[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 224 (Thursday, November 20, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69078-69082]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27160]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0246]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone, John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse,
Boston, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Coast Guard proposes to establish a
permanent security zone within Sector Boston's Captain of the Port
(COTP) Zone on the waters in the vicinity of John Joseph Moakley United
States Courthouse, Boston, MA. Enforcement of this permanent security
zone during high profile court proceedings at the Moakley Courthouse is
necessary to protect people, property, and the port of Boston from
subversive acts.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before December 22, 2014.
    Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before December 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2014-0246 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West

Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries accepted between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Mr. Mark Cutter, Coast Guard Sector Boston
Waterways Management Division, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-
366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2014-0246), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received
by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you
fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as
having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0246) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0246) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

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

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    In previous years, the U.S. Coast Guard has received requests from
federal and state law enforcement agencies to establish a temporary
security zone in the vicinity of the John Joseph Moakley United States
Courthouse on a case-by-case basis to facilitate the security and
safety of persons and property during high profile court proceedings.
The Coast Guard now proposes to create a permanent rule that will
create a permanent security zone in the vicinity of the courthouse to
be enforced on a case-by-case basis at the discretion of the COTP.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter
701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and
160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; and Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast
Guard to establish security zones.
    The John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse houses the United
States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the United States
District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and the United States
Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts. Consequently, high
profile events and court proceedings, such as the ongoing prosecution
related to the Boston Marathon bombing, often take place at the Moakley
Courthouse, resulting in a heightened security posture. With this in
mind, the Captain of the Port, Sector Boston, has determined that a
security zone is necessary to better protect and secure persons and
property during high profile court proceedings and events.
    Establishing a security zone on an ad hoc basis is administratively
cumbersome and reduces the opportunity for public participation in the
development of the rule. Thus, to lessen administrative overhead and to
maximize public participation, this rule proposes to establish a
security zone near the courthouse that will remain in effect
permanently but will be enforced only when deemed necessary by the
COTP. This permanent security zone will be published in Title 33 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 165.

D. Discussion of Rule

    For the reasons explained above, the COTP Boston proposes to
establish a security zone encompassing all U.S. navigable waters, from
surface to bottom, within five hundred (500) yards of the John Joseph
Moakley United States Courthouse (Moakley Courthouse) in Boston, MA and
following any natural waterside seawall

configuration enclosed by a line connecting the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
42[deg]21'15'' N....................  71[deg]02'54'' W; Bounded by the
                                       curvature of the seawall, thence
                                       to
42[deg]21'13'' N....................  71[deg]02'27'' W; thence to
42[deg]21'25'' N....................  71[deg]02'17'' W; thence to
42[deg]21'32'' N....................  71[deg]02'54'' W; Bounded by the
                                       curvature of the seawall, thence
                                       to
42[deg]21'18'' N....................  71[deg]03'01'' W; thence to point
                                       of origin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While this proposed security zone is being enforced, no person or
vessel may enter or remain in it without the permission of the COTP.
However, the COTP proposes to grant standing permission to enter the
security zone to any vessel that goes no faster than that speed
necessary to maintain a safe course, unless otherwise required by
Navigation Rules and as long as such vessels remain beyond two hundred
and fifty (250) yards of the Moakley Courthouse. Under certain
circumstances and depending on security needs of a given situation, the
COTP may predetermine before an enforcement period begins to make these
standing conditions of entry less restrictive.
    Regardless of the conditions of entry, any person or vessel
permitted to enter the security zone must comply with the directions
and orders of the COTP or the COTP's representative while said person
or vessel is within the five-hundred (500) yard zone. To obtain the
permissions required by this proposed regulation, individuals may reach
the COTP or the COTP's representative via VHF channel 16 or 617-223-
5757 (Sector Boston Command Center) to obtain permission.
    This proposed security zone will be in effect permanently but will
only be enforced when deemed necessary by the COTP. Anyone, including
members of federal or state law enforcement agencies, may request that
this security zone be enforced. The COTP will notify the public of the
enforcement of this security zone by publishing a Notice of Enforcement
(NOE) in the Federal Register and via the other means listed in 33 CFR
165.7. Such notifications will include the date and times of
enforcement, along with any pre-determined conditions of entry.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under these Orders.
    The Coast Guard expects minimal adverse impact on mariners from
this security zone's enforcement for the following reasons. First, the
security zone is expected to be enforced only a few weeks at a time and
on only a few occasions per year. Second, the minimum speed necessary
to maintain a safe steerageway, within five hundred (500) yards of the
Moakley Courthouse closely mirrors the City of Boston's six (6) knots
speed restrictions for Boston Inner Harbor. Third, the Coast Guard
designed the security zone to have as minimal geographical application
as possible and will permit traffic in the Fort Point Channel via law
enforcement vessel escort. While water taxis servicing the Harbor Dock
on the premises of the Moakley Courthouse may be impacted during an
enforcement period, such impact should be minimal as the Harbor Dock at
the courthouse will likely be shutdown during high profile events, and
if not, the COTP is expected to permit vessels to enter via law
enforcement vessel escort. Though the regular schedule commuter ferries
that service Rowes Wharf will also have to transit through the two
hundred and fifty (250) yard security zone, it is expected that the
COTP will authorize them permission to transit through upon initial
notification to the COTP or the designated on-scene representative.
Fourth, mariners may pass through the security zone with authorization
from the COTP or the designated on-scene representative. Finally, as
mentioned previously, the Coast Guard will provide advance notification
to the public anytime it intends to enforce the security zone. Such
notification will be made in advance through an NOE published in the
Federal Register and also through the local Notice to Mariners and
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. REGULATORY PLANNING AND REVIEW section, the Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without

jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule will not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``Significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action may be one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment.
    This proposed rule involves the establishment of a security zone
and thus, may be categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph (34)(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A
preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this
determination will be available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

     Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.120 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.120  Security Zone; John Joseph Moakley United States
Courthouse, Boston, MA.

