[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50577-50581]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20265]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1093; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-149-AD;
Amendment 39-17163; AD 2012-16-16]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of
extensive corrosion of the ballscrew of the drive mechanism of the
horizontal stabilizer trim actuator. This AD requires repetitive
detailed inspections for discrepancies of the horizontal stabilizer
ballscrew assembly; repetitive lubrication of the horizontal stabilizer
trim control system; repetitive measurements for discrepancies of the
ballscrew to ballnut freeplay; and corrective actions, if necessary. We
are issuing this AD to prevent undetected failure of the primary and
secondary load paths for the ballscrew in the horizontal stabilizer,
which could lead to loss of control of the horizontal stabilizer and
consequent loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective September 26, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 26,
2012.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Frey, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone:
(425) 917-6468; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 published in the Federal Register on October 25, 2011 (76 FR
65991). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive detailed inspections
for discrepancies of the horizontal stabilizer ballscrew assembly;
repetitive lubrication of the horizontal stabilizer trim control
system; repetitive measurements for discrepancies of the ballscrew to
ballnut freeplay; and corrective actions, if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Requests To Withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011)

    Airlines for America (A4A), on behalf of its member American
Airlines (AAL), asked that the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011) be
withdrawn. A4A stated that in view of previously implemented
maintenance procedures designed to prevent malfunctions of the
horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA), and maintenance data
gathered in accomplishing those and other related procedures, the NPRM
is not necessary. A4A added that those procedures include instructions
mandated by AD 2005-12-18, Amendment 39-14134 (70 FR 35166, June 17,
2005), which requires inspection and overhaul of the primary brake of
the HSTA, ``upgrades to HSTA maintenance in the Boeing maintenance
planning document (MPD), and corresponding upgrades to air carrier
maintenance programs.'' AAL stated that the ``Discussion'' section of
the NPRM specifies ``Jackscrews and ballscrews are similar in function
and have similar airplane level failure modes.'' AAL noted that this
statement is not accurate in defining the risk posed by the ballscrew
design. AAL added that the ballscrew uses ball bearings for the primary
load path, and a male thread nut for the secondary load path is more
tolerant of inadequate lubrication conditions than the jackscrew/acme
nut design used on Model MD-80 airplanes. AAL also stated that the NPRM
specifies that the unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on
other products of the same type design, which misrepresents the level
of risk to the Model 757 worldwide fleet.
    We disagree with the requests to withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 65991,
October 25, 2011). Although the maintenance procedures in AD 2005-12-
18, Amendment 39-14134 (70 FR 35166, June 17, 2005), will prevent
grease contamination on the primary HSTA brake, the repetitive
intervals for the subject actions are not frequent enough to prevent
corrosion in the ballscrew of the drive mechanism of the HSTA, which
could result in undetected failure of both the primary and secondary
load paths. In light of this, we have determined that the unsafe
condition is likely to exist or develop on the affected airplanes. As a
result of that determination, we are issuing this AD in order to
eliminate the unsafe condition by requiring that the actions be done at
the required intervals.

Request To Issue Emergency Airworthiness Directive

    Captain Rick Petersen, a private citizen, asked that a ``more
deliberate emergency type directive'' be issued instead of an NPRM (76
FR 65991, October 25, 2011). The commenter stated that extensive
corrosion found on

any flight control mechanism is enough evidence to justify an emergency
type directive.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. Before issuing the
NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011), we considered the urgency of the
identified unsafe condition and the actions required to correct that
unsafe condition. We also considered appropriate compliance times for
requiring that those actions be done, in order to correct the unsafe
condition in a timely manner to ensure continued safety. We coordinated
those times with the manufacturer. At that time, we determined that it
was practicable to provide notice and opportunity for public comment.
In addition, in consideration of the amount of time that has already
elapsed since issuance of the original notice, we find that to further
delay issuance of this final rule by converting it to another type of
AD rulemaking is inappropriate and unnecessary. Therefore, we have not
changed the AD in this regard.

Requests To Change Flight Cycles to Flight Hours

    A4A, on behalf of its members AAL and UPS, and Boeing requested
that the airplane groups specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of the
NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011) be identified in terms of flight
hours instead of flight cycles. UPS stated that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 757-27A0144, Revision 1, dated January 20, 2010, identifies
flight hours for that determination. UPS added that in order to
maintain consistency, flight cycles should be changed to flight hours.
Boeing also noted that this is a grammatical error.
    We agree with the commenters' requests. We inadvertently specified
``total flight cycles'' instead of ``total flight hours.'' Boeing Alert
Service Bulletins 757-27A0144, and 757-27A0145, both Revision 1, both
dated January 20, 2010, specify groups that ``* * * have completed less
than or equal to 15,000 flight hours'' and that ``have completed more
than 15,000 flight hours.'' We did not intend to differ from the
service information. All the compliance times specified in paragraphs
(g) and (h) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011) were expressed
in terms of flight hours and we did not give notice in the NPRM that we
were differing from the service information in this regard. Therefore,
we have changed the term ``total flight cycles'' to ``total flight
hours'' in the description of the affected airplanes for paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD.

