the submitted
rules, our final action will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this proposed rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final
EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference the Clark County DES rules described in Table
1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
materials available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed 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 Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: February 15, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2022-03690 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


MEMORANDUM

DATE:		8/5/14

TO:		Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602

FROM:	Ray Saracino, EPA

SUBJECT:	July 24, 2014, Meeting Regarding Proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY

      EPA participated in a meeting organized by the Navajo Nation on July 24, 2014.  EPA provided a brief overview of the Clean Power Plan proposal for Existing Power Plants. The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.        ATTENDEES

A specific list of attendees is not available.  Approximately 75 people from Navajo Nation, industry and environmental organizations were present.  Colleen McKaughan presented on behalf of EPA.

Attachment


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58066-58070]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23575]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0726; Product Identifier 2019-NM-102-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400
series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of wear on
fuel couplings, bonding springs, and sleeves as well as fuel tube end
ferrules and fuel component end ferrules. This proposed AD would
require repetitive inspections of certain parts for discrepancies that
meet specified criteria, and replacement as necessary; repetitive
inspections of certain parts for damage and wear, and rework of parts;
and electrical bonding checks of certain couplings. This proposed AD
would also require revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations. For certain airplanes, this proposed AD
would allow a modification that would terminate the repetitive
inspections. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by December
16, 2019.

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 De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123
Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-
4000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://dehavilland.com. 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-2019-
0726; 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 NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Catanzaro, 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_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites 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-2019-0726;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-102-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2017-04R2, dated
September 25, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model
DHC-8-400 series airplanes.
    The FAA has received reports of wear on fuel couplings, bonding
springs, and sleeves as well as fuel tube end ferrules and fuel
component end ferrules. The FAA is proposing this AD to address such
wear, which could reduce the integrity of the electrical bonding paths
through the fuel line and components, and ultimately lead to fuel tank
ignition in the event of a lightning strike. See the MCAI for more
information.
    The FAA issued a related NPRM that proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39
by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model
DHC-8-400 series airplanes. The related NPRM published in the Federal
Register on July 6, 2018 (83 FR 31488). The related NPRM was also
prompted by reports of wear on fuel couplings, bonding springs, and
sleeves as well as fuel tube end ferrules and fuel component end
ferrules. Since the

related NPRM was issued, Bombardier developed a new optional
terminating modification for certain Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes
and issued associated service information. In addition, Bombardier
developed new airworthiness limitations related to the identified
unsafe condition. In light of these changes, the FAA has withdrawn the
related NPRM as of August 28, 2018 (84 FR 45119), and is now issuing
this new NPRM for public comment.
    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-2019-
0726.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision D, dated
November 23, 2018. This service information describes procedures for
repetitive detailed inspections of the clamshell coupling bonding
wires, fuel couplings, and associated sleeves for discrepancies (wear
and damage, including discoloration, worn coating, scuffing and
grooves) that meet specified criteria, and replacement. This service
information also describes procedures for repetitive detailed
inspections for damage and wear of the fuel tube end ferrules, fuel
component end ferrules, and ferrule O-ring flanges, and rework of
parts.
    Bombardier has also issued Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision C,
dated July 13, 2018. This service information describes procedures for
a detailed inspection for damage and wear of the fuel tube end
ferrules, fuel component end ferrules, and ferrule O-ring flanges;
rework (repair, replacement, or blending, as applicable) of parts; and
a retrofit (structural rework) of the fuel couplings, isolators, and
structural provisions.
    Bombardier has also issued Service Bulletin 84-28-26, Revision A,
dated November 29, 2018. This service information describes procedures
for electrical bonding checks of all threaded couplings on the inboard
vent lines in the left and right wings.
    Bombardier has also issued Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) Temporary
Revision ALI-00AS, dated April 24, 2018; and Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier)
Temporary Revision ALI-00AT, dated April 24, 2018. This service
information describes airworthiness limitations for fuel tank systems.
These documents are distinct since they describe different
airworthiness limitations.
    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

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to a bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD
because the agency evaluated all the relevant information and
determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist
or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the
clamshell coupling bonding wires, fuel couplings, and associated
sleeves for discrepancies that meet specified criteria, and replacement
as necessary; repetitive inspections of the fuel tube end ferrules,
fuel component end ferrules, and ferrule O-ring flanges for damage and
wear, and rework of parts; and electrical bonding checks of all
threaded couplings on the inboard vent lines in the left and right
wings. This proposed AD would also require revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and
Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs). Compliance
with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph
(p)(1) of this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 52 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
268 work-hours x $85 per hour = $22,780......................              $0          $22,780       $1,184,560
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for revising the maintenance or inspection program.