    (a) Location. This security zone encompasses all U.S. navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, within five hundred (500) yards of the
John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse (Moakley Courthouse) in
Boston, MA, and following any natural waterside seawall configuration
enclosed by a line connecting the following points from: 42[deg]21'15''
N, 71[deg]02'54'' W bounded by the curvature of the seawall; thence to
42[deg]21'13'' N, 71[deg]02'27'' W; thence to 42[deg]21'25'' N,
71[deg]02'17'' W; thence to 42[deg]21'32'' N, 71[deg]02'54'' W bounded
by the curvature of the seawall; thence to 42[deg]21'18'' N,
71[deg]03'01'' W; thence to point of origin.
    (b) Regulations. While this security zone is being enforced, the
following regulations, along with those contained in 33 CFR 165.33,
apply:
    (1) No person or vessel may enter or remain in this security zone
without the permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector
Boston. However, the COTP hereby grants vessels permission to enter
this security zone as long as such vessels remain beyond two hundred
and fifty (250) yards of the Moakley Courthouse and as long as such
vessels go no faster than that speed necessary to maintain a safe
course, unless otherwise required by the Navigation Rules. Under
certain circumstances and depending on security needs of a given
situation, the COTP may predetermine before an enforcement period
begins to make these entry conditions less restrictive.
    (2) Although vessels have permission to enter the security zone
under the conditions mentioned in the preceding paragraph, no person or
vessel may come within two hundred and fifty (250) yards of the Moakley
Courthouse under any conditions unless given express permission from
the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. As mentioned in the
preceding paragraph, the COTP may chose before an enforcement period
begins to make this entry condition less restrictive. In other words,
the COTP may predetermine that vessels allowed to conditionally enter
the security zone may come closer to the courthouse than the two
hundred and fifty (250) yards mentioned above.
    (3) Any person or vessel permitted to enter the security zone shall
comply with the directions and orders of the COTP or the COTP's
representative. Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by
siren, radio, flashing lights, or other means, the operator of a vessel
within the zone shall proceed as directed. Any person or vessel within
the security zone shall exit the zone when directed by the COTP or the
COTP's representative.
    (4) To obtain permissions required by this regulation, individuals
may reach the COTP or the COTP's representative via VHF channel 16 or
617-223-5757 (Sector Boston Command Center) to obtain permission.
    (5) Penalties. Those who violate this section are subject to the
penalties set

forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.
    (c) Effective and enforcement period. This security zone is in
effect permanently but will only be enforced when deemed necessary by
the COTP. Anyone, including members of federal or state law enforcement
agencies, may request that this security zone be enforced.
    (d) Notification. The COTP will notify the public of the
enforcement of this security zone by publishing a Notice of Enforcement
(NOE) in the Federal Register and via the other means listed in 33 CFR
165.7. Such notifications will include the date and times of
enforcement, along with any pre-determined conditions of entry.
    (e) COTP representative. The COTP's representative may be any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer or any Federal, state, or
local law enforcement officer who has been designated by the COTP to
act on the COTP's behalf. The COTP's representative may be on a Coast
Guard vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, a state or local law
enforcement vessel, or a location on shore.

    Dated: November 5, 2014.
J.C. O'Connor III,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Boston.
[FR Doc. 2014-27160 Filed 11-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 127 (Monday, July 6, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31894-31896]
[FR Doc No: E9-15811]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0608; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-215-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 747-200C and -200F Series
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing 747-200C and -200F series airplanes. This proposed AD would
require a high frequency eddy current inspection for cracks of certain
fastener holes, and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD
would also require repetitive replacements of the upper chords, straps
(or angles), and radius fillers of certain upper deck floor beams, and,
for any replacement that is done, detailed and open-hole HFEC
inspections for cracks of the modified upper deck floor beams, and
corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report
from the manufacturer that the accomplishment of certain existing
inspections, repairs, and modifications is not adequate to ensure the
structural integrity of the affected 7075 series aluminum alloy upper
deck floor beam upper chords on airplanes that have exceeded certain
thresholds. We are proposing this AD to prevent cracking of the upper
chords and straps (or angles) of the floor beams, which could lead to
failure of the floor beams and consequent loss of controllability,
rapid decompression, and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 20, 2009.

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
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>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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> or
425-227-1152.

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 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: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; 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-2009-0608;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-215-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://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

    We have received reports that operators have found cracks in the
upper chords and straps (or angles) of the upper deck floor beams. The
airplanes had accumulated between 16,264 and 23,561 total flight
cycles. In addition, we received a report from the manufacturer that
the accomplishment of certain existing inspections, repairs, and
modifications is not adequate to ensure the structural integrity of the
affected 7075 series aluminum alloy upper deck floor beam upper chords
on airplanes that have exceeded certain thresholds. Cracks in the upper
chords or straps (or angles) of an upper deck floor beam that are not
found and repaired could become large and fully sever the floor beam. A
severed floor beam can lead to large deflection or deformation of the
floor and of the adjacent body skin, frames, and stringers, and could
result in damage and unintended inputs to the wire bundles and control
cables routed through the floor beams which could affect airplane
controllability. If not corrected, adjacent severed floor beams could
result in consequent loss of controllability, rapid decompression, and
loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