Requests To Revise Compliance Times

    Boeing and A4A requested that we revise certain compliance times.
Boeing asked that paragraphs (g)(1)(ii), (g)(3)(ii), (h)(1)(ii),
(h)(3)(ii), (i)(1)(ii), and (i)(3)(ii) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991,
October 25, 2011) be deleted, and that the compliance times in each
sub-paragraph be consolidated into one compliance time in the
applicable parent paragraph. Boeing stated that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletins 757-27A0144 and 757-27A0145, both Revision 1, both dated
January 20, 2010, do not differentiate between the airplanes on which a
detailed inspection has or has not been done previously, and added that
it is not included in the ``Differences'' section of the NPRM. Boeing
noted that the only difference between the paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2)
of the NPRM, paragraphs (g)(3) and (g)(4) of the NPRM, paragraphs
(h)(1) and (h)(2) of the NPRM, paragraphs (h)(3) and (h)(4) of the
NPRM, and paragraphs (i)(3) and (i)(4) of the NPRM is whether there is
a 6 or 18 month compliance time allowance. Boeing also noted the only
difference between paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of the NRPM is whether
the HSTA has been overhauled. Boeing noted that this complicates the
related actions in the NPRM, and is not necessary for the continued
airworthiness of airplanes on which an HSTA is installed.
    A4A, on behalf of its member AAL, requested that we revise the
compliance times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (h)(1), (i)(1),
(g)(2), (h)(2), and (i)(2) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011),
so that airplanes previously inspected and airplanes not previously
inspected have the same compliance times, rather than allowing a longer
compliance time for airplanes that have not been inspected. A4A also
requested that we revise the compliance times specified in paragraphs
(g)(3), (h)(3), (i)(3), (g)(4), and (h)(4) of the NPRM, so that HSTAs
that have been previously lubricated are provided a longer compliance
time.
    We agree with the commenter's requests. Boeing Alert Service
Bulletins 757-27A0144 and 757-27A0145, both Revision 1, both dated
January 20, 2010, do not differentiate between the airplanes on which a
detailed inspection has or has not been done previously. In light of
this fact, we have deleted paragraphs (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), (g)(2),
(g)(3)(i), (g)(3)(ii), (g)(4), (h)(1)(i), (h)(1)(ii), (h)(2),
(h)(3)(i), (h)(3)(ii), (h)(4), (i)(1)(i), (i)(1)(ii), (i)(2),
(i)(3)(i), (i)(3)(ii), and (i)(4) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25,
2011). The compliance times and the initial inspection and lubrication
tasks specified in paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD have been
consolidated to include the actions in those sub-paragraphs, and to
simplify the compliance times. These changes are relieving and allow
operators more time to incorporate the requirements of this AD into
their maintenance schedules.
    These compliance times differ from the compliance times in the
referenced service information in that certain compliance times in this
AD are based on time after the effective date of this AD. The
compliance times in this AD will prevent airplanes from immediately
being out of compliance with the AD requirements, because they will
prevent grounding an airplane if it has already exceeded the compliance
times specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 757-27A0144, and 757-
27A0145, both Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010. The compliance
times in this AD have precedence over the compliance times specified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 757-27A0144, and 757-27A0145, both
Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010. We have changed paragraphs
(g), (h), and (i) of this AD accordingly by including the initial
compliance times in revised paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (h)(1), (h)(2),
(i)(1), and (i)(2) of this AD. Paragraphs (g)(5), (h)(5), and (i)(5) of
the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011), are specified as paragraphs
(g)(3), (h)(3), and (i)(3) in this AD. We have clarified the compliance
time in paragraph (i)(3)(i) of this AD (paragraph (i)(5)(i) of the
NPRM) by revising the compliance time ``Before the accumulation of
15,000 total flight hours after accomplishing an overhaul * * *'' to
specify ``Within 15,000 flight hours after accomplishing an overhaul *
* *.''

Request To Provide Clarification of Freeplay Measurement

    Boeing asked that we clarify the freeplay measurement language in
the ``Differences'' section and paragraph (k) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991,
October 25, 2011) to avoid misinterpretation by operators. Boeing
stated that 0.001 inch of freeplay is sufficient to verify that the
ballnut rolling elements are free and there is room for grease action.
Boeing added that page 704 of the supplier Component Maintenance Manual
(CMM) 27-41-10, specifies that axial lash of 0.002 to 0.006 inch is
acceptable for assembly at overhaul. Boeing noted that that some margin
of error on the low side of 0.002 inch is necessary to avoid
unwarranted removal of units built to the low limit of tolerance, in
addition to clarifying that there is a high limit (0.016 inch) as well
as a low limit (0.001 inch). Boeing concluded that the

acceptable range specified in paragraph (k) of the NPRM could be
interpreted as 0.002 to 0.006 inch, which is not what was intended.
    We agree with the request to clarify the freeplay measurement
requirement, for the reasons provided. We have changed paragraph (k) of
this AD accordingly. However, since the ``Differences'' section of the
preamble does not reappear in the final rule, no change to the AD is
necessary in this regard.

Request To Remove Certain Language From Paragraph (l) of the NPRM (76
FR 65991, October 25, 2011)

    A4A, on behalf of its member AAL, asked that the language ``hard
time replacement program'' be removed from the credit language
specified in paragraph (l) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011).
AAL stated that paragraph (l) of the NPRM provides credit for
installation of new or overhauled HSTAs, but added that the quoted
language could limit that credit. AAL noted that paragraph (l) of the
NPRM specifies that the overhaul, when conducted as part of a hard time
replacement program ``meets the intent of one detailed inspection, one
freeplay inspection, and one lubrication of the HSTA.'' AAL stated that
any overhaul that includes removal of the HSTA, and overhaul of the
stabilizer ballscrew that are done in accordance with the instructions
in the original equipment manufacturer CMM, should meet the intent of
the subject actions, regardless of whether the overhaul is done as part
of a ``hard time replacement program.'' AAL added that all overhauls,
regardless of the reasons for removal, would meet the proposed
requirements.
    We agree with the request for the reasons provided. We have removed
the subject language from paragraph (l) of this AD accordingly.

