[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 14, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34630-34633]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14684]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2011-0346, FRL-9318-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Hampshire:
Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Greenhouse Gas Permitting
Authority and Tailoring Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a requested revision to New
Hampshire's State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act). The proposed SIP revision was submitted by New Hampshire,
through the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NH
DES), Air Resources Division, to EPA on February 7, 2011. The proposed
SIP revision modifies New Hampshire's Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program to establish appropriate emission
thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and
modification projects become subject to New Hampshire's PSD permitting
requirements for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This rule
clarifies the applicable thresholds in the New Hampshire SIP, addresses
the flaw discussed in the SIP Narrowing Rule, and incorporates state
rule changes adopted at the state level into the Federally-approved
SIP. EPA is proposing approval of New Hampshire's February 7, 2011, SIP
revision because the Agency has made the preliminary determination that
this SIP revision is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations
regarding PSD permitting for GHGs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2011-0346, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2011-0346,''
Donald Dahl, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 5 Post Office Square--
Suite 100, (mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Donald Dahl,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor
Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (mail code OEP05-2),
Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R01-OAR-
2011-0346.'' 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
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics,
and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston,
Massachusetts. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the New
Hampshire SIP, contact Donald Dahl, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post
Office Square--Suite 100, (mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109--3912.
Mr. Dahl's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA proposing in this document?
II. What is the background for the action proposed by EPA in this
document?
    A. GHG-Related Actions
    B. New Hampshire's Actions
III. What is EPA's analysis of New Hampshire's SIP revision?
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA proposing in this document?

    On February 7, 2011, NH DES submitted a revision to EPA for
approval into the New Hampshire SIP to establish appropriate emission
thresholds for determining which new or modified stationary sources
become subject to New Hampshire's PSD permitting requirements for GHG
emissions. Due to a previous EPA action known as the SIP Narrowing
Rule, starting on January 2, 2011, the approved New Hampshire SIP's PSD
requirements for GHG now apply at the thresholds specified in the
Tailoring Rule, not at the 100 or 250 tons per year (tpy) levels
otherwise provided under the CAA, which would overwhelm New Hampshire's
permitting resources. Final approval of this SIP revision request will
put in place the GHG emission thresholds for PSD applicability set
forth in EPA's Tailoring Rule, ensuring that smaller GHG sources
emitting less than these thresholds will not be subject to permitting
requirements. Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is

proposing to approve this revision into the New Hampshire SIP.

II. What is the background for the action proposed by EPA in this
document?

    This section briefly summarizes EPA's recent GHG-related actions
that provide the background for today's proposed action. More detailed
discussion of the background is found in the preambles for those
actions. In particular, the background is contained in what we call the
GHG PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,\1\ and in the preambles to the actions
cited therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources
in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 82536 (Dec. 30,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. GHG-Related Actions

    EPA has recently undertaken a series of actions pertaining to the
regulation of GHGs that, although for the most part distinct from one
another, establish the overall framework for today's final action on
the New Hampshire SIP. Four of these actions include, as they are
commonly called, the ``Endangerment Finding'' and ``Cause or Contribute
Finding,'' which EPA issued in a single final action,\2\ the ``Johnson
Memo Reconsideration,'' \3\ the ``Light-Duty Vehicle Rule,'' \4\ and
the ``Tailoring Rule.'' \5\ Taken together and in conjunction with the
CAA, these actions established regulatory requirements for GHGs emitted
from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines; determined that
such regulations, when they took effect on January 2, 2011, subjected
GHGs emitted from stationary sources to PSD requirements; and limited
the applicability of PSD requirements to GHG sources on a phased-in
basis. EPA took this last action in the Tailoring Rule, which, more
specifically, established appropriate GHG emission thresholds for
determining the applicability of PSD requirements to GHG-emitting
sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for
Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.'' 74 FR
66496 (Dec. 15, 2009).
    \3\ ``Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants
Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting Programs.'' 75 FR 17004 (Apr. 2,
2010).
    \4\ ``Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and
Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 25324
(May 7, 2010).
    \5\ ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 31514 (June 3,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PSD is implemented through the SIP system, and so in December 2010,
EPA promulgated several rules to implement the new GHG PSD SIP program.
Recognizing that some states had approved SIP PSD programs that did not
apply PSD to GHGs, EPA issued a SIP call and, for some of these states,
a FIP.\6\ Recognizing that other states had approved SIP PSD programs
that do apply PSD to GHGs, but that do so for sources that emit as
little as 100 or 250 tpy of GHG, and that do not limit PSD
applicability to GHGs to the higher thresholds in the Tailoring Rule,
EPA issued the GHG PSD SIP Narrowing Rule. Under that rule, EPA
withdrew its approval of the affected SIPs to the extent those SIPs
covered GHG-emitting sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. EPA
based its action primarily on the ``error correction'' provisions of
CAA section 110(k)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Specifically, by action dated December 13, 2010, EPA
finalized a ``SIP Call'' that would require those states with SIPs
that have approved PSD programs but do not authorize PSD permitting
for GHGs to submit a SIP revision providing such authority. ``Action
To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call,'' 75 FR
77698 (Dec. 13, 2010). EPA has begun making findings of failure to
submit that would apply in any state unable to submit the required
SIP revision by its deadline, and finalizing FIPs for such states.
See, e.g. ``Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of Failure To Submit State
Implementation Plan Revisions Required for Greenhouse Gases,'' 75 FR
81874 (Dec. 29, 2010); ``Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits
Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources
of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan,'' 75 FR
82246 (Dec. 30, 2010). Because New Hampshire's SIP already
authorizes New Hampshire to regulate GHGs once GHGs became subject
to PSD requirements on January 2, 2011, New Hampshire is not subject
to the proposed SIP Call or FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. New Hampshire's Actions