    The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although this
number may vary from operator to operator. In the past, the FAA has
estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since
operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for
their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator
estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the
FAA estimates the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x
$85 per work-hour).

                  Estimated Costs for Optional Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
525 work-hours x $85 per hour =                $20,906          $65,531
 $44,625..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required or optional actions. The FAA has no way of determining the
number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
174 work-hours x $85 per hour =                $16,767          $31,557
 $14,790..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    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 and associated appliances to the
Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA 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) 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 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

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate previously
held by Bombardier, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2019-0726; Product
Identifier 2019-NM-102-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by December 16, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model
DHC-8-400, -401 and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category,
manufacturer serial numbers 4001, 4003, and subsequent.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of wear on fuel couplings,
bonding springs, and sleeves as well as fuel tube end ferrules and
fuel component end ferrules. The FAA is proposing this AD to address
such wear, which could reduce the integrity of the electrical
bonding paths through the fuel line and components, and ultimately
lead to fuel tank ignition in the event of a lightning strike.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Initial Inspection Compliance Times

    For airplanes having serial numbers 4001 and 4003 through 4575
inclusive that, as of the effective date of this AD, have not done
the actions specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21: At
the applicable times specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this
AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) of this
AD.
    (1) For all airplanes except those identified in paragraph
(g)(2) of this AD: Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes with an original airworthiness certificate or
original export certificate of airworthiness issued on or after the
effective date of this AD: Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months,
whichever occurs first after the date of issuance of the original
airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original
export certificate of airworthiness.

(h) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable times specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of
this AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) of
this AD. Repeat the actions thereafter at intervals not to exceed
6,000 flight hours or 36 months, whichever occurs first.
    (1) Do a detailed inspection of the clamshell coupling bonding
wires, fuel couplings, and associated sleeves for discrepancies that
meet specified criteria, as identified in, and in accordance with
paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision D, dated November 23,
2018. If any conditions are found meeting the criteria specified in
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision D, dated November 23,
2018, before further flight, replace affected parts with new
couplings and sleeves of the same part number, in accordance with
paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision D, dated November 23,
2018.
    (2) Do a detailed inspection of the fuel tube end ferrules, fuel
component end ferrules, and ferrule O-ring flanges for damage and
wear, and rework (repair, replace, or blend, as applicable) the
parts, in accordance with paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20,
Revision D, dated November 23, 2018.

(i) Optional Terminating Action for Repetitive Inspections

    For airplanes having serial numbers 4001 and 4003 through 4575
inclusive: Doing a detailed inspection of the fuel tube end
ferrules, fuel component end ferrules, and ferrule O-ring flanges
for damage and wear, and reworking (repair, replace, or blend, as
applicable) the parts; and doing a retrofit (structural rework) of
the fuel couplings, isolators, and structural provisions, in
accordance with paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision C,
dated July 13, 2018, terminates the inspections specified in
paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) of this AD.

(j) Electrical Bonding Checks

    For airplanes having serial numbers 4001, 4003 through 4489
inclusive, and 4491 through 4575 inclusive that, as of the effective
date of this AD, have done the actions specified in Bombardier
Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision A, dated September 29, 2017; and
airplanes having serial numbers 4576 through 4581 inclusive: Within
6,000 flight hours or 36 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, do the actions specified in paragraph (j)(1)
or (2) of this AD.
    (1) Accomplish electrical bonding checks of all threaded
couplings on the inboard vent lines in the left and right wings, in
accordance with paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-26, Revision A,
dated November 29, 2018.
    (2) Do a detailed inspection of the fuel tube end ferrules, fuel
component end ferrules, and ferrule O-ring flanges for damage and
wear, and rework (repair, replace, or blend, as applicable) the
parts; and a retrofit (structural rework) of the fuel couplings,
isolators, and structural provisions in accordance with paragraph
3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision C, dated July 13,
2018.