Request To Remove Note 1 of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011)

    UPS asked that Note 1 of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011)
be removed because it serves no practical purpose. UPS stated that this
note provides additional guidance for verification of the measurement
in Subject 27-41-10, ``Stabilizer Trim Ballscrew Freeplay,'' of Chapter
27, ``Flight Controls,'' of the Boeing 757 Airplane Maintenance Manual
(AMM), Revision 101, dated May 20, 2011. UPS added that, if this note
refers to the measurement in paragraph (k) of the NPRM, it should also
refer to CMM 27-41-05 for HSTA guidance for the 0.002 inch measurement.
    We disagree with the request. The reference to Subject 27-41-10,
``Stabilizer Trim Ballscrew Freeplay,'' of Chapter 27, ``Flight
Controls,'' of the Boeing 757 Airplane Maintenance Manual (AMM),
Revision 101, dated May 20, 2011, is correct. The guidance in Note 1 of
this AD refers maintenance personnel to the procedures that verify the
measurement was not made in error when the ballnut freeplay measurement
is less than the measurement required by the AD. We have made no change
to the AD in this regard.

Request To Correct Grammatical Errors

    Boeing asked that we correct grammatical errors in the
``Differences'' and ``Relevant Service Information'' sections and
paragraph (k) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011). Boeing
stated that the word ``then'' was used instead of ``than.''
    We agree for the reason provided. We have changed the error in
paragraph (k) of this AD; however, since the ``Differences'' and
``Relevant Service Information'' sections of the preamble do not
reappear in the final rule, no change to the AD is necessary in this
regard.

Request To Revise Cost Estimate

    AAL asked that the cost estimate provided in the NPRM (76 FR 65991,
October 25, 2011) be increased. AAL stated that the 13 work-hours
specified in the ``Costs of Compliance'' section of the NPRM only
include the time for initial accomplishment of the required actions.
AAL added that the work-hours necessary for the repetitive actions are
not included.
    We agree that the economic analysis in the NPRM (76 FR 65991,
October 25, 2011) did not include the cost of the work-hours necessary
for the repetitive actions. We have changed the ``Costs of Compliance''
section below to include those work-hours.

Request To Remove Reference to AMM

    A4A, on behalf of its member UPS, requested that we revise
paragraph (j) of the NPRM (76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011) to remove
reference to the AMM. UPS stated that, by referring to a specific
revision of the AMM, operators would have to request an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) in order to use any later revisions of the
AMM. UPS also suggested that Boeing revise Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 757-27A0144, Revision 1, dated January 2010, to include
replacement procedures, and that we refer to that revised service
bulletin.
    We do not agree to revise paragraph (j) of this AD. We do not
consider that delaying this action until after the manufacturer revises
the service bulletin is warranted, since operators can accomplish the
actions in accordance with the AMM. We also cannot use the phrase, ``or
later FAA-approved revisions,'' in an AD when referring to the service
document because doing so violates Office of the Federal Register (OFR)
regulations for approval of materials ``incorporated by reference'' in
rules. See paragraph (f) of section 51.1 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (1 CFR 51.1(f)).
    To allow operators to use later revisions of the referenced
document (issued after publication of the AD), either we must revise
the AD to reference specific later revisions, or operators must request
approval to use later revisions as an alternative method of compliance
with this AD under the provisions of paragraph (n) of this AD. We have
not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Allow Credit for Certain Actions

    A4A, on behalf of its member UPS, requested that we revise the NPRM
(76 FR 65991, October 25, 2011) to allow credit for actions
accomplished per the Boeing maintenance review board report/maintenance
planning document (MRBR/MPD). UPS noted that these documents refer to
the same AMM sections and tasks specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 757-27A0144, Revision 1, dated January 20, 2010. UPS stated
that an operator that performs actions following its maintenance
program is not allowed credit for accomplishment of the task, and that
the next required inspection should be done in accordance with the
compliance times specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
27A0144, Revision 1, dated January 20, 2010.
    As stated previously, we have revised the compliance times in this
AD so that the times do not depend on whether actions were done in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144, Revision 1,
dated January 20, 2010. Therefore, operators that did actions using the
MRBR/MPD have the same initial compliance times as operators that did
actions using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144, Revision 1,
dated January 20, 2010. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that
these changes

will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the
scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 730 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
also estimate that it takes about 13 work-hours per inspection,
lubrication and measurement cycle per product to comply with this AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $806,650, or
$1,105 per product, per inspection, lubrication, and measurement cycle.
    We estimate that it takes about 26 work-hours to do any HSTA
replacement required based on the results of the inspection. We have no
way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
replacements. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of this replacement to the U.S.
operators to be $2,210 per product, excluding parts costs, which vary
depending on airplane configuration.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2012-16-16 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17163; Docket No. FAA-
2011-1093; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-149-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 26, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF,
-200CB, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 27: Flight Controls.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of extensive corrosion of the
ballscrew of the drive mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer trim
actuator (HSTA). We are issuing this AD to prevent undetected
failure of the primary and secondary load paths for the ballscrew in
the horizontal stabilizer, which could lead to loss of control of
the horizontal stabilizer and consequent loss of control of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Group 1, Configuration 1 Airplanes--Repetitive Inspections,
Lubrications, Freeplay Checks

