[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 144 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43734-43735]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18253]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0774; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-057-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter France (Eurocopter) Model AS350BA helicopters with certain
AERAZUR emergency flotation gear container assemblies installed. This
proposed AD would require replacing each affected emergency flotation
gear container assembly (container assembly) at specified time limits
based on the date of manufacture. This proposed AD is prompted by a
recognition that container assemblies with an intended operating
limitation of 10 years may not have been replaced because the limit is
no longer recorded in the Maintenance Program. The proposed actions are
intended to prevent failure of the emergency container assembly due to
age and subsequent damage to the helicopter and injury to the occupants
after an emergency water landing.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 24,
2012.

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.
    Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75053-4005, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at http://www.eurocopter.com. You may review a copy of the service information at
the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Roach, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax (817)
222-5961, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued AD No.
2008-0189, dated October 10, 2008, to correct an unsafe condition for
the Eurocopter Model AS350BA helicopters with certain AERAZUR emergency
flotation gear installed. EASA advises that the container assemblies
have an operating life limit of 10 years from the date of manufacture.
The EASA AD states that ``as of June 2006, this limit is no longer
recorded in the Maintenance Program; therefore, after June 2006,
container assemblies having already exceeded the 10-year limit could
have not been replaced yet.'' The EASA AD also states that ``floating
performance of a helicopter may prove to be insufficient in the event
of ditching, in case of failure of a container assembly being operated
beyond its operating time limit.''

FAA's Determination

    This helicopter model is manufactured in France and is type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
14 CFR 21.29 and the applicable bilateral agreement. Pursuant to the
applicable bilateral agreement, EASA has kept the FAA informed of the
situation described above.
    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant
information and determined that an unsafe condition is likely to exist
or develop on other products of the same type design.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter has issued Alert Service Bulletin No. 25.01.02, dated
September 24, 2008 (EASB), which specifies certain times measured from
the date of manufacture to replace the container assemblies. EASA
classified this EASB as mandatory and issued AD No. 2008-0189, dated
October 10, 2008, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these
helicopters.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require determining the manufacturing date
of each part-numbered container assembly, and depending on the date,
replacing

the container assembly with an airworthy container assembly at
specified times.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    We do not allow return of the container assemblies to the
manufacturer for an inspection and extension of the life limit.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 85 helicopters of
U.S. registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD.
     It would take minimal time to determine the manufacturing
date of the container and about \1/2\ work hour per helicopter to
replace the container assemblies at an average labor rate of $85 per
work hour.
     Required parts would cost about $21,775 for the left
container assembly and $26,690 for the right container assembly per
helicopter.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost impact of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $485,075, assuming 10 helicopters
require replacement of the right and left container assemblies.

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, 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 to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

Eurocopter France: Docket No. FAA-2012-0774; Directorate Identifier
2010-SW-057-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model AS350BA helicopters with AERAZUR left-
hand emergency flotation gear container assembly (container
assembly), part number (P/N) 158170 or 158210-1, or right-hand
container assembly, P/N 158171 or 158215-1, installed, certificated
in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as failure of the container
assembly due to age and subsequent damage to the helicopter. This
condition could result in injury to the occupants after an emergency
water landing.

(c) Compliance

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

(d) Required Actions

    (1) Determine the manufacturing date of each part-numbered
container assembly stamped on the cover of the identification plate.
    (2) Replace each container assembly with an airworthy container
assembly as follows:
    (i) For a container assembly with a date of manufacture 12 or
more years before the effective date of this AD, replace within 30
days.
    (ii) For a container assembly with a date of manufacture 10 or
more years and less than 12 years before the effective date of this
AD, replace within 60 days.
    (iii) For a container assembly with a date of manufacture 9 or
more years and less than 10 years before the effective date of this
AD, replace before reaching 10 years and 60 days.
    (iv) For a container assembly with a date of manufacture less
than 9 years before the effective date of this AD, replace before
reaching 10 years.

(e) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(f) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. 25.01.02, dated
September 24, 2008, which is not incorporated by reference, contains
additional information about the subject of this AD. For service
information identified in this AD, contact American Eurocopter
Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75053-4005,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at http://www.eurocopter.com. You may review a copy of the service information
at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency AD No. 2008-0189, dated October 10, 2008.