    On July 30, 2010, New Hampshire provided a letter to EPA, in
accordance with a request to all States from EPA in the Tailoring Rule,
with confirmation that the State has the authority to regulate GHG in
its PSD program. The letter also confirmed that current New Hampshire
rules require regulating GHGs at the existing 100/250 tpy threshold,
rather than at the higher thresholds set in the Tailoring Rule. See the
docket for this proposed rulemaking for a copy of New Hampshire's
letter.
    In the SIP Narrowing Rule, published on December 30, 2010, EPA
withdrew its approval of New Hampshire's SIP (among other SIPs) to the
extent that the SIP applies PSD permitting requirements to GHG
emissions from sources emitting at levels below those set in the
Tailoring Rule.\7\ As a result, New Hampshire's current approved SIP
provides the state with authority to regulate GHGs, but only at and
above the Tailoring Rule thresholds; and requires new and modified
sources to receive a Federal PSD permit based on GHG emissions only if
they emit at or above the Tailoring Rule thresholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources
in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 82536 (Dec. 30,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The basis for this proposed SIP revision is that limiting PSD
applicability to GHG sources to the higher thresholds in the Tailoring
Rule is consistent with the SIP provisions that provide required
assurances of adequate resources, and thereby addresses the flaw in the
SIP that led to the SIP Narrowing Rule. Specifically, CAA section
110(a)(2)(E) includes as a requirement for SIP approval that States
provide ``necessary assurances that the State * * * will have adequate
personnel [and] funding * * * to carry out such [SIP].'' In the
Tailoring Rule, EPA established higher thresholds for PSD applicability
to GHG-emitting sources on grounds that the states generally did not
have adequate resources to apply PSD to GHG-emitting sources below the
Tailoring Rule thresholds,\8\ and no State, including New Hampshire,
asserted that it did have adequate resources to do so.\9\ In the SIP
Narrowing Rule, EPA found that the affected states, including New
Hampshire, had a flaw in their SIP at the time they submitted their PSD
programs, which was that the applicability of the PSD programs was
potentially broader than the resources available to them under their
SIP.\10\ Accordingly, for each affected state, including New Hampshire,
EPA concluded that EPA's action in approving the SIP was in error,
under CAA section 110(k)(6), and EPA rescinded its approval to the
extent the PSD program applies to GHG-emitting sources below the
Tailoring Rule thresholds.\11\ EPA recommended that States adopt a SIP
revision to incorporate the Tailoring Rule thresholds, thereby (i)
assuring that under State law, only sources at or above the Tailoring
Rule thresholds would be subject to PSD; and (ii) avoiding confusion
under the Federally approved SIP by clarifying that the SIP applies to
only sources at or above the Tailoring Rule thresholds.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31517.
    \9\ SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR 82540.
    \10\ Id. at 82542.
    \11\ Id. at 82544.
    \12\ Id. at 82540.