    For Group 1, Configuration 1 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144 (for Model 757-200, -200CB, and
200PF series airplanes) or 757-27A0145 (for Model 757-300 series
airplanes), both Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010, that have
accumulated 15,000 total flight hours or fewer as of the effective
date of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1),
(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, at the times specified in those
paragraphs, and in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144 (for Model 757-200, -
200CB, and -200PF series airplanes) or 757-27A0145 (for Model 757-
300 series airplanes), both Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010.
    (1) Within 3,500 flight hours or 2 years after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a detailed inspection
for discrepancies of the horizontal stabilizer ballscrew assembly.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,500
flight hours or 2 years, whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 2,000 flight hours or 1 year after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Lubricate the horizontal
stabilizer trim control system. Repeat the lubrication thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours or 1 year, whichever
occurs first.
    (3) Do the stabilizer ballscrew to ballnut freeplay check for
discrepancies at the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of this AD. Repeat the freeplay check
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 18,000 flight hours or 5
years, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 15,000 total flight hours.
    (ii) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD.

(h) Group 1, Configuration 2 Airplanes--Repetitive Inspections,
Lubrications, Freeplay Checks

    For Group 1, Configuration 2 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144 (for Model 757-200, -200CB, and
200PF series airplanes) or 757-27A0145 (for Model 757-300 series
airplanes), both Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010, that have
accumulated more than 15,000 total flight hours as of the effective
date of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraphs (h)(1),
(h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD, at the times specified in those
paragraphs, and in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144 (for Model 757-200, -
200CB, and 200PF series airplanes) or 757-27A0145 (for Model 757-300
series airplanes), both Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010.
    (1) Within 3,500 flight hours or 18 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a detailed inspection
for discrepancies of the horizontal stabilizer ballscrew assembly.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,500
flight hours or 2 years, whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 2,000 flight hours or 1 year after the effective date
of this AD, whichever

occurs first: Lubricate the horizontal stabilizer trim control
system. Repeat the lubrication thereafter at intervals not to exceed
2,000 flight hours or 1 year, whichever occurs first.
    (3) Do the stabilizer ballscrew to ballnut freeplay check for
discrepancies within 18 months after the effective date of this AD.
Repeat the freeplay check thereafter at intervals not to exceed
18,000 flight hours or 5 years, whichever occurs first.

(i) Group 1, Configuration 3 Airplanes--Repetitive Inspections,
Lubrications, Freeplay Checks

    For Group 1, Configuration 3 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144 (for Model 757-200, -200CB, and
200PF series airplanes) or 757-27A0145 (for Model 757-300 series
airplanes), both Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010: Do the
actions required by paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of this
AD, at the time specified in those paragraphs, and in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 757-27A0144 (for Model 757-200, -200CB, and -200PF series
airplanes) or 757-27A0145 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes), both
Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010.
    (1) Within 3,500 flight hours or 2 years after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a detailed inspection
for discrepancies of the stabilizer ballscrew assembly. Repeat the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,500 flight hours
or 2 years, whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 2,000 flight hours or 1 year after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Lubricate the horizontal
stabilizer trim control system. Repeat the lubrication thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours or 1 year, whichever
occurs first.
    (3) Do the stabilizer ballscrew to ballnut freeplay check for
discrepancies at the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(i)(3)(i) and (i)(3)(ii) of this AD. Repeat the freeplay check
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 18,000 flight hours or 5
years, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Within 15,000 flight hours after accomplishing an overhaul
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0142, Revision 2,
dated October 23, 2003 (for Model 757-200, -200CB, and -200PF series
airplanes); or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0143, Revision
1, dated October 23, 2003 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes).
    (ii) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD.

(j) Corrective Actions

    If any discrepancy is found during any action required by
paragraph (g), (h), or (i) of this AD: Before further flight, do the
replacement specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, in
accordance with Subject 27-41-10, ``Stabilizer Trim Ballscrew
Freeplay,'' of Chapter 27, ``Flight Controls,'' of the Boeing 757
Airplane Maintenance Manual (AMM), Revision 101, dated May 20, 2011;
except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (1) Replace the HSTA with a new or overhauled HSTA.
    (2) Replace the HSTA with a HSTA that is not new or overhauled
on which a detailed inspection, freeplay measurement, and
lubrication of that actuator are performed in accordance with
paragraph (g), (h), or (i) of this AD, as applicable, and no
discrepancies are found during the inspection and freeplay
measurement.

(k) No Action Required

    No action is required if a freeplay measurement greater than or
equal to 0.001 inch but less than 0.016 inch, is found and the
measurement is verified to have been performed correctly. This AD
requires HSTA replacement, as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD,
if a freeplay measurement is less than 0.001 inch, or greater than
or equal to 0.016 inch.

    Note 1 to paragraph (k) of this AD: Additional guidance for the
verification of the measurement can be found in Subject 27-41-10,
``Stabilizer Trim Ballscrew Freeplay,'' of Chapter 27, ``Flight
Controls,'' of the Boeing 757 AMM, Revision 101, dated May 20, 2011.