(g) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 3212 Emergency
Flotation Section.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 18, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-18253 Filed 7-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 28, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56156-56158]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0526; Product Identifier 2017-NM-026-AD; Amendment
39-19109; AD 2017-24-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the upper aft
skin at the rear spar of the wings. This AD requires repetitive
inspections for cracking of the upper aft skin of the wings, and repair
if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 2, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 2,
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0526.

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-2017-
0526; 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 final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office
(phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-627-
5210; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 5, 2017 (82 FR 25744).
The NPRM was prompted by reports of cracking in the upper aft skin at
the rear spar of the wings. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive
inspections for cracking of the upper aft skin of the wings, and repair
if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this final rule. The following presents the comments received on the
NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing (APB) stated that the installation of
winglets per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not
affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's service instructions.
    Southwest Airlines requested clarification that additional
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approvals are not necessary
during accomplishment of the actions specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16, 2017, if the installation of
winglets was done using STC ST01219SE.
    We agree with the commenters' statements. We have redesignated
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD as paragraph (c)(1) of this AD and
added paragraph (c)(2) to this AD to state that installation of STC
ST01219SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions
required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' AMOC approval request is not
necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

Request To Revise Certain Corrective Action Requirements

    All Nippon Airways (ANA) asked that we revise paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD to change the compliance method for crack repair to allow
use of the Boeing 737-500 Structural Repair Manual (SRM) 57-20-10,
Repair 7. ANA stated that Boeing has already developed the repair
procedure for the outer wing upper aft skin at the trailing edge
between wing buttock line (WBL) 160 and WBL 205, as specified in Boeing
737-500 SRM 57-20-10, Repair 7. ANA added that the repair procedure is
applicable to part of an inspection area specified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16, 2017. ANA noted that
its request should be considered to reduce AMOC requests.
    We disagree with the request. Boeing has indicated that Repair 7 of
the SRM is currently being revised. We do not consider that delaying
this rulemaking until release of the revised service information is
warranted. However, under the provisions of paragraph (j) of this AD,
we will consider requests for approval of alternative service
information if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the
service information would provide an acceptable level of safety. Boeing
has indicated it intends to request approval of a global AMOC for the
revised service information after this AD is published. Therefore, we
have made no change to this AD in this regard.

Request To Clarify Certain Requirements

    Boeing asked that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD, and the heading
for paragraph (g), be changed to include ``corrective actions'' to
clarify that corrective actions may be required.
    We agree with the commenter's request. We have revised paragraph
(g) of this AD accordingly.
    Boeing also asked that the header for paragraph (h) of the proposed
AD be changed to remove ``repetitive'' because merely specifying
``inspections'' addresses both initial and repetitive inspections.
    We agree to clarify the terminology in the header for paragraph (h)
of this AD. We do not presume that the term ``repetitive'' necessarily
excludes the initial action. An action cannot be repeated without
accomplishment of the initial action. Many existing ADs use the term
``repetitive'' actions, which we intend as including the initial
action. Therefore, we have not changed this AD regarding this issue.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this final rule with the changes described previously and minor
editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated
January 16, 2017. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive surface high frequency eddy current inspections, low
frequency eddy current inspections, and detailed inspections on
airplanes with or without an external repair, for cracking of the upper
aft skin from WBL 159 to WBL 220. 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 471 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
         Action                   Labor cost            Parts cost      Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection..............  Up to 9 work-hours x $85                $0  Up to $765 per        Up to $360,315 per
                           per hour = up to $765 per                   inspection cycle.     inspection cycle.
                           inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that enables us to provide cost
estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2017-24-05 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19109; Docket No. FAA-
2017-0526; Product Identifier 2017-NM-026-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 2, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100,
-.200, -.200C, -.300, -.400, and -.500 series airplanes,
certificated in any category.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a4005d308b/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57; Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the upper aft
skin at the rear spar of the wings. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracks in the upper aft skin of the wings, which could
result in the inability of a principal structural element to sustain
limit load, and consequent reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) For Group 1 Airplanes: Inspection and Corrective Actions