Related ADs

    As a result of these reports of cracks, Boeing issued Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2439 provides procedures for an open-hole high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) or surface HFEC inspection to find fatigue cracking in
the upper chord of the upper deck floor beams, and applicable related
investigative and corrective actions. The actions in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001, are required by AD
2006-08-02, amendment 39-14556 (71 FR 18618, April 12, 2006).
    In addition, Boeing has received many reports of cracks in the
upper chords and straps (or angles) of the affected floor beams at the
fastener locations where the upper chords attach to the body frames. As
a result of these reports of cracks, Boeing issued Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2420, dated March 26, 1998; and Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2429, dated March 22, 2001. Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2420 provides procedures for detailed and open-hole
HFEC

inspections of the upper chords of the floor beams, and applicable
corrective actions. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2429 provides
procedures for detailed and open-hole HFEC inspections and modification
of the upper chords of the floor beams, and applicable corrective
actions. The actions in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2420,
dated March 26, 1998; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2429,
dated March 22, 2001, are required by AD 2005-07-21, amendment 39-14046
(70 FR 18277, April 11, 2005).
    To preclude widespread fatigue damage, we have determined that we
should not rely solely on the inspections required by AD 2006-08-02 and
AD 2005-07-21 indefinitely. We have determined to mandate a
modification of the floor beams and related investigative actions in
this separate AD action, rather than superseding the related ADs.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2696, dated
October 16, 2008. This service bulletin describes procedures for
removing the upper chords from the upper deck floor beams at stations
(STA) 340 to 440 inclusive, 500, and 520, an open-hole HFEC inspection
for cracks of all the fastener holes accessed for upper chord removal,
and if any cracking is found, contacting Boeing for repair information,
and doing the repair. This service bulletin also describes procedures
for fabricating and installing new upper chords and straps (or angles)
of the upper deck floor beams at STA 340 to 440 inclusive, 500, and 520
with new upper chords, straps (or angles), and radius fillers.
    For any airplane on which a replacement is done, the service
bulletin recommends detailed and HFEC inspections for cracks of the
modified upper deck floor beams, and for airplanes on which any
cracking is found, contacting Boeing for repair instructions and
repairing if necessary. For all airplanes, this service bulletin
specifies to do detailed and HFEC inspections for cracks of the upper
deck floor beams within 15,000 flight cycles after the replacement is
done, or within 1,500 flight cycles, whichever occurs later. This
service bulletin also specifies replacing the upper chords and straps
(or angles) of the upper deck floor beams within 6,000 flight cycles
after doing the detailed and HFEC inspections. The service bulletin
also specifies repetitive detailed and HFEC inspections within 15,000
flight cycles after the upper chord replacement modification.
    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2696 refers to Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2429, Revision 2, dated October 16, 2008; and
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, Revision 2, dated July 17,
2008; as additional sources of information for doing the post-
modification inspections.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in
the service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2696, dated October 16, 2008,
specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair
certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those
conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 25 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S.
operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                             Table--Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Average                                                  Number of
                        labor                                                     U.S.-
     Work hours        rate per          Parts            Cost per product     registered        Fleet cost
                         hour                                                   airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
663.................        $80  None................  $53,040 per inspection/         25  $1,326,000 per
                                                        replacement cycle.                  inspection/
                                                                                replacement cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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), and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2009-0608; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-
215-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by August 20, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F
series airplanes, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53:
Fuselage.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report from the manufacturer that the
accomplishment of certain existing inspections, repairs, and
modifications is not adequate to ensure the structural integrity of
the affected 7075 series aluminum alloy upper deck floor beam upper
chords on airplanes that have exceeded certain thresholds. We are
issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the upper chords and straps
(or angles) of the floor beams, which could lead to failure of the
floor beams and consequent loss of controllability, rapid
decompression, and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Initial Inspection and Replacement

    (g) Before the accumulation of 21,000 total flight cycles, or
within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later: Do an open hole high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspection of all the fastener holes accessed for upper chord
removal for cracks, and replace upper chords, straps (or angles),
and radius fillers of the upper deck floor beams, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2696, dated October 16, 2008.

Repetitive Replacements and Post-Replacement Inspections

    (h) Within 15,000 flight cycles after doing the replacement
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 1,500 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do
detailed and HFEC inspections for cracks of the modified upper deck
floor beams, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2696, dated October 16, 2008.
Within 6,000 flight cycles after doing the detailed and HFEC
inspections, do the replacement specified in paragraph (g) of this
AD. Repeat the post-replacement inspections and replacement at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2696, dated October 16, 2008.

Repair of Cracks

    (i) If any crack is found during any inspection required by this
AD: Before further flight, repair the crack using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this
AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(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. Send information to
ATTN: Ivan Li, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6437; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Or, e-mail information to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 25, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-15811 Filed 7-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60839-60840]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25760]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Number: PR19-14-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: Revised Statement
of Operating Conditions DDC and LAUFG to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/13/18.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>11.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/4/18.

    Docket Number: PR19-15-000.
    Applicants: Alpine High Pipeline LP.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): Revised
Statement of Operating Conditions to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/13/18.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>67.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/4/18.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/19.

    Docket Number: PR19-16-000.
    Applicants: Lee 8 Storage Partnership.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b)(2)+(g): Petition for Rate
Approval to be effective 11/14/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/14/18.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>42.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/5/18.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/19.

    Docket Number: PR19-17-000.
    Applicants: Black Hills Energy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: BHEA SOC Filing to
be effective 11/15/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/15/18.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>52.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/18.