(l) Method of Compliance for Replacement of HSTA

    Any HSTA overhauled before the effective date of this AD, or
within the compliance time specified in paragraph (g), (h), or (i)
of this AD, as applicable--that included removal of the HSTA from
the airplane and overhaul of the stabilizer ballscrew, as specified
in Linear Motion Component Maintenance Manual with Illustrated Parts
List, Ball Screw Assembly, Linear Motion Part No. 7820700, Boeing
Part No. (S251N201-1), 27-41-10, Revision 3, dated October 2, 2007--
meets the intent of one detailed inspection, one freeplay
inspection, and one lubrication of the HSTA, as specified in
paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD; and therefore, is
considered acceptable for compliance with the initial accomplishment
of the actions specified in paragraph (g), (h), or (i) of this AD,
as applicable, and the repetitive interval for those actions may be
determined from the performance date of that overhaul.

(m) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on
any airplane, a horizontal stabilizer trim actuator that is not new
or overhauled, unless a detailed inspection, freeplay measurement,
and lubrication of that actuator are performed in accordance with
paragraph (g), (h), or (i) of this AD, as applicable, and no
discrepancies are found during the inspection and freeplay
measurement.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(o) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kenneth Frey,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, Seattle
ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone:
(425) 917-6468; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(p) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0144, Revision 1, dated
January 20, 2010.
    (ii) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0145, Revision 1,
dated January 20, 2010.
    (iii) Subject 27-41-10, ``Stabilizer Trim Ballscrew Freeplay,''
of Chapter 27, ``Flight Controls,'' of the Boeing 757 Airplane
Maintenance Manual, Revision 101, dated May 20, 2011.
    (iv) Linear Motion Component Maintenance Manual with Illustrated
Parts List, Ball Screw Assembly, Linear Motion Part No. 7820700,
Boeing Part No. (S251N201-1), 27-41-10, Revision 3, dated October 2,
2007.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) For Linear Motion service information identified in this AD,
contact Linear Motion LLC, 628 North Hamilton Street, Saginaw,
Michigan 48602; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http://www.thomsonaerospace.com.
    (5)You may review copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (6) 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/index.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 10, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-20265 Filed 8-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 18607]
[DOCID:fr23ap09-80]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-
2004-17984; FMCSA-2005-20027]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Renewals; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA previously announced its decision to renew the
exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations for 13 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to
exempt individuals from the vision requirement if the exemptions
granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that
granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that will be
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without
the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov.

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The comment
period ended on March 30, 2009.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Conclusion

    The Agency has not received any adverse evidence on any of these
drivers that indicates that safety is being compromised. Based upon its
evaluation of the 13 renewal applications, FMCSA renews the Federal
vision exemptions for David F. Breuer, Wilford F. Christian, Richard S.
Cummings, Joseph A. Dean, Jimmy C. Killian, Daniel L. Jacobs, Jimmy C.
Killian, Jose M. Limon-Alvarado, Eugene R. Lydick, John W. Montgomery,
Billy L. Riddle, Scottie Stewart, and Artis Suitt.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each renewal
exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with
the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: April 17, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-9346 Filed 4-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 47 (Monday, March 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8779-8780]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04376]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2019-04]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Debra
Plymate

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the

legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before April 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-1083
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alphonso Pendergrass<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 26, 2019.
Lirio Liu,
Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2018-1083.
    Petitioner: Debra Plymate.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  61.315(a), 61.411(a),
61.415, and 61.429(b).
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner request an exemption
to allow the McClish Funk B to be operated by FAA certificated sport
pilots, student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate, and certified
flight instructors with sport pilot ratings. Exemption from 14 CFR
61.315(a) will permit persons exercising the privileges of a sport
pilot certificate or student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate
to operate the McClish Funk B, and permit flight time obtained in the
McClish Funk B to be considered flight time obtained in a light-sport
aircraft. An exemption from 14 CFR 61.411(a), 61.415, and 61.429(b)
will permit persons exercising the privileges of a flight instructor
certificate with a sport pilot rating to provide flight training in the
McClish Funk B.

[FR Doc. 2019-04376 Filed 3-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59243-59244]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23709]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee Meeting on Transport
Airplane and Engine Issues

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a public meeting of the FAA's Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) to discuss transport airplane and
engine (TAE) issues.

DATES: The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 19, 2011,
starting at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time. Arrangements for oral
presentations must be made by October 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The Boeing Company, 1200 Wilson Boulevard, Room 234,
Arlington, Virginia 22209.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ralen Gao, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-
209, FAA, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, Telephone
(202) 267-3168, FAX<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. app. 2), notice is
given of an ARAC meeting to be held October 19, 2011.
    The agenda for the meeting is as follows:

 Opening Remarks, Review Agenda and Minutes
 FAA Report
 ARAC Executive Committee Report
     Update on Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group
 Transport Canada Report
 Materials Flammability Working Group Report
 Avionics Harmonization Working Group Report
 AA Working Group Report
 Flight Controls Working Group Report
     Rudder Reversal Tasking
 Any Other Business
 Action Items Review

    Attendance is open to the public, but will be limited to the
availability of meeting room space. Please confirm your attendance with
the person listed

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section no later than October
12, 2011. Please provide the following information: Full legal name,
country of citizenship, and name of your industry association, or
applicable affiliation. If you are attending as a public citizen,
please indicate so.
    The FAA will arrange for teleconference service for individuals
wishing to join in by teleconference if we receive notice by October
12, 2011. For persons participating by telephone, please contact Ralen
Gao by email or phone for the teleconference call-in number and
passcode. Anyone calling from outside the Arlington, VA, metropolitan
area will be responsible for paying long-distance charges.
    The public must make arrangements by October 12, 2011, to present
oral statements at the meeting. Written statements may be presented to
the ARAC at any time by providing 25 copies to the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section or by providing copies at the
meeting. Copies of the documents to be presented to ARAC may be made
available by contacting the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    If you need assistance or require a reasonable accommodation for
the meeting or meeting documents, please contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Sign and oral
interpretation, as well as a listening device, can be made available if
requested 10 calendar days before the meeting.