    For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16, 2017: Within 120 days after
the effective date of this AD, do an inspection for cracking of the
upper aft skin of the wings, and do all applicable corrective
actions, using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(h) For Groups 2 and 3 Airplanes: Repetitive Inspections and Repair

    For Groups 2 and 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16, 2017: At the applicable time
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16, 2017, except as required by
paragraph (i) of this AD, do the applicable inspection for cracking
of the upper aft skin of the wings from wing buttock line (WBL) 159
to WBL 220, in accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16, 2017. If any
cracking is found, repair before further flight, in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Repeat the
inspection thereafter at the applicable time specified in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1329,
dated January 16, 2017.

(i) Exceptions to the Service Information

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated
January 16, 2017, specifies a compliance time ``after the original
issue date of this service bulletin,'' paragraph (h) of this AD
requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the
effective date of this AD.
    (2) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated
January 16, 2017, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions, and specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for
Compliance), this AD requires repair in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority
to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards
District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration
deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD: For
service information that contains steps that are labeled as RC, the
provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Payman Soltani,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5313; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1329, dated January 16,
2017.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 15, 2017.
Chris Spangenberg,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-25379 Filed 11-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 18 (Monday, January 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5866-5867]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01619]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket ID PHMSA-2012-0319]

Pipeline Safety: Annual Reports and Validation

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice of extension of submittal deadline for calendar year
2012 gas transmission and gathering annual reports, remind pipeline
owners and operators to validate their Operator Identification Number
data, and request supplemental reports to correct gas transmission and
liquefied natural gas annual report data issues.

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

SUMMARY: Over the past three years, PHMSA has made a number of
amendments to pipeline data regulations and reporting forms for gas,
hazardous liquids, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) operators. Most
recently, on December 5, 2012, the Office of Management and Budget
approved revisions to the gas transmission and gathering annual report.
Based on the significant changes to the gas transmission and gathering
annual report, PHMSA is extending the filing deadline for calendar year
2012 data from March 15, 2013, to June 15, 2013. In addition, certain
operators with Operator Identification Numbers (OPID) established prior
to January 1, 2011, are required to validate their OPID data before
June 30, 2012. PHMSA has determined that a number of operators have not
completed their OPID data validations. Therefore, PHMSA is using this
notice to remind operators to validate their OPID data. PHMSA has also
noticed that annual reports submitted by gas transmission and LNG
operators contain data that conflicts with other required reports
submitted to PHMSA. Operators should review their

annual report data to ensure it is accurate and submit supplemental
reports to correct errors.

DATES: The filing deadline for calendar year 2012 data for the gas
transmission and gathering annual report is extended to June 15, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blaine Keener, National Field
Coordinator, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Submittal Deadline for Calendar Year 2012 Gas Transmission and
Gathering Annual Reports

    On December 5, 2012, the Office of Management and Budget approved
revisions to the gas transmission and gathering annual report (PHMSA F-
7100.2-1). Based on the significant changes to the report, PHMSA is
extending the filing deadline for calendar year 2012 data from March
15, 2013 to June 15, 2013. Docket PHMSA-2012-0024 includes details
about the changes to the report.
    PHMSA anticipates enabling the online submittal of gas transmission
and gathering annual reports no later than March 1, 2013. When the
online reporting system is available, PHMSA will send an email to
pipeline operator staff who submitted calendar year 2011 gas
transmission and gathering annual reports.

Validation

    A final rule published in the Federal Register on November 26,
2010, (75 FR 72878) established new regulations (49 CFR Sec. Sec.
191.22 and 195.64) requiring certain pipeline operators and LNG
operators established prior to January 1, 2011, to validate data on
file with PHMSA before June 30, 2012. PHMSA extended the compliance
deadline for completing validation to September 30, 2012, in Advisory
Bulletin ADB-2012-04, published in the Federal Register on March 21,
2012, (77 FR 16471). Two types of gas distribution pipeline operators,
master meter operators and small LPG operators, are not required to
complete validation. All other pipeline operators and LNG operators
that received an OPID from PHMSA prior to January 1, 2011 are required
to validate their OPID data.
    Based on validation data collected through the end of November
2012, approximately sixteen percent of operators with an OPID that were
required to validate their data had not complied with this requirement.
To avoid enforcement action, these operators should log into the on-
line PHMSA Portal at https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/phmsaportallanding
and complete their validation. Any operator that has not registered
staff in the PHMSA Portal must register by following the instructions
at http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/portal_message/PHMSA_Portal_Registration.pdf before validation can be completed.