(k) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate the information specified in Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier)
Temporary Revision ALI-00AS, dated April 24, 2018; and Q400 Dash 8
(Bombardier) Temporary Revision ALI-00AT, dated April 24, 2018.
Except as specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, the initial
compliance time for doing the tasks in Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier)
Temporary Revision ALI-00AS, dated April 24, 2018, is at the time
specified in Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) Temporary Revision ALI-00AS,
dated April 24, 2018, or within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.

(l) Initial Compliance Time for Task 284000-419

    The initial compliance time for task 284000-419 is at the time
specified in paragraph (l)(1) or (2) of this AD, as applicable, or
within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later.
    (1) For airplanes having serial numbers 4001 and 4003 through
4575, inclusive: Within 18,000 flight hours or 108 months, whichever
occurs first, after the earliest date of embodiment of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 84-28-21 on the airplane.
    (2) For airplanes having serial numbers 4576 and subsequent:
Within 18,000 flight hours or 108 months, whichever occurs first,
from the date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate
or original export certificate of airworthiness.

(m) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, or Critical Design Configuration
Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (k) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, or CDCCLs may be used unless
the actions, intervals, and CDCCLs are approved as an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this AD.

(n) No Reporting Requirement

    Although Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision D, dated
November 23, 2018, specifies to submit certain information to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

(o) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using the service
information specified in paragraph (o)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this
AD.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision A, dated
December 14, 2016.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision B, dated
February 13, 2017.
    (iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-20, Revision C, dated
April 28, 2017.
    (2) For the airplane having serial number 4164, this paragraph
provides credit for the initial inspections required by paragraphs
(h)(1) and (2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-
28-20, dated September 30, 2016.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (i) of this AD if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using the service information specified in
paragraph (o)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this AD.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21, dated August 31, 2017.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision A, dated
September 29, 2017.
    (iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision B, dated
June 8, 2018.
    (4) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-
28-26, dated August 14, 2018.
    (5) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-
28-21, Revision B, dated June 8, 2018.
    (6) For airplanes having serial numbers 4001, 4003 through 4489
inclusive, and 4491 through 4575 inclusive, and that are post
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-21, Revision A, dated September
29, 2017: This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (j) of this AD if those actions were performed prior to
the effective date of this AD using the service information
specified in paragraph (o)(6)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) Bombardier Modification Summary Package (ModSum)
IS4Q2800032, dated February 1, 2018.
    (ii) Any airworthiness limitation change request (ACR) specified
in figure 1 to paragraph (o)(6)(ii) of this AD.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP30OC19.001

(p) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO 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 certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's TCCA Design Approval
Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must
include the DAO-authorized signature.

(q) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2017-04R2, dated September 25, 2018, 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-2019-0726.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Joseph
Catanzaro, 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_ADDRESS>    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123
Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-
375-4000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
https://dehavilland.com. 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 October 23, 2019.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-23575 Filed 10-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65200-65202]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24030]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0490; Directorate Identifier 2008-SW-004-AD;
Amendment 39-17611; AD 2013-20-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited
(Bell) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bell Model 407 helicopters. This AD requires installing a placard
beneath the NR/NP dual tachometer and revising the limitations section
of the rotorcraft flight manual (RFM). This AD was prompted by several
incidents of third stage engine turbine wheel failures, which were
caused by excessive vibrations at certain engine speeds during steady-
state operations. These actions are intended to alert pilots to avoid
certain engine speeds during steady-state operations, prevent failure
of the third stage engine turbine, engine power loss, and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective December 5, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference

of a certain document listed in this AD as of December 5, 2013.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell
Helicopter Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel,
Quebec J7J1R4; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (450)
433-0272; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review the
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