    Docket Number: PR19-18-000.
    Applicants: Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: RMNG Revised SOC
Filing to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/15/18.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>53.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-297-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: eTariff filing per 1430: TETLP Extension to file Form
501-G.
    Filed Date: 11/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181116-5177.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-298-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: WBX East Amendments Filing to
be effective 11/16/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181116-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-299-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Gulf Connector Initial Rate
Filing--REV to be effective 12/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered,
but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/

docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 19, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25760 Filed 11-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 153)]
[Notices]
[Page 40181]
[DOCID:fr11au09-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ES09-31-001]

Entergy Texas, Inc.; Notice of Filing

August 4, 2009.
    Take notice that on July 28, 2009, Entergy Texas, Inc. filed a
supplement providing additional explanation to its April 30, 2009
application.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions 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 or intervention 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 7, 2009.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19130 Filed 8-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34-37]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32905]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-8138; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-112-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-17-
10 for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and
4000 airplanes. AD 2011-17-10 currently requires inspecting for a by-
pass wire between the housing of each in-tank fuel quantity indication
(FQI) cable plug and the cable shield, and corrective actions if
necessary. AD 2011-17-10 also requires revising the airplane
maintenance program. Since we issued AD 2011-17-10, revised service
information has been issued to update the critical design configuration
control limitations (CDCCLs) that address potential ignition sources
inside fuel tanks. This proposed AD would require revising the airplane
maintenance or

inspection program by incorporating the instructions in the revised
service information. The proposed AD also removes certain airplanes
from the applicability. We are proposing this AD to prevent potential
ignition sources inside the fuel tanks, which, in combination with
flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18,
2016.

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
Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL
Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31
(0)88-6280-111; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.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-
8138; 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: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; 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-2015-8138;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-112-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

    On August 3, 2011, we issued AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76
FR 50111, August 12, 2011), for all Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000,
and 4000 airplanes. AD 2011-17-10 requires inspecting for a by-pass
wire between the housing of each in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable
shield and corrective actions (installing a by-pass wire) if necessary.
AD 2011-17-10 also requires revising the airplane maintenance program.
    Since we issued AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111,
August 12, 2011), revised service information has been issued to update
the critical CDCCLs that address potential ignition sources inside fuel
tanks.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0111, dated May 8, 2014 (referred to after
this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    * * * [T]he FAA published Special Federal Aviation Regulation
(SFAR) 88, and the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) published
Interim Policy INT/POL/25/12.
    The review conducted by Fokker Services on the F28 design, in
response to these regulations, revealed that on certain aeroplanes,
an interrupted shield contact may exist or develop between the
housing of an in-tank Fuel Quantity Indication (FQI) cable plug and
the cable shield of the shielded FQI system cables in the main and
collector fuel tanks, which can, under certain conditions, form a
spark gap.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, may create an
ignition source in the fuel tank vapour space, possibly resulting in
a wing fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the aeroplane.
    To address and correct this unsafe condition, Fokker Services
published Service Bulletin (SB) SBF28-28-053 which provides
instructions, for early production aeroplanes, for a one-time
inspection to check for the presence of a by-pass wire between the
housing of each in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable shield and,
depending on findings, for the installation of a by-pass wire. In
addition, SBF28-28-053 provides a Critical Design Configuration
Control Limitation (CDCCL) item to make certain that the by-pass
wire remains installed on these aeroplanes.
    On later production aeroplanes, an improved plug Part Number (P/
N) 20P227-2 was introduced with a better shield connection to the
housing of the plug. Therefore, SBF28-28-053 (original issue and
Revision 1) also provided a CDCCL item to ensure that this type of
plug remains installed on those aeroplanes.
    EASA issued AD 2010-0217 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2011-17-
10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011)] to require
accomplishment of the instructions related to the by-pass wire and
implementation of the CDCCL items as specified in Fokker Services
SBF28-28-053 Revision 1, as applicable to aeroplane s/n.
    Since EASA AD 2010-0217 was issued, it was identified that P/N
20P227-2 and 20P228-1 plugs are also approved and can therefore be
installed on the later production aeroplanes. Prompted by this
finding, Fokker Services issued SBF28-28-055 to address the
implementation of a CDCCL item to make certain that only approved
plug types remain installed on the later production aeroplanes,
while SBF28-28-053 Revision 2 was issued for early production
aeroplanes to address the by-pass wire related actions only.
    Consequently, EASA issued AD 2011-0184, retaining the
requirements of EASA AD 2010-0217, which was superseded, to require
implementation of the related CDCCL items as specified in Fokker
Services SBF28-28-053 Revision 2, or SBF28-28-055, as applicable to
aeroplane s/n.
    More recently, Fokker Services published Revision 3 of SBF28-28-
053, to eliminate the use of a heat gun in or near to the fuel tank,
and prompted by a change to the definition of the related CDCCL
item. Fokker Services also cancelled SBF28-28-055, due to the
introduction of a revised definition of the CDCCL item that has been
published in Fokker Services SBF28-28-050, Revision 2.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements related to SBF28-28-053 of EASA AD 2011-0184, which is
superseded, but requires those actions to be accomplished in
accordance with the instructions of Fokker Services SBF28-28-053,
Revision 3 (R3).
    All the actions related to SBF28-28-055, as previously required
through paragraphs (5)