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

III. What is EPA's analysis of New Hampshire's SIP revision?

    The regulatory revisions that NH DES submitted on February 7, 2011,
establish thresholds for determining which stationary sources and
modification projects become subject to permitting requirements for GHG
emissions under New Hampshire's PSD program. Specifically, the
submittal includes changes to New Hampshire's regulations at Air
Resources Division Env-A 101 (Definitions) and Env-A 619 (PSD Permit
Requirements) that New Hampshire finalized in December 2010.
    New Hampshire is currently a SIP-approved state for the PSD
program. In a letter provided to EPA on July 30, 2010, New Hampshire
notified EPA of its interpretation that the State currently has the
authority to regulate GHGs under its PSD regulations. The currently-
approved New Hampshire PSD SIP (adopted prior to the promulgation of
EPA's Tailoring Rule) applies to major stationary sources (having the
potential to emit at least 100 tpy or 250 tpy or more of a regulated
NSR pollutant, depending on the type of source) or modifications
constructing in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable with
respect to the NAAQS.
    The amendments to Env-A 101 that EPA is proposing to approve into
the New Hampshire SIP include: New Env-A 101.35, definition of ``Carbon
dioxide equivalent emissions''; new Env-A 101.96, definition of
``Greenhouse gases''; an amendment to the definition of ``Major
source'' in Env-A 101.115; and certain amendments to Env-A 619.03,
``PSD Permit Requirements.''
    New Hampshire's original SIP revision request to EPA, dated
February 7, 2011, proposed to incorporate all of the amendments to Env-
A 619.03 as part of its SIP revision request. After an exchange of
correspondence, on May 16, 2011, New Hampshire withdrew from
consideration its recent revisions to Env-A 619.03(a). Thus, EPA is
proposing to approve into the SIP Env-A 619.03(b)-(e) as revised, but,
in place of the revised Env-A 619.03(a), to retain its previously-
approved predecessor, which was then numbered as Env-A 623.03(a).\13\
New Hampshire's previously-approved PSD regulations became effective
under state law on July 23, 2001 and were approved by EPA on October
28, 2002 (67 FR 65710). EPA and New Hampshire agree that relying on the
previously-approved version of Env-A 619.03(a) does not affect the
manner in which Env-A 619.03(b)-(e) function. New Hampshire and EPA may
take action on the revision to Env-A 619.03(a) in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Env-A 623 was renumbered to Env-A 619 for reasons unrelated
to the Tailoring Rule or this proposed revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The changes to New Hampshire's PSD program regulations that EPA is
proposing to approve are substantively the same as the amendments to
the Federal PSD regulatory provisions in EPA's Tailoring Rule regarding
greenhouse gases. As part of its review of this submittal, EPA
performed a line-by-line review of New Hampshire's proposed revision
and has preliminarily determined that they are consistent with the
Tailoring Rule.
    EPA has, however, identified several minor differences between the
proposed SIP revision and EPA's PSD regulations. These differences
arise from the fact that New Hampshire's PSD SIP consists, in the main,
of an incorporation by reference of 40 CFR 52.21 as it stood when the
PSD SIP was approved. For purposes of regulating greenhouse gases,
however, New Hampshire has incorporated by reference the definitions of
``major stationary source'' and ``significant'' contained in 40 CFR
52.21(b), July 1, 2009 edition, and the definitions of ``subject to
regulation'' and ``regulated NSR pollutant'' promulgated by EPA in the
Tailoring Rule and codified at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)-(50). These
differences and EPA's analysis of why they do not affect approvability
are explained in a memorandum ``Explanation of Two Definitions in New
Hampshire's PSD Regulations.'' See the docket for this proposed
rulemaking for a copy of the memorandum.

IV. Proposed Action

    Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is proposing to approve New
Hampshire's February 7, 2011 SIP revision relating to PSD requirements
for GHG-emitting sources. Specifically, New Hampshire's February 7,
2011 SIP revision establishes appropriate emissions thresholds for
determining PSD applicability to new and modified GHG-emitting sources
in accordance with EPA's Tailoring Rule. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that this SIP revision is approvable because it is in
accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting
for GHGs.
    If EPA does approve New Hampshire's changes to its air quality
regulations to incorporate the appropriate thresholds for GHG
permitting applicability into New Hampshire's SIP, then Sec.
52.1522(c) of 40 CFR part 52, as included in EPA's SIP Narrowing Rule--
which codifies EPA's limiting its approval of New Hampshire's PSD SIP
to not cover the applicability of PSD to GHG-emitting sources below the
Tailoring Rule thresholds--is no longer necessary. In today's proposed
action, EPA is also proposing to amend Sec.  52.1522(c) of 40 CFR part
52 to remove this unnecessary regulatory language.