    Issued in Washington, DC on September 20, 2011.
Julie Ann Lynch,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-23709 Filed 9-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 166 (Thursday, August 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52003-52005]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20898]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0648; FRL-9931-31-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico;
Nonattainment New Source Review Permitting State Implementation Plan
Revisions for the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) for
the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County. These revisions provide
updates to the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County major
Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permit program. The EPA is
proposing this action under section 110 and part D of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or the Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
OAR-2009-0648, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions.
     Email: Ms. Erica Le Doux at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail or delivery: Ms. Erica Le Doux, Air Permits Section
(6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2009-0648. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
through http://www.regulations.gov or email, if you believe that it is
CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means that the EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your comment along with any disk or
CD-ROM submitted. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use
of special characters and any form of encryption and should be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Erica Le Doux,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment with Ms. Le Doux or Mr. Bill Deese at (214)
665-7253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

I. Background

    The Act at section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to develop and
submit to the EPA for approval into the state SIP, preconstruction
review programs applicable to new and modified stationary sources of
air pollutants for attainment and nonattainment areas that cover both
major and minor new sources and modifications, collectively referred to
as the NSR SIP. The CAA NSR SIP program is composed of three separate
programs: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), NNSR, and
Minor NSR. PSD is established in part C of title I of the CAA and
applies in areas that are designated as meeting the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), i.e., ``attainment areas'', as well as
areas designated as ``unclassifiable'' because there is insufficient
information to determine if the area meets the NAAQS. The NNSR SIP
program is established in part D of title I of the CAA and applies in
areas that are designated as not being in attainment of the NAAQS,
i.e., ``nonattainment areas.'' The Minor NSR SIP program addresses
construction or modification activities that do not emit, or have the
potential to emit, beyond certain major source thresholds and thus do
not qualify as ``major'' and applies regardless of the designation of
the area in which a source is located. The revisions to 20.11.60 NMAC
submitted on August 16, 2010 and July 26, 2013 were submitted as
revisions to the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County NNSR permit
program and will be evaluated against the requirements for NNSR
programs at 40 CFR 51.160-51.165.

A. August 16, 2010, Submittal

    On August 16, 2010, the Governor Bill Richardson submitted
revisions to the New Mexico SIP that incorporated revisions to the NMAC
for the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County. The August 16, 2010,
submittal includes final revised regulation sections 1, 2, 6, 7, 12
through 27 (including five new additional sections) in 20.11.60 NMAC,
Permitting in Nonattainment Areas. The updates that were accepted by
the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board constitutes
the integration of language that is consistent with federal NNSR
permitting regulations.

B. July 26, 2013, Submittal

    On July 26, 2013, the designee of the Governor, New Mexico
Environment Department Cabinet Secretary, Ryan Flynn, submitted
revisions to the SIP. This SIP submittal incorporated revisions to the
NMAC for the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County. It includes final
revised regulation sections 6, 7, 12, 13, and 15 in 20.11.60 NMAC,
Permitting in Nonattainment Areas. The updates that were accepted by
the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board constitutes
the integration of language that is consistent with federal NNSR
permitting regulations.

C. What is not included in today's proposed action?

    The EPA also received in the August 16, 2010 submittal revisions to
regulations within 20.11.61 NMAC--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) permitting program and Infrastructure SIP for
Particulate Matter less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5) and
Ozone (O3). In the July 26, 2013 submittals, revisions to
regulations within 20.11.61 NMAC-PSD permitting program and 20.11.42
NMAC--Operating Permits were also included. The revisions to 20.11.61
NMAC were submitted as revisions to the New

Mexico SIP. The 20.11.42 NMAC revisions were submitted as an update the
title V program. As part of this review, EPA is taking action only on
the submitted revisions to 20.11.60 NMAC. We are addressing the amended
regulations in 20.11.61 NMAC as part of separate SIP action (See 80 FR
28901); for the revisions to 20.11.42 NMAC, it will be addressed
separately in a later action to update the NM title V program.

II. The EPA's Evaluation

    The current SIP-approved version of 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in
Nonattainment Areas, was last approved by EPA on April 26, 2007, and
became effective on May 29, 2007. See 72 FR 20728. Substantive
revisions to the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County NNSR program
amend the existing state regulations to address the following federal
NNSR requirements promulgated by the EPA:
     Implementation of the NSR Program for PM2.5 (73
FR 28321);
     PSD for PM2.5-Increments, Significant Impact
Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC) (75 FR
64864);
     Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone (O3)
NAAQS-Phase 2; Final Rule to Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990
Amendments Relating to NSR and PSD as They Apply to Carbon Monoxide
(CO), PM and O3 NAAQS (70 FR 71612);
     PSD and NNSR: Reasonable Possibility in Recordkeeping (72
FR 72607); and
     PSD and NNSR: Reconsideration of Inclusion of Fugitive
Rule; Interim Rule; Stay and Revisions (76 FR 17548).
    Further, the amendments contained in the two submittals revise the
rules to conform to the latest changes to New Mexico Air Code for the
City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County laws which must continue to meet
minimum federal requirements and include grammatical and formatting
corrections. In addition, more headings were added to provide clarity
to the rules.
    The EPA's evaluation of the revisions to the New Mexico SIP for the
City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County NNSR program included a line-by-
line comparison in the TSD of the proposed revisions with the federal
requirements. State and local permitting authorities may meet the
requirements of 40 CFR part 51 with different but equivalent
regulations. While some permitting authorities choose to incorporate by
reference the applicable federal rules, other permitting authorities
(such as the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County) choose to draft
rules that track the federal language but contain differences. We found
that in most cases, the state regulatory language is identical to the
federal rule. Where the rules are not identical, they are at least
consistent and support the federal rules and definitions. The EPA is
therefore making a preliminary determination that the City of
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has adopted the necessary elements for
the NNSR program to comply with the federal regulatory requirements for
implementation of the PM2.5 and O3 NAAQS.