and (6) of EASA AD 2011-0184, are now addressed by EASA AD 2014-0110
[http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2014-0110] which has been superseded by
EASA AD 2015-0030 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2015-0030].
* * * * *
    The CDCCL requirement in AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR
50111, August 12, 2011) for Model F.28 Mark 2000, 3000, and 4000
airplanes is now addressed in other related rulemaking. Therefore this
proposed AD does not include Model F.28 Mark 2000, 3000, and 4000
airplanes in the applicability.
    This AD also removes airplanes having serial numbers 11993 and
19994 from the applicability because those airplanes were scrapped and
removed from the type certificate data sheet.
    The unsafe condition is the potential of ignition sources inside
fuel tanks. Such ignition sources, in combination with flammable fuel
vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the
airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket
No. FAA-2015-8138.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-
053, Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. The service information
describes procedures for inspecting for a by-pass wire between the
housing of each in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable shield, and
installing a by-pass wire if necessary. The service information also
describes CDCCL item 1.7 for fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS)
wiring in wing tanks. This service information is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section
of this NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    This proposed AD would require implementation of certain
maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. This proposed
AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and
CDCCLs. Compliance with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR
91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered,
or repaired in the areas addressed by these actions, the operator may
not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In
this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to
the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD. The request
should include a description of changes to the required actions that
will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.
    Notwithstanding any other maintenance or operational requirements,
components that have been identified as airworthy or installed on the
affected airplanes before accomplishing the revision of the airplane
maintenance or inspection program specified in this AD, do not need to
be reworked in accordance with the CDCCLs. However, once the airplane
maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by this
AD, future maintenance actions on these components must be done in
accordance with the CDCCLs.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 5 airplanes of U.S.
registry. This proposed AD would merely require using the
Accomplishment Instructions in the revised service information. The
current costs associated with this proposed AD are repeated as follows
for the convenience of affected operators:
    The actions that are required by AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774
(76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), will take about 6 work-hours per
product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts
cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost
of the actions that were required by AD 2011-17-10 is $510 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions
required by AD 2011-17-10 will take about 7 work-hours and require
parts costing $308, for a cost of $903 per product. We have no way of
determining the number of products that may need these actions.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to revise the maintenance or inspection program in this proposed AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $425, or
$85 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 airworthiness directive (AD)
2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), and
adding the following new AD:

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2015-8138; Directorate
Identifier 2014-NM-112-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111,
August 12, 2011).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 1000
airplanes; certificated in any category; serial numbers (S/Ns) 11003
through 11041 inclusive, and S/Ns 11991 and 11992.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the issuance of revised service
information to update the critical design configuration control
limitations (CDCCLs) that address potential ignition sources inside
fuel tanks. We are issuing this AD to prevent potential ignition
sources inside the fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent
loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Inspection and Installation With Revised Service
Information

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (g) of
AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011),
with revised service information. At a scheduled opening of the fuel
tanks, but not later than 84 months after September 16, 2011 (the
effective date of AD 2011-17-10), do a general visual inspection for
the presence of a by-pass wire between the housing of each in-tank
fuel quantity indication (FQI) cable plug and the cable shield, in
accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker
Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 1, dated September 20, 2010,
or Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. As of the effective date of
this AD, only Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 3,
dated January 9, 2014, may be used.

(h) Retained Corrective Actions, With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (h) of
AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011),
with revised service information. If during the general visual
inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, it is found that a
by-pass wire is not installed: Before the next flight, install the
by-pass wire between the housing of the in-tank FQI cable plug and
the cable shield, in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 1,
dated September 20, 2010, or Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. As
of the effective date of this AD, only Fokker Service Bulletin
SBF28-28-053, Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014, may be used.

(i) Retained Maintenance Program Revision To Add Fuel Airworthiness
Limitation, With a New Exception

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (i) of
AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011),
with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph (k) of this
AD, concurrently with paragraph (g) of this AD, revise the airplane
maintenance program by incorporating CDCCL-1 specified in paragraph
1.L.(1)(c) of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053 Revision 1, dated
September 20, 2010.

(j) Retained No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or CDCCLs
Requirement, With a New Exception

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (k) of
AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011),
with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph (k) of this
AD: After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (i) of
this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspection, interval) and/or
CDCCLs may be used unless the actions, intervals, and/or CDCCLs are
approved as an alternative methods of compliance (AMOC) in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this
AD.

(k) New Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision To Add Fuel
Airworthiness Limitation

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
airplane maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by
incorporating CDCCL item 1.7 as specified in paragraph 1.L.(1)(c) of
Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 3, dated January 9,
2014. Accomplishing the revision required by this paragraph
terminates the revision required by paragraph (i) of this AD.

(l) No Alternative CDCCLs

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (k) of this AD, no alternative CDCCLs may be
used unless the CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD.

(m) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the applicable actions
required by paragraphs (k) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using Fokker Service
Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 2, dated June 22, 2011.

(n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Fokker B.V. Service's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.

(o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0111, dated
May 8, 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-2015-8138.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130
EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31
(0)88-6280-111; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.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>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2015.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-32905 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


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

      UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY        	     WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460       		              				OFFICE PREVENTION,     				PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES                                                             MEMORANDUM                                                                   December 05, 2012        SUBJECT:	Ecotoxicity Scoping Document for Gibberellins Registration Review Decision Document.                       EPA Reg No.:		62097-                Registration Review                 Case#:		               4110                CAS No.:		77-06-5                PC Code:		043801; 043802; 116902.        FROM:	Michael Rexrode, Ph.D., Senior Biologist          /s/             12/05/2012                Biochemical Pesticides Branch                Biopesticide & Pollution Prevention Division (7511P)        TO:		Menyon Adams, Regulatory Action Leader                         12/05/2012                Biochemical Pesticides Branch                Biopesticide & Pollution Prevention Division (7511P)                     ACTION REQUESTED

The following is an ecotoxicity assessment for gibberellic acid in support of the Registration Review Work Plan.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Executive Summary

The following compounds will be considered collectively as Gibberellic acids (GA): Gibberellic acid (GA3) and related isomers known as gibberellins (GA4 and GA7). Gibberellic acids were first identified in Japan in 1935, as the metabolic byproduct of a fungal plant pathogen Gibberella fujikuroi. Since its discovery, GAs have been found in all plants and have been  used in agriculture as plant regulators to stimulate cell division and elongation that affects leaf, stem and fruit development. In addition to growth stimulation, gibberellic acids can hasten plant maturation and seed germination (Feng et al., 2008).