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 foreign authority's AD,
any incorporated-by-reference service information, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations Office, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chinh Vuong, Aviation Safety Engineer,
Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On June 7, 2013, at 78 FR 34286, the Federal Register published our
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Bell Model 407 helicopters,
serial numbers 53000 through 53644. The NPRM proposed to require
installing a placard on the instrument panel below the NR/NP dual
tachometer and revising the Operating Limitations section of the Model
407 RFM to limit steady-state operation between speeds of 68.4% to
87.1%. The proposed requirements were intended to alert pilots to avoid
certain engine speeds during steady-state operations, prevent failure
of the third stage engine turbine, engine power loss, and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.
    The NPRM was prompted by AD No. CF-2004-09R1, dated July 4, 2005,
issued by Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada. TCCA issued AD No. CF-2004-09R1 to correct an
unsafe condition for Model 407 helicopters. TCCA advises that several
failures of third stage turbine wheels used in Rolls Royce 250-C30S and
250-C47B engines, and three of these failures have occurred to the 250-
C47B engine used by Bell on the Model 407. According to TCCA, Rolls
Royce has determined that detrimental vibrations can occur within a
particular range of turbine speeds, and may be a contributing factor to
these failures. Bell has revised the operating limitations of the RFM
and provided a corresponding decal on the instrument panel to inform
pilots to avoid steady-state operations between 68.4% and 87.1% turbine
speeds.
    The TCCA AD requires amending the RFM, advising pilots of the
change, and installing a decal as described in Bell Alert Service
Bulletin (ASB) No. 407-05-67, dated June 8, 2005 (ASB 407-05-67).

Comments

    After our NPRM (78 FR 34286, June 7, 2013) was published, we
received comments from one commenter.

Request

    Rolls-Royce Corporation requested that in addition to requiring the
placard on the instrument panel, we allow operators the option to
temporarily mark the Nr/Np gauge with colored
tape, to provide a more visual aide to the pilot for the speed
avoidance zone.
    We disagree. Marking the glass surface of the gauge can create
parallax issues when viewing the avoidance ranges on the gauge,
resulting in erroneous readings.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Canada and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Canada, TCCA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the TCCA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by TCCA, reviewed the relevant information,
considered the comment received, and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of the
same type design and that air safety and the public interest require
adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the TCCA AD

    The TCCA AD requires compliance within 10 calendar days, while this
AD requires compliance within 30 days.

Related Service Information

    Bell has issued ASB 407-05-67, which contains procedures for
installing a placard on the instrument panel below the main rotor RPM
(Nr)/power turbine RPM (Np) dual tachometer and for inserting the RFM
changes into the flight manual.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 472 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Based on an average labor rate of $85 per hour, we estimate
that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with
this AD. Amending the RFM will require about 0.5 work-hour, for a cost
per helicopter of about $43 and a cost to U.S. operators of $20,296.
Installing the decal will require about 0.2 work-hour and required
parts cost $20, for a cost per helicopter of $37 and a cost to U.S.
operators of $17,464. Based on these estimates, the total cost of this
AD will be $80 per helicopter and $37,760 for the U.S. operator fleet.

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 helicopters identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);

    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2013-20-05 Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (Bell): Amendment
39-17611; Docket No. FAA-2013-0490; Directorate Identifier 2008-SW-
004-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Model 407 helicopters, serial numbers
53000 through 53644, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a third stage turbine
vibration, which could result in turbine failure, engine power loss,
and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective December 5, 2013.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    Within 30 days:
    (1) Revise the Operating Limitations section of the Model 407
Rotorcraft Flight Manual by inserting Section 1, Limitations, pages
1-6 and 1-14, of Bell BHT-407-FM-1, revision 3, dated April 26,
2005.
    (2) Remove placard part number (P/N) 230-075-213-105, if
installed.
    (3) Install placard P/N 230-075-213-111, or equivalent, directly
below the NR/NP dual tachometer.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Chinh Vuong, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    (1) Bell Alert Service Bulletin No. 407-05-67, dated June 8,
2005, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional
information about the subject of this AD. For service information
identified in this AD, contact Bell Helicopter Textron Canada
Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4; telephone
(450) 437-2862 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review a copy of the service
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada
Civil Aviation (TCCA) AD No. CF-2004-09R1, dated July 4, 2005. You
may view the TCCA AD on the internet in the AD Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 7250: Turbine
Section.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Pages 1-6 and 1-14 of Section 1, Limitations, of Bell
Rotorcraft Flight Manual BHT-407-FM-1, Revision 3, dated April 26,
2005.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Bell service information identified in this AD, contact
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir,
Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 20, 2013.
Scott A. Horn,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-24030 Filed 10-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US