III. Proposed Action

    We evaluated and are proposing to approve the revisions to 20.11.60
NMAC submitted for SIP inclusion on August 16, 2010 and July 26, 2013.
The EPA has made the preliminary determination that the revisions are
approvable because the submitted rules are adopted and submitted in
accordance with the CAA and are consistent with the EPA's regulations
for NNSR permitting at 40 CFR 51.160-51.165. Therefore, under section
110 and part D of the Act, and for the reasons presented above and our
accompanying TSD, the EPA proposes to fully approve the specific
revisions to the New Mexico SIP for the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo
County as identified below.
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010; and adopted on April 10, 2013 and
submitted on July 26, 2013
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010; and adopted on April 10, 2013 and
submitted on July 26, 2013
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010; and adopted on April 10, 2013 and
submitted on July 26, 2013
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010; and adopted on April 10, 2013 and
submitted on July 26, 2013
     New <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010 and
submitted on August 16, 2010;
     New <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010 and
submitted on August 16, 2010; and adopted on April 10, 2013 and
submitted on July 26, 2013
     New <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010 and
submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     New <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010 and
submitted on August 16, 2010;
     New 11.60.20 NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010 and
submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
     Revisions to <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC as adopted on July 14, 2010
and submitted on August 16, 2010;
    The EPA is proposing to find that the August 16, 2010 and July 26,
2013, submittals together addresses all required NNSR elements for the
implementation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. We note that the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo
County NNSR program does not include regulation of VOCs and ammonia as
PM2.5 precursors. However, section 189(e) of the Act
requires regulation of PM2.5 precursors that significantly
contribute to PM2.5 levels ``which exceed the standard in
the area'' and PM2.5 levels in the City of Albuquerque-
Bernalillo County do not currently exceed the standard. In the event
that an area is designated nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS or any other future PM2.5 NAAQS, New Mexico for the
City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County will have a deadline under
section 189(a)(2) of the CAA to make a submission addressing the
statutory requirements as to that area, including the requirements in
section 189(e) that apply to the regulation of PM2.5
precursors.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by
reference

revisions to the New Mexico State regulations for the City of
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County as described in the Proposed Action
section above. We have made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or
in hard copy at the EPA Region 6 office.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. See, 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
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 action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable 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 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides.

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

    Dated: August 12, 2015.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2015-20898 Filed 8-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 73)]
[Notices]
[Page 19985]
[DOCID:fr16ap10-96]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1875-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Maryland; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Maryland (FEMA-1875-DR), dated February 19, 2010, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: April 9, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Maryland is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of February 19, 2010.

    Anne Arundel, Charles, and Talbot Counties and the Independent
City of Baltimore for emergency protective measures (Category B),
including snow assistance, under the Public Assistance program for
any continuous 48-hour period during or proximate to the incident
period.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-8748 Filed 4-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: June 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 119)]
[Notices]
[Page 35641-35642]
[DOCID:fr21jn06-82]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-354-000]

Rockies Express Pipeline LLC; Notice of Application

June 12, 2006.
    Take notice that on May 31, 2006, Rockies Express Pipeline LLC
(Rockies Express), formerly Entrega Gas Pipeline LLC, 370 Van Gordon
Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80228, filed an application in Docket No.
CP06-354-000, pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and
Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting a certificate of
public convenience and necessity to construct certain pipeline
facilities to provide up to 1,500,000 Dth per day of transportation
capacity, referred to as the REX-West project, as well as authorization
to lease capacity from Questar Overthrust Pipeline Company
(Overthrust), all as more fully set forth in the application which is
on file with the Commission and open for public inspection. These
filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
 using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number

excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Specifically, Rockies Express requests authorization to construct:
(1) 713 miles of 42-inch pipeline in Weld, Logan and Sedgwick Counties,
Colorado, Laramie County, Wyoming, Kimball, Perkins, Lincoln, Dawson,
Frontier, Gosper Phelps, Kearney, Franklin, Webster, Nuckolls, Thayer,
Jefferson and Gage Counties, Nebraska, Marshall, Nemaha, Brown and
Doniphan Counties, Kansas, and Buchannan, Clinton, Caldwell Carroll,
Chariton, Randolph and Audrain Counties, Missouri; (2) a 5-mile, 24-
inch gas supply lateral (Echo Springs Lateral) in Carbon and Sweetwater
Counties, Wyoming; (3) five new compressor stations in Weld and
Sedgwick Counties, Colorado, Gage County, Nebraska, Clinton County,
Missouri, and Sweetwater County, Wyoming; and (4) additional compressor
units at currently authorized compressor stations in Sweetwater County,
Wyoming (Wamsmutter CS--one unit), and Rio Blanco County, Colorado
(Meeker Hub--three units), and at the proposed new compressor station
in Weld County, Colorado (Cheyenne CS Hub--one unit).
    On November 18, 2005, the Commission staff granted Rockies Express'
request to utilize the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Pre-
Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF06-3-000 to staff activities
involving the Rockies Express project. Now, as of the filing of Rockies
Express' application on May 31, 2006, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for
this project has ended. From this time forward, Rockies Express'
proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP06-354-000, as noted in
the caption of this Notice.
    Rockies Express also seeks authorization to lease capacity of
625,000 Dth per day on the facilities of Overthrust. In order to
fulfill its lease commitment, Overthrust intends to construct 77 miles
of 36-inch pipeline, for which Overthrust has commenced environmental
consultation under the NEPA Pre-Filing Process in Docket No. PF06-19-
000, and will add compression at two locations on the facilities for
which it is currently seeking authority in Docket No. CP06-167-000.
Additionally, Rockies Express states that TransColorado Gas
Transmission Company (TransColorado) will seek authority to construct
facilities, with a capacity of 250,000 Dth per day, from the Blanco Hub
in New Mexico to the Meeker Hub in Colorado where TransColorado will
interconnect with Rockies Express. TransColorado has commenced
environmental consultation under the NEPA Pre-Filing Process in Docket
No. PF06-20-000.
    The estimated cost of the REX-West project is approximately $1.6
Billion. Rockies Express proposes two rate zones. Rockies Express
proposes to charge its approved, existing recourse rates for Zone 1
(points west of and including the Cheyenne Hub), and proposes to
establish new, initial recourse rates for Zone 2 (points east of the
Cheyenne Hub to and including the proposed interconnect with Panhandle
Eastern Pipe Line Company in Audrain County, Missouri). Rockies Express
also proposes to charge incremental rates related to the costs of the
proposed Overthrust lease, the Meeker Hub facilities, and the Cheyenne
Hub facilities.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Bentley W. Breland, Vice President of Certificates and Rates, Rockies
Express Pipeline LLC, P.O. Box 281304, Lakewood, Colorado 80228-8304,
phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the below listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: July 5, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-9765 Filed 6-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 182 (Thursday, September 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 49320]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20290]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3421-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

South Carolina; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of South Carolina (FEMA-3421-EM), dated September 1, 2019,
and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued September 11, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this emergency is closed effective September 6, 2019.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-20290 Filed 9-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: January 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2244]
[DOCID:fr14ja08-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD08-3-000]

Conference on Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Project; Notice
of Technical Conference and Request for a Statement of Interest
Regarding an Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Project

January 4, 2008.
    On January 29, 2008, the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC or Commission) will hold a technical conference to
discuss its third-party contracting requirements and expectations with
respect to preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) on an
Alaska natural gas transportation project. The staff invites those
contracting companies with the relevant expertise and an interest in
providing third-party contractor services to assist the FERC
environmental staff with the review of the application(s) and the
design and preparation of an EIS staff will prepare for the anticipated
project.
    The technical conference will be held at the Commission's
Headquarters, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426 in room 3M-2A
from 10 a.m. until 12 p.m. EST. All interested parties may attend. The
conference will not be transcribed, and telephone participation will
not be available.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    If a project moves forward and starts the Pre-Filing Process to
seek authorization under the Natural Gas Act, the FERC will be the lead
agency for complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) and for preparing an EIS that consolidates the environmental
review of all federal agencies with regulatory and other
responsibilities relevant to such a project. In particular, the staff
is interested in information and ideas regarding how a consultant would
assist it with:
     Planning and supporting the public participation process;
     coordinating the information flow between the lead and
cooperating agencies;
     identifying and analyzing the environmental issues
associated with a large diameter trans-Alaskan pipeline project; and
     preparing an EIS that is in full compliance with NEPA.
    In addition to the technical conference, the staff is seeking
Statements of Interest from qualified companies. Respondents to this
Request for Statement of Interest (RSI) should also submit a Capability
Statement (CS) of no more than 25 pages that describes the
organization's ability to perform the effort outlined above. The CS
should summarize the company's experience in projects of similar scope
and complexity, prior NEPA experience, and familiarity with the FERC
(especially third-party contract experience). The CS should also detail
the company's relevant expertise in such fields as arctic pipeline
construction and restoration, pipeline engineering, geotechnical and
seismic design, subsistence, and Native Alaskan consultation. The CS
may be appended with the qualifications of the key personnel on the
project team. In addition to the CS, respondents must include a
completed Organizational Conflict of Interest Statement (see
attachment).
    Responses to the RSI must be submitted as detailed below:
     Send two copies to: Michael J. Boyle, Branch Chief, Office
of Energy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Room 62-47, Washington, DC 20426;
     reference ``Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Project
RSI'' on both copies; and
     mail the response so that it will be received in
Washington, DC, on or before January 25, 2008.
    Be advised that all information submitted should be marked as
``Proprietary Information--Do Not Release'' in bold letters on the top
of every page in order to protect the submittal from public disclosure.
Companies responding to the RSI may also be interviewed individually at
the Commission's offices in Washington, DC. If such interviews are
scheduled, attendance would be at the interested parties' own expense.
    For additional information concerning the technical conference or
the RSI, please contact Laurence Sauter at<PHONE_NUMBER> or Rich McGuire
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-404 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P