GA stimulates the cells of germinating seeds to produce mRNA molecules that code for hydrolytic enzymes. Since GA regulates growth, applications of very low concentrations can have a profound effect while higher concentrations will have the opposite effect; therefore, the compounds are usually used in concentrations between 0.01 and 10 mg/L. GA is also widely used in the grape-growing industry as a hormone to induce the production of larger bundles and bigger grapes, especially Thompson seedless grapes (Univ. Davis website).

Based on a review of all available ecological data, exposure information, and gibberellic acids non-toxic mode of action, the Agency expects that label rate application of this plant growth regulator will pose minimal risk to nontarget wildlife and fish. The rational for this conclusion is as follows: 1) Gibberellic acid is produced in all plants as a growth stimulator; 2) Gibberellic acid is found in algae and seaweed that are natural components of fish diets; 3) Gibberellic acid is non-toxic to mammalian and avian species (LD50 > 2,250 mg/kg); 4) A review (11/27/12) of the Agency Environmental Incident Information System (EIISv2.1.1; 2012) showed that there were no reports of adverse effects from gibberellic acid exposure to non-target species.  Data waivers were also granted for Nontarget Insect Testing (885.4340) and Nontarget Plant Testing (885.4300) in July of 1995 as part of the RED development process because of the unique characteristics of this product, its non-toxic mode of action, low use volumes (< 2g/A), and biodegradability (low to no persistence). Based on the current use patterns and label directions, the non-toxic effects to terrestrial and aquatic plants and animals, the Agency finds that Gibberellic Acid use is a No Effect to endangered plant and animal species.

Figure 1.0   Gibberellic Structure

Method and Rates of Application: Gibberellic Acid (GA ) may be applied by aircraft, irrigation systems, ground spray equipment, seed treatment or soil incorporation.

Chemical and Fate Properties Table 1.0 shows that gibberellic acid is very water soluble (4,280 mg/L), has a very low potential for bioaccumulation (Log P = 0.72), is non-persistent (DT50 = 3.4 days soil; DT50 = 27 days hydrolysis), and photo degrades rapidly (DT50 = 0.2 days).

  Table 1.0 Chemical and Fate Properties for Gibberellic Acid[1]                              OPPTS Guideline No.                                     Property                              Description of Result                                    830.6302 Color White                                    830.6303 Physical State White crystalline solid                                    830.7200 Melting point/Range Decomposes before melting                                    830.7220 Boiling point/Range Decomposes before boiling                                    830.7300 Bulk density (g/ml)/Specific gravity 1.49                                    830.7550                                    830.7560                                    830.7570 Partition Coefficient (n- Octanol/Water) P = 5.25       Log P = 0.72                                    830.7840 Water Solubility 4,280 mg/L at 20[0]  C                                    830.7950 Vapor Pressure 0.1 mm Hg @ 25°C

                                   830.7370 Dissociation constant at 25[0]  C pKa = 4.0                                    835.3300 Aerobic Soil Degradation  (days) DT 50 = 3.4                                    835.2240 Aqueous Photolysis (Days at pH 7) DT50 = 0.2                                    835.2130 Aqueous Hydrolysis (days at 200  C pH 7) DT50 = 27  [1] BPBD : biopesticide data base University of Hertfordshire Aquatic Risk Assessment The available aquatic data shows that gibberellic acid is practically non-toxic to fish (rainbow trout LC50 > 150 ppm) and aquatic invertebrates (Daphnia magna LC50 > 143 ppm) (Table 2.0).

Table 2.0   Gibberellic Acid Aquatic Toxicity Data Test Results MRID Freshwater Fish LC50 (Trout)  850.1075 LC50 > 150 ppm; NOEL = 143 ppm Practically non-toxic 42167401

Freshwater Invertebrate (Daphnia)  850.1010 LC50 > 143 ppm NOEL = 143 ppm Practically non-toxic 42084402

In order to assess any potential risk to aquatic life from runoff to an aquatic area, the Agency has evaluated the potential for risk through a Tier I single event model, (Parker et al., 1995) GENEEC (GENeric Estimated Exposure Concentration). This model assumes that one single large rainfall/runoff event occurs that removes a large quantity of pesticide from a field to an adjacent body of water at one time. Longer-term, multiple-day average concentration values are calculated based on the peak day value and subsequent values considering degradation processes. Table 3.0 shows the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) that could be expected from a worst case (0.5221 lbs ai/A) runoff event from a blueberry field into an aquatic area. The Agency calculated risk quotients (RQ) as an exposure/hazard ratio in order to determine the potential ecological risk from gibberellic acid exposure to non-target aquatic species. Assuming that the fish LC50 is = 150 ppm and that the invertebrates EC50 =143 ppm, the respective RQ values were found to range from 0.00  -  0.0002 ppm. These projected RQs are below the Agency's level of concern (LOC) (0.05  -  0.5) for risk to non-target aquatic organisms, as well as, aquatic endangered/threatened species (Appendix A). The acute risk from gibberellic acid exposure to non-target and listed aquatic organisms is low.