Gas Transmission Annual Reports--Incidents in High Consequence Areas

    From calendar year 2004 through 2009 inclusive, PHMSA collected
data about incidents in high consequence areas (HCAs) as part of gas
integrity management performance reports. Starting with calendar year
2010, this incident data became integrated in the gas transmission and
gathering annual report. Gas transmission pipeline operators are also
required to submit a gas transmission and gathering incident report for
each incident. Since 2004, gas transmission and gathering incident
reports have indicated whether the incident occurred in an HCA.
``Incidents occurring in HCA'' data from gas integrity management
performance reports, gas transmission annual reports, and incident
reports is publicly available on the PHMSA Web site at http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/gasimp/pm_summary2.htm.
    For all years except 2009, the numbers from ``Incidents occurring
in HCA'' data, included in the integrity management performance reports
and annual reports do not match the number from incident reports. While
the number of ``Incidents occurring in HCA'' data matches for 2009, the
OPIDs detailed in the integrity management performance reports do not
match the OPIDs in the incident reports. Gas transmission operators who
have reported incidents in HCAs from 2004 through 2011 in either gas
integrity management performance reports, gas transmission annual
reports, or incident reports should submit supplemental reports as
needed to correct the data.
    Gas integrity management performance reports can be created or
supplemented by sending changes to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Gas
transmission annual reports and incident reports from 2010 forward can
be created or supplemented in the PHMSA Portal at https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/phmsaportallanding. Incident reports from 2004
through 2009 inclusive can be created or supplemented by sending an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Liquefied Natural Gas Annual Reports/Incidents and Safety-Related
Conditions

    Since calendar year 2010, LNG operators have been required to
submit annual reports to PHMSA. Part C of the annual report includes
data about incidents and Part D includes data about safety-related
condition (SRC) reports. LNG operators are also required to submit
separate reports to PHMSA for incidents and safety-related conditions.
    Based on the LNG data available at the end of November 2012, there
are inconsistencies between the data for annual reports, incident
reports, and SRC reports. Although there have been no LNG incident
reports submitted, LNG annual report data indicates there was one LNG
incident in 2010 and another in 2011. PHMSA's SRC report data indicates
there were five LNG safety-related conditions reported in 2010 and
2011. However, LNG annual reports indicate 264 safety-related
conditions for 2010 and 2011 combined. LNG operators should review
their annual reports and SRC reports and submit supplemental reports as
needed to correct the data.
    LNG annual report data and SRC report data can be downloaded at the
following URL: http://phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library/data-stats.
    LNG annual and incident reports can be submitted and supplemented
in the PHMSA Portal at https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/phmsaportallanding.
SRC reports can be created or supplemented by sending an email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2013-01619 Filed 1-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 234 (Thursday, December 7, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57687-57688]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26418]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 29

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1129; Notice No. 29-042-SC]

Special Conditions: Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BHTI), Model
525 Helicopter; Mode Annunciation

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: We propose special conditions for the BHTI Model 525
helicopter. This helicopter will have a novel or unusual design feature
associated with fly-by-wire flight control system (FBW FCS) functions
that affect the pilot awareness of the flight control modes while
operating the helicopter. The applicable airworthiness regulations do
not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design
feature. These proposed special conditions contain the additional
safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to
establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: Send your comments on or before January 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number [FAA-2017-XXXX]
using any of the following methods:
    [square] Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
    [square] Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
    [square] Hand Delivery of Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m., and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    [square] Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Harrum, Aerospace Engineer,
Rotorcraft Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is
possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change
these special conditions based on the comments we receive.