04/28/2008 10:28 AM

To

Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

next batch for Pb RIA docket

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:27 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/16/2008 11:57 AM

To

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

for your review: did I get the Pb NAAQS links correct for interagency distribution?

Hi Kathy,

Good job this morning, it was a lively group with a diverse level of familiarity!

Below is what I propose to share with interagency Pb NAAQS review group.  Please let me know if I my phrasing is inaccurate or if I'm not pointing to most recent or best drafts.  Thank you;

best,

heidi

202 395 4551

************************

As promised, here are the links to documents supporting your participation in the interagency review of Pb NAAQS.

I.  A CASAC letter following ANPRM publication is forthcoming; The most recent CASAC letter is a review of the Staff Paper second draft; .

http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/2DCD6EF49CDD37B285257364005F9 3E4/$File/casac-07-007.pdf

II.  Criteria Document, Staff Paper and ANPRM for the Pb NAAQS is available at the following link.  Note that the Risk Assessment is located in the "Technical Documents" section:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pb/s_pb_index.html

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:27 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/16/2008 01:39 PM

To

"Laur, Michele N."<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Fraas, Arthur G." <EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Farrell, Amy L." <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Baer, Mitchell"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Holman, Keith W."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Mestey, Felix CIV \(NAVFACHQ\)"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Newton, Drek  CIV NFESC" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Daniels, Jarad"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Skidmore, Charlotte T."<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Serebrov, Job" <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Grahame, Thomas" <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Beck, Nancy"<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

I. Links to Pb NAAQS documents  II. tent. mtg schedule

Good afternoon,

Two follow up items from this morning's meeting on the Pb NAAQS Regulatory Impact Analysis discussion:

I.  Documents supporting review

As promised, here are the links to documents supporting your participation in the interagency review of Pb NAAQS.

a.  A CASAC letter following ANPRM publication is forthcoming; The most recent CASAC letter is a review of the Staff Paper second draft; .

http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/2DCD6EF49CDD37B285257364005F9 3E4/$File/casac-07-007.pdf

b.  Criteria Document, Staff Paper and ANPRM for the Pb NAAQS is available at the following link.  Note that the Risk Assessment is located in the "Technical Documents" section:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pb/s_pb_index.html

II.  Interagency Meeting Schedule

The meeting schedule for this regulatory review group is shaping up roughly as follows (invitations will be sent out shortly):

Tue 1/22, 1:30 -3pm:

Pb Exposure Information.  What is known (and not known) about human exposure and pathways.  This background supports understanding both the RIA and the Risk Assessment

Tent. Thu 1/24 time tbd:

Pb Environmental Sources and Monitoring:  What is known (and not known) about sources of lead in the environment, and how we monitor ambient Pb

Tent. Mon, 1/28 time tbd:

RIA Follow up:  Costs and Benefits methodology, applicability of the Energy Exec Order

Date and time Tbd:

Risk Analysis Framework:  Following review of exposure and sources information on 1/22 and 1/24, this conversation will review the analytical structure in the Risk Analysis, briefly introduced in our interagency meeting on 12/20/07.

Questions welcome, as always,

 Heidi

Heidi R. King

OMB/OIRA

<PHONE_NUMBER>

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:27 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/16/2008 03:23 PM

To

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Erika Sasser/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Near Roadway information for Tom Grahame

Thank you; I'll share with the broader group, as I believe this is also

of interest to Dept of Transportation.