Table 3.0 GENEEC Version 1.0 Estimated Environmental Concentrations Calculated for Gibberellic Acid Runoff (PPM) from a Blueberry Field after a Maximum Application of 0.52911 lbs. ai/A, one Applications/Years Peak EEC  RQ values Max. 4 day average EEC RQ values Max. 21 day average EEC RQ values Max. 60 day average EEC RQ values Max. 90 day average EEC RQ values 0.031 0.0002 0.027 0.0002 0.016 0.00 0.007 0.00 0.004 0.00

Terrestrial Risk Assessment The acute terrestrial toxicity profile for gibberellic acid shows that this compound is practically non-toxic to mammalian (LD50 > 5,000 mg/kg) and avian species (LD50 >2,250 mg/kg; LC50 > 4,640 mg/kg), as well as, non-target insects (Table 4.0).

Table 4.0 Gibberellic Acid Terrestrial Toxicity Data Test Results MRID Rat Acute Oral  870.1100 LD50 > 5,000 mg/kg 00153783 Avian Acute Oral (Bobwhite Quail) 850.2100 LD50 > 2,250 mg/L; Noel +2,250 mg/L Practically non-toxic 42084401 Avian Dietary (Bobwhite Quail)   850.2200 LC50 > 4,640 ppm Practically non-toxic 00121075

Non-target Insects Non-toxic to honey bees  > 25 ug/bee 43370201

In order to quantitatively evaluate the potential for toxic exposure of gibberellic acid residues to avian and mammalian organisms, the Agency used a worst case agricultural scenario on blueberries along with mammalian toxicity and avian toxicity data. Using the Terrestrial Residue Exposure Model (T-REX) Version 1.4.1. in order to calculate expected residues, the Agency performed a terrestrial risk assessment that included numerous calculations of dietary exposure for multiple weight class animals (Appendix B). Expected residues were calculated for avian and mammalian food items along with dissipation rate of a chemical applied to foliar surfaces (single application) in order to estimate acute and chronic RQs relative to weight class for various sized birds and mammals. The upper bound (Table 5.0) Kenega values show that exposure to gibberellic acid (0.5291 lbs/A ai) has a low potential for toxic impact to birds (RQ = 0.00  -  0.09) and mammals (RQ= 0.00- 0.01) that may be feeding in the area of application. The low toxic risk of gibberellic acid to terrestrial organisms, the short environmental half life (4 days) and an understanding of the ubiquitous nature of gibberellic acid (produced in all plants) show that there is a very low potential for toxic risk to birds and mammalian species, including listed species.

Table 5.0  T-REX Estimated Environmental Concentrations and RQ Values for Gibberellic Acid Application to a Blueberry Field after a Maximum Application of 0.52911 lbs. ai/A, one Applications/Years

Dose-Based                     Mammalian Classes and Body Weight (grams)

                      15                                                 35                                                  1000

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ Short grass 121.07 0.01 83.68 0.01 19.40 0.01 Tall grass 55.49 0.01 38.35 0.00 8.89 0.00 Broadleaf plants 68.10 0.01 47.07 0.01 10.91 0.00 Fruit/pods 7.57 0.00 5.23 0.00 1.21 0.00 Arthropods 47.42 0.00 32.77 0.00 7.60 0.00 Seeds 1.68 0.00 1.16 0.00 0.27 0.00

Dose-Based                      Avian Classes and Body Weight (grams)

                       20                                                 100                                                 1000

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ Short grass 144.62 0.09 82.47 0.04 36.92 0.01 Tall grass 66.29 0.04 37.80 0.02 16.92 0.01 Broadleaf plants 81.35 0.05 46.39 0.02 20.77 0.01 Fruit/pods 9.04 0.01 5.15 0.00 2.31 0.00 Arthropods 56.64 0.03 32.30 0.02 14.46 0.00 Seeds 2.01 0.00 1.15 0.00 0.51 0.00

Endangered Species The unique characteristics of gibberellic acid, its non-toxic mode of action, low use volumes, and biodegradability (low to no persistence) should minimize the risks to threatened and endangered species. The Agency has calculated the potential risk to terrestrial and aquatic species by relying on Individual Effects Model Version 1.1 that predicts the chance of individual effect at about 1 in 294,000 for terrestrial animals (Table 6.0) and 1 in 418,000,000 for aquatic species (Table 7.0). Based on the ecological toxicity data that has been submitted on the active ingredients, there should not be toxic risk to endangered/ threatened species from exposure to the end use product. Gibberellic acid should present a No Effect to terrestrial and aquatic threatened or endangered species, if used in accordance with approved labeling.

Ecological Effects Summary Based on a review of all available ecological data, exposure information, and gibberellic acids non-toxic mode of action, the Agency expects that applications of this plant growth regulator will pose minimal to no risk to non-target wildlife and fish. The rational for this conclusion is as follows: 1) Gibberellic acid is produced in all plants as a growth stimulator; 2) Gibberellic acid is found in algae and seaweed that are natural components of fish diets; 3) Gibberellic acid is non-toxic to mammalian and avian species (LD50 > 5,000 mg/kg); 4) A review (11/27/12) of the Agency Environmental Incident Information System (EIISv2.1.1; 2012) showed that there were no reports of adverse effects from gibberellic acid exposure to non-target species; 5) Gibberellic acid is not toxic to bees (< 25 ug/bee). Data waivers were also granted for Nontarget Insect Testing (885.4340) and Nontarget Plant Testing (885.4300) in July of 1995 as part of the RED development process because of the unique characteristics of this product, its non-toxic mode of action, low use volumes (< 2g/A), and biodegradability (low to no persistence). Based on the current use patterns, the non-toxic effects to terrestrial and aquatic plants and animals, the Agency finds that Gibberellic Acid use is a No Effect to endangered plant and animal species.