Background

    On December 15, 2011, BHTI applied for a type certificate for a new
transport category helicopter designated as the Model 525. The aircraft
is a medium twin-engine rotorcraft. The design maximum takeoff weight
is 20,500 pounds, with a maximum capacity of 19 passengers and a crew
of 2.
    The BHTI Model 525 helicopter will be equipped with a four-axis
full authority digital FBW FCS that provides for aircraft control
through pilot input and coupled flight director modes. Current
regulations are inadequate in the area of pilot awareness of the flight
control modes while operating the helicopter. The proposed special
condition will require that suitable mode annunciation be provided to
the flight crew for events that significantly change the operating mode
of the system but do not merit the traditional warnings, cautions, and
advisories.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, BHTI must show that the Model
525 helicopter meets the applicable provisions of part 29, as amended
by Amendment 29-1 through 29-55 thereto. The BHTI Model 525
certification basis date is December 31, 2013, the effective date of
application to the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 29) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the BHTI Model 525 because of a novel
or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar
novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the BHTI Model 525 helicopter must comply with the noise
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under Sec.  611 of Public Law 92-574,
the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec.  21.17(a)(2).

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The BHTI Model 525 helicopter will incorporate the following novel
or unusual design features: A four-axis full authority digital FBW FCS.
Pilot control inputs, through the mechanically linked cockpit controls
(cyclic, collective, directional pedals), are transmitted electrically
to each of the three Flight Control Computers (FCCs). The pilot control
input signals are then processed and transmitted to the hydraulic
flight control actuators which affect control of

the main and tail rotors. The FCCs process the pilot control input
signals depending on the flight control mode in affect.

Discussion

    The current 14 CFR 29 standards do not provide adequate standards
for pilot awareness of the flight control modes while operating the
helicopter. The proposed special condition will require that suitable
mode annunciation be provided to the flight crew for events that
significantly change the operating mode of the system but do not merit
the traditional warnings, cautions, and advisories.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
BHTI Model 525 helicopter. Should BHTI apply at a later date for a
change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating
the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would
apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of rotorcraft. It is not a rule of general applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 29

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Proposed Special Conditions

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., Model 525 helicopters:
    Mode Annunciation: A means must be provided to indicate to the crew
any mode that significantly changes or degrades the handling or
operational characteristics of the rotorcraft.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas on November 16, 2017.
Larry M. Kelly,
Manager, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-26418 Filed 12-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT Information Requirements for Nonroad Diesel Engines ( Nonroad Large SI Engines and Marine Diesel Engines) ( Amendments)

Spring 2004 Assessment and Standards Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality Office of Air and Radiation U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1 Information Collection Request 1( a). Title Information Requirements for Nonroad Diesel Engines ICR Tracking Number: 1897.07 1( b). Short Characterization The Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to adopt emission standards for new nonroad engines. We need information to verify that manufacturers comply with emission standards   before production begins, during production, and after units have been placed into service. We require manufacturers to generate or retain information to demonstrate that engines comply with emission standards.

Manufacturers generally send us the data they collected and keep these records and other pertinent information. We may request to see any of these records. We and the regulated companies will use the data exclusively to ensure compliance with emission standards. Emission rates for specific pollutants and total numbers of engines built are examples of what we require.

This ICR is a revision to the existing information collection approved under OMB control number 2060 0460. The revisions generally include new standards, testing, and reporting requirements for nonroad diesel engines.

2. Need For and Use of the Collection 2( a). Need/ Authority for the Collection The data we require in this ICR is necessary to comply with Title II of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990. The Act directs us to adopt regulations for nonroad engines if we determine those engines contribute significantly to air pollution in the U. S. Now that we have made this determination, the Act directs us to set emission standards for any category of nonroad engines that contributes to air quality nonattainment in two or more areas in the U. S. We can only meet the requirements of the Act by collecting data from the regulated industry. Also, we will only have an effective program if we know that these engines maintain their certified emission level throughout their operating lives.

2( b). Use/ Users of the Data We will oversee the certification process and maintain the program database. We will use the 2 data items to verify compliance with the following requirements associated with the new emission standards:

Determine whether or not a prototype engine may adequately represent an engine family.