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 Clean Air Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 Clean Air Act; 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, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

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

    Dated: June 1, 2011.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2011-14684 Filed 6-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15528-15530]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06563]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0492; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-232-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701, & 702), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), and CL-600-2D24
(Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by
reports of a disconnect between the elevator lever and control rod.
This proposed AD would require replacement of left and right fixed
control rods and lever assemblies of the elevator control system. We
are proposing this AD to prevent a disconnect between the elevator
lever and control rod, which could lead to un-commanded elevator
movement of the associated control surface, a large difference between
the position of the left and the right elevator control surface, and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane and degradation of
the structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 8, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-2015-
0492; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2015-0492;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-232-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each

substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2014-44, dated December 9, 2014 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-
2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet
Series 705), and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes. The
MCAI states:

    During an engineering review of the Elevator Control system, it
was discovered that a disconnect between the elevator lever and
control rod could lead to uncommanded elevator movement of the
associated control surface. This uncommanded movement may cause a
large difference between the position of the left and the right
elevator control surface resulting in reduced controllability of the
aeroplane and degradation of the structural integrity of the
horizontal stabilizer.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the replacement of the existing
elevator lever assemblies and control rods with newly designed ones,
which will prevent a disconnect between the components of the
elevator control system should a failure occur.

    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-2015-
0492.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc. has issued Service Bulletin 670BA-17-062, Revision
B, dated October 10, 2014. This service information describes
procedures for replacing the elevator lever assemblies and control
rods. The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. This service
information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access
this service information.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 400 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We also estimate that it would take about 14 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $6,712
per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $3,160,800, or $7,902 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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):

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2015-0492; Directorate Identifier
2014-NM-232-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by May 8, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to the airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this
AD.
    (i) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701, & 702) airplanes, serial number (S/N) 10002 through 10337
inclusive.
    (ii) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series
705) and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, S/N 15001
through 15298 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of a disconnect between the
elevator lever and control rod. We are issuing this AD to prevent a
disconnect between the elevator lever and control rod, which could
lead to un-commanded elevator movement of the associated control
surface, a large difference between the position of the left and the
right elevator control surface, and consequent reduced
controllability of the airplane and degradation of the structural
integrity of the horizontal stabilizer.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Replacement of Elevator Lever Assemblies and Control Rods

    Within 9,200 flight hours or 5 years, whichever occurs first,
after the effective date of this AD: Replace the left and right
fixed

control rods and lever assemblies of the elevator control system
with newly designed control rods and lever assemblies, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier, Inc. Service
Bulletin 670BA-27-062, Revision B, dated October 10, 2014.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-27-062,
dated December 12, 2013; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-27-
062, Revision A, dated April 1, 2014.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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 ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing
Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (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,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2014-44, dated December
9, 2014, 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-2015-0492.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 12, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-06563 Filed 3-23-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 38 (Thursday, February 26, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10423-10426]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03979]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0415; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-001-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; GROB-WERKE Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain GROB-WERKE Models G115EG and G120A airplanes that would
supersede AD 2014-26-04. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe

condition as a defective starter solenoid. We are issuing this proposed
AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Grob Aircraft AG, Customer Service, Lettenbachstrasse 9, D-86874
Tussenhausen-Mattsies, Germany, telephone: + 49 (0) 8268-998-105; fax:
+ 49 (0) 8268-998-200; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: grob-aircraft.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0415; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2015-0415;
Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-001-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On December 22, 2014, we issued AD 2014-26-04, Amendment 39-18055
(80 FR 155, January 5, 2015). That AD required actions intended to
address an unsafe condition on certain GROB-WERKE Models G115EG and
G120A airplanes and was based on mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country.
    AD 2014-26-04, Amendment 39-18055 (80 FR 155, January 5, 2015), was
considered an interim action. Since we issued AD 2014-26-04, GROB
Aircraft developed a modification to avoid loss of electrical power in
case of electrical shortage in the starter solenoid.
    European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No. 2015-0010R1, dated February 4, 2015 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    An operator of a G 115E aeroplane experienced a total loss of
electrical power in flight. The investigation found that a defective
starter solenoid had caused an internal short circuit which resulted
in breakdown of the system voltage.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in
reduced control of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, GROB Aircraft AG
issued Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) MSB1078-196 for G 115
aeroplanes and MSB 1121-144 for G 120 aeroplanes to provide
instructions for inspection and corrective action. Consequently,
EASA issued AD 2014-0212 to require a one-time inspection of the
starter solenoid and, depending on findings, replacement of the
starter. In addition, for G 115E aeroplanes, installation of a
placard was required.
    More recently, GROB Aircraft AG developed a modification to
avoid loss of electrical power in case of electrical shortage in the
starter solenoid, which was published in revised GROB MSB1078-196/1
and MSB1121-144/1.
    Prompted by this development, EASA issued AD 2015-0010,
retaining the requirements of EASA AD 2014-0212, which was
superseded, and required installation of a starter relay.
    Since that AD was issued, operator comments have indicated the
existence of a logistical problem, resulting in the unnecessary
grounding of aeroplanes.
    For the reason described above, this AD is revised to amend
paragraph (3), extending the compliance time for modification.