Thanks Lydia,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 3:22 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Fw: Near Roadway information for Tom Grahame

Below is a note that provides a guide for Tom Grahame to information

that answers one of the questions he asked during our meeting today.

----- Forwarded by Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US on 01/16/2008 03:20 PM

-----

             Erika

             Sasser/RTP/USEPA

             /US                                                     To

                                      Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             01/16/2008 12:57                                        cc

             PM                       Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

                                      Deirdre Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      Near Roadway information for Tom

                                      Grahame

Tom Grahame asked whether we had information regarding lead

concentrations near roadways (such as gradient studies).  Deirdre

identified 2 sections of the Criteria document and 1 appendix to the

Lead Risk Assessment that deal with lead in outdoor soil and dust near

roadways.  These are:

Criteria Document

   Chapter 2, section 2.3.3 "Resuspension of Lead Containing Dust and

   Soil"

   Chapter 3, section 3.2  "Exposure:  Soil and Dust"

Risk Assessment

   Appendix F:  "Lead in Outdoor Soil and Dust near Roadways"-- this

   appendix includes a table listing key studies and summarizing their

   design/findings in terms of lead concentrations

Perhaps we could send this to Heidi to forward on to Tom, along with the

links to CD, Staff Paper, and Risk Assessment?

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:27 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/18/2008 04:26 PM

To

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

FW: FYI We have CDC reviewers

Kathy, I should have copied you.  My apologies -

heidi

From: King, Heidi R.

Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 4:26 PM

To<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: FYI We have CDC reviewers

Hi Lydia,

CDC/HHS has identified the following folks as appropriate CDC participants in the interagency review of the Pb NAAQS:

Tom Sinks

possibly Mary Jean Brown also

Best,

heidi

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:27 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/23/2008 12:51 PM

To

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Allen Basala/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Skidmore, Charlotte T." <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Deirdre Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Zachary Pekar/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Request concerning meetings and your questions from earlier this morning

Lydia,

I understand that you'd like to divide the issues by work-product (RIA

and RA report) teams, but I am trying to help interagency folks get up

to speed on the underlying basic information which supports the work by

each of these teams.  We get different information from various offices

of EPA, and we are trying to sort out the apparent contradictions that

emerge when we fail to acknowledge the common base of science from which

we are all working.

I understand this is confusing, that is why I suggested we work with ORD

to develop a more thorough review of the background/science on human

exposure and environmental sources of lead.

Both are inputs to RIA and to Risk assessment, but in the absense of

sufficient background information we aren't able to progress quickly.

I suggesst we engage ORD; Thanks!

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:47 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Skidmore, Charlotte T.;

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Request concerning meetings and your questions from earlier

this morning

Heidi,

I'm afraid that I'm confused about the issues we're discussing at each

of these meetings.  As you know, we have separate teams with knowledge

of the underlying research discussed in the Criteria Document,  the way

in which the risk assessment was conducted, and the development of the

RIA.   From my standpoint, I would very much prefer to order our

discussions based on which of these sets of issues you and the

interagency team want to discuss so that I can avoid wasting people's

time.   Consequently, the list of issues that you sent in your first

e-mail this morning is difficult for me to deal with as it mingles

research, risk assessment and RIA source questions.   If the subjects

that Kathy described in her e-mail are ones that work for our meeting

tomorrow, then we're set on that one, as those subjects are all RIA

issues.   It would be very helpful if you could take the list of issues

you sent this morning and separate them out in terms of what specific

questions interagency folks have about the evidence discussed in the CD,

what specific questions they have about the risk assessment, including

the way in which it was conducted, and any remaining RIA-related

questions.  Folks here are working very hard and I simply can't ask them

to sit in meetings if there are not specific questions related to their

specific knowledge and work.   Thanks very much for your consideration

on this point.

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             01/23/2008 10:17                                        cc

             AM                       "Skidmore, Charlotte T."

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                       v>, Deirdre

                                      Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen

                                      Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia

                                      Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron

                                      Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Allen

                                      Basala/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      RE: With whom do I work on

                                      Thursday's interagency mtg,

                                      Sources of Pb and monitoring?