Reference

BPBD : biopesticide data base University of Hertfordshire http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/bpdb/Reports/371.htm

Gibberellin and Flame Seedless Grapes from a University of California, Davis website

Feng, S., Martinez C., Gusmaroli, G., Wang, Y., Zhou, J., Wang, F., Chen, L., Yu, L.,  Iglesias-Pedraz, J.M., Kircher, S., Eberhard, S., Fu, X., Fan, L-M., and Deng, X.W.  2008.  Coordinated regulation of Arabidopsis thaliana development by light and gibberellins. Nature 451:475-479.

Parker, R.D., R.D. Jones and H.P. Nelson., 1995. GENEEC: A Screening Model for Pesticide Environmental Exposure Assessment in Proceedings of the International Exposure Symposium on Water Quality Modeling; American Society of Agricultural Engineers, pp. 485-490; Orlando, Florida

U.S. EPA.  1998.  Guidance for Ecological Risk Assessment.  Risk Assessment Forum.  EPA/630/R-95/002F, April 1998.

U.S.EPA  2004. Individual Effects Chance Model Version 1.1. EFED/OPP/USEPA.

U.S.EPA  2008. Terrestrial Residue Exposure Model (T-REX) Version 1.4.1. EFED/OPP/USEPA.

Appendix A   GENEEC Model

Table A.1   Gibberellic Acid Residues to an Aquatic Area after One Application to Blueberries (GENEEC) INPUT VALUES *   --------------------------------------------------------------------    RATE (#/AC)   No.APPS &     SOIL    SOLUBIL    APPL TYPE      NO-SPRAY INCORP     ONE(MULT)    INTERVAL    Koc       (PPM )        (%DRIFT)               (FT)          (IN)   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   .529(   .529)            1   1           10.0         4280.0         GRHIFI(  6.6)           .0              .0   FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES (DAYS)   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   METABOLIC   DAYS UNTIL      HYDROLYSIS   PHOTOLYSIS   METABOLIC   COMBINED    (FIELD)            RAIN/RUNOFF          (POND)         (POND-EFF)          (POND)          (POND)   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------      3.40                       0                                N/A             .20-  24.80               6.00                 4.83

  GENERIC EECs (IN MICROGRAMS/LITER (PPB)     Version 2.0 Aug 1, 2001   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------       PEAK      MAX 4 DAY            MAX 21 DAY         MAX 60 DAY        MAX 90 DAY       GEEC      AVG GEEC              AVG GEEC            AVG GEEC            AVG GEEC   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------       30.74             27.51                         15.68                           6.72                         4.52

Appendix B   Gibberellic Acid Residues to Terrestrial Area after One Application to Blueberries (T-REX)

Table B.1 T-REX Upper Bound Residues and RQ Calculations for mammalian and Avian Exposure to Gibberellic Acid


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 155 (Friday, August 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49853-49854]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17343]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-D-1494]

International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical
Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products;
Effectiveness of Anthelmintics: General Recommendations (Revision 1);
Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry (GFI) #90 (VICH
GL7(R1)) entitled ``Effectiveness of Anthelmintics: General
Recommendations (Revision 1).'' This draft guidance has been developed
for veterinary use by the International Cooperation on Harmonisation of
Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal
Products (VICH). The objective of this draft guidance is to provide
study design recommendations that will facilitate the universal
acceptance of the generated effectiveness data to fulfill the national/
regional requirements for anthelmintic drugs in animal species. This
revision updates data analysis and isolate characterization
recommendations, outlines how to approach new indications, and makes
additional clarifying changes.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by October 11, 2022 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-1999-D-0188 for ``Effectiveness of Anthelmintics: General
Recommendations (Revision 1).'' Received comments will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-
402-7500.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to the
Policy and Regulations Staff (HFV-6), Center for Veterinary Medicine,
Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855.
Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in
processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
electronic access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aim[eacute]e Phillippi-Taylor, Center
for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-114), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
GFI #90 (VICH GL7(R1)) entitled ``Effectiveness of Anthelmintics:
General Recommendations (Revision 1).'' The objective of this guidance
is to provide study design recommendations that will facilitate the
universal acceptance of the generated effectiveness data to fulfill the
national/regional requirements for anthelmintic drugs in animal
species. This revision updates data analysis and isolate
characterization recommendations, outlines how to approach new
indications, and makes additional clarifying changes.
    FDA has participated in efforts to enhance international
harmonization and is committed to seeking scientifically based
harmonized technical procedures for pharmaceutical development. One of
the goals of harmonization is to identify, and then

reduce, differences in technical requirements for drug development
among regulatory agencies in different countries. FDA has actively
participated in the International Council for Harmonisation of
Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use to develop
harmonized technical requirements for the approval of human
pharmaceutical and biological products among the European Union, Japan,
and the United States. The VICH is a parallel initiative for veterinary
medicinal products. The VICH is concerned with developing harmonized
technical requirements for the approval of veterinary medicinal
products in the European Union, Japan, and the United States, and
includes input from both regulatory and industry representatives.
    The VICH Steering Committee is composed of member representatives
from the European Commission and European Medicines Agency;
AnimalhealthEurope; FDA--Center for Veterinary Medicine and U.S.
Department of Agriculture--Center for Veterinary Biologics; the U.S.
Animal Health Institute; the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries; and the Japanese Veterinary Products Association. There
are 10 observers to the VICH Steering Committee: One representative
from government and one representative from industry of Australia, New
Zealand, Canada, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. The World
Organisation for Animal Health is an associate member of the VICH. The
VICH Secretariat, which coordinates the preparation of documentation,
is provided by HealthforAnimals.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on
``Effectiveness of Anthelmintics: General Recommendations (Revision
1).'' It does not establish any rights for any person and is not
binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it
satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 514 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0032.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/default.htm, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: August 8, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-17343 Filed 8-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P