You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0415.

Relevant Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    GROB Aircraft has issued Service Bulletin No. MSB1078-196/1, dated
December 1, 2014, and Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/3, dated
February 20, 2015. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.
The GROB Aircraft service bulletins describe procedures for inspecting
the starter solenoid, replacing damaged starters, and installing a
starter relay. This service information is reasonably available; see
ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 6 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 4 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic starter inspection requirement of this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed
inspection on

U.S. operators to be $2,040, or $340 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary starter replacements
would take about 4 work-hours and require parts costing $600, for a
cost of $940 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
products that may need this replacement.
    We also estimate that it would take about 20 work-hours per product
to comply with the starter relay installation requirement of this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required
parts would cost about $1,000 per product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed
installation on U.S. operators to be $16,200, or $2,700 per product

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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 removing Amendment 39-18055 (80 FR
155, January 5, 2015), and adding the following new AD:

GROB-WERKE: Docket No. FAA-2015-0415; Directorate Identifier 2015-
CE-001-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 13, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2014-26-04, Amendment 39-18055 (80 FR 155,
January 5, 2015) (``AD 2014-26-04'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to GROB-WERKE Model G115EG airplanes, all serial
numbers through 82323/E, and Model G120A airplanes, all serial
numbers through 85063, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 80: Starting.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct defective
starter solenoids, which could cause an internal short circuit and
could result in reduced control. We are superseding AD 2014-26-04
requiring installation of a starter relay that will prevent loss of
electrical power in case of electrical shortage in the starter
solenoid.

 (f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) through
(f)(3) of this AD:
    (1) Within the next 30 days after February 9, 2015 (the
effective date retained from AD 2014-26-04), inspect the starter
following Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions in GROB Aircraft
Service Bulletin No. MSB1078-196, dated July 14, 2014; GROB Aircraft
Service Bulletin No. MSB1078-196/1, dated December 1, 2014; GROB
Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144, dated July 14, 2014; GROB
Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/1, dated January 12, 2015;
GROB Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/2, dated February 5,
2015; or GROB Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/3, dated
February 20, 2015, as applicable.
    (2) If any damage is found on the starter during the inspection
required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further flight,
replace the starter with a serviceable part. Do the replacement
following Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions in GROB Aircraft
Service Bulletin No. MSB1078-196, dated July 14, 2014; GROB Aircraft
Service Bulletin No. MSB1078-196/1, dated December 1, 2014; GROB
Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144, dated July 14, 2014; GROB
Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/1, dated January 12, 2015;
GROB Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/2, dated February 5,
2015; or GROB Aircraft Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/3, dated
February 20, 2015, as applicable.
    (3) Within the next 100 hours time-in-service after the
effective date of this AD, install a starter relay following Part B
of the Accomplishment Instructions in GROB Aircraft Service Bulletin
No. MSB1078-196/1, dated December 1, 2014, or GROB Aircraft Service
Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/3, dated February 205, 2015, as applicable.

(g) Credit for Actions Done in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    Actions done before the effective date of this AD following the
Accomplishment Instructions specified in GROB Aircraft Service
Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/1, dated January 12, 2015; or GROB Aircraft
Service Bulletin No. MSB1121-144/2, dated February 5, 2015, as
applicable, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(2)
of this AD.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on
any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(i) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2015-0010R1, dated February 4, 2015, for related information. You
may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0415. For service
information related to this AD, contact Grob Aircraft AG, Customer
Service, Lettenbachstrasse 9, D-86874 Tussenhausen-Mattsies,
Germany, telephone: + 49 (0) 8268-998-105; fax: + 49 (0) 8268-998-
200; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: grob-
aircraft.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on February 19, 2015.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-03979 Filed 2-25-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 9534]
[DOCID:fr24fe06-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-33-002]

Southern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

February 14, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 9, 2006, Southern Natural Gas Company
(Southern) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to the Commission
Order issued February 1, 2006.
    Southern states that copies of the filing were served on parties on
the official service list.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 7, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-2621 Filed 2-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P