Kathy,

That's fine; sounds good.  I had sent an email last week identifying the

categories of questions that have been coming up (both in RIA and in

Risk Assessment meetings) and hadn't heard back on who was leading and

how the agenda would be broken out; I also just learned from Margarite

that a meeting had been set up at 4pm but I was unaware and had

separately set up the 10am time.

I appreciate your quick response!

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:52 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Skidmore, Charlotte T<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Re: With whom do I work on Thursday's interagency mtg, Sources

of Pb and monitoring?

Heidi, we've been preparing for Thursday's meeting by preparing briefing

material covering the questions that came up last week on monitoring and

inventory.  We have not been preparing to answer questions about the

risk assessment, including contributions to exposure from other media.

That's really Deirdre and Zach's bailiwick.

My understanding was that this is followup for the RIA team, which

includes expertise on monitoring (PM10 vs. TSP) and inventory (sources

of air emissions).  So many questions came up on monitoring and

inventory -- I thought we had set up this meeting to address those

specifically.  Please let me know.  We're not going to be prepared

tomorrow to answer many of the questions below, which were not the

questions we understood this meeting to be about.

 On these questions that come out of RIA discussions, I'm the point

person.  I'm not the point person for the risk assessment, though.

If we are going forward with addressing montoring and inventory

questions stemming from the RIA, then I will make sure you get the

slides (and the call-in number).  The 10-12 time tomorrow works fine for

my team.

Thanks!  Please let me know if our current course needs to change.

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

             01/23/2008 09:38         Deirdre Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

             AM                       Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

                                      Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

                                      Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

                                      "Skidmore, Charlotte T."

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                       v>

                                                                     cc

                                                                Subject

                                      With whom do I work on Thursday's

                                      interagency mtg, Sources of Pb

                                      and monitoring?

Good morning Lydia and team,

We have a time set for 10-12am (tentatively) on Thursday, 1/24 to

continue the interagency Pb NAAQS; Could someone please

- confirm that this works for EPA (I don't recall whether we had set a

time)

- coordinate the EPA team invitation

- provide a call-in number to OMB for distribution to interagency group

- provide slides in advance of the meeting

Thanks very much; I realize we are all busy, indeed it is not a simple

task to coordate nearly 30 interagency reviewers on several major rules

at the same time and EPA support in organizing these meetings is very

much appreciated.  In the past couple of months we've not all been as

efficient as we could be - I have not been notified of scheduled

meetings, or have received email notifications that do not match the

meetings on EPA calendars. Please do let me know what I can do to

improve our interagency coordination process more efficient.

Suggestion:  Could we identify a point person at EPA to act as my

counterpart in facilitating these meetings?

Topics for Thursday:

Review Environmental Sources

Please clarify sources of ambient lead:  What does research tell us

about the relative contribution of stationary sources, aircraft, crustal

sources, paint, etc in ambient lead?  What data sources are available,

have been used by EPA to support the risk assessment and the RIA?

Please clarify past air vs current air:  What research is available

exploring the contribution of past emissions vs recent emissions in

ambient air?  Why does the risk assessment choose to distinguish between

them, if we are unable to differentiate the relative contribution to

current ambient air levels?

Background sources/ background levels:  What research and data is

available to distinguish between lead from paint, food (can solder,

processing) and water vs ambient air contribution?  What research has

EPA relied upon to support risk assessment, RIA?

Discuss uncertainty about how lead in soils in re-entrained:  What

research provides evidence of re-entrainment, the magnitude of the

problem, and the relative contribution to ambient lead?

How does the risk assessment treat Pb historical deposits near roadways

vs Current emissions/deposits and relative contribution to Pb exposure

risk

----- Forwarded by Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/28/2008 10:27 AM -----

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/24/2008 09:52 AM

To

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

RE: Slides for 10 am meeting today

Got it, it opens, and I sent it out - we're good!

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:49 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Subject: Slides for 10 am meeting today

Heidi -- I apologize for the short timeframe -- we've been making some

corrections this morning.

(See attached file: Pb Emissions Inventory and Monitoring 01-24-08 --

rev.ppt)

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>