Ensure compliance of production line engines.

Issue a recall to correct a noncompliant family of engines.

Confirm actual emission benefits gained by the program.

Ensure proper maintenance and setting of physically adjustable parameters.

Aid in the production projections to randomly select the engines which are to undergo testing.

Determine whether a prototype or freshly manufactured engine should be issued a certificate of conformity.

Ensure that durability of emission controls is consistent with the manufacturer's stated useful life.

Ensure control of emissions across the range of engine operation expected in the normal course of its lifetime

Manage the importation of engines that meet requirements 3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and other Collection Criteria 3( a). Nonduplication State and local governments have not adopted emission standards comparable to those we are adopting. The information requested under this ICR is therefore not available from other sources.

3( b). Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB We published a proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register regarding emission standards for nonroad diesel engines on May 23, 2003. We received comments on several issues related to information collection. These comments are summarized in the following table.

Table 1 Comments Related to Information Collection Commenter Comment Response EMA Identifying the worst case engine configuration in an engine family is overly burdensome. Manufacturers are responsible to use " good engineering judgment" in selecting the worstcase engine. This is consistent with their ongoing liability for meeting the emission standards for all engine configurations.

Yanmar Manufacturers should be able to choose between the C1 and the G2 duty cycles for testing engines below 19 kW. We proposed to specify the G2 duty cycle instead of the C1 duty cycle for testing engines below 19 kW. We agree with the commenter, but only for engines that the manufacturer will sell into applications that run at intermediate speeds, which is appropriate for the C1 duty cycle. Commenter Comment Response 3 EMA EPA should not change the smoke test. We proposed to rely on the new international procedure for measuring smoke. However, since smoke testing will continue only for those engines that do not have PM aftertreatment, we agree with manufacturers that it is not worth investing in new measurement equipment and procedures for smoke.

EMA The thresholds for investigating and reporting defects are too low. We have adjusted the investigation and reporting thresholds to reduce the recordkeeping burden, as described in the Summary and Analysis of Comments.

EMA Manufacturers should not have to make production engines available to EPA for testing. From the beginning of EPA emission standards, we have reserved the right to procure and test manufacturers' production engines. While this is not a frequent occurrence, we believe it is an important element of our effort to ensure compliance with emission standards.

EMA EPA should allow for treating all information from manufacturers as confidential, not just information EMA sends to EPA. The proposed regulatory provisions related to confidential information do not limit manufacturers' ability to identify information as confidential, whether that information comes from site visits, inspections, special testing, or other means.

3( c) Consultations We have met with companies that will be subject to the new emission standards. These contacts are summarized in Table 1. 4 Table 1 Industry Contacts Regarding Information Collection Date Contact July 30 31, 2002 William Passie Caterpillar passie_ william_ c@ cat. com August 13, 2002 Tom Haley Vermeer ( 641) 628 3141 September 16, 2002 SER Outreach Meeting # 1 W. Josh Sutherland Wisconsin Motors ( 901) 229 0715 Eric Ramsey Sweepster, Inc. ( 734) 996 9116 x391 Darrin Drollinger Association of Equipment Manufacturers ( AEM) ( 312) 321 1470 November 13, 2002 SER Outreach Meeting # 2 Bob Ball, Mike Spear, Phil Jenkins Sweepster, Inc. ( 734) 996 9116 Sensors, Inc.

November 12, 2002 Bob Ball, Mike Spear Sweepster, Inc. ( Site visit) ( 734) 996 9116 March 21, 2003 Engine Manufacturers Association ( EMA) Meeting August 12, 2003 Case New Holland November 17, 2003 Engine Manufacturers Association ( EMA) Meeting March 23, 2004 Engine Manufacturers Association ( EMA) Meeting July 9, 2003 Komatsu July 14, 2003 Engine Manufacturers Association ( EMA) Meeting July 15, 2003 John Deere July 16, 2003 Engine Manufacturers Association ( EMA) Meeting October 20, 2003 Caterpillar 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection Annual reporting for certifying engine families is necessary to align with the regulatory requirement to certify engine families every year.

3( e) General Guidelines 5 This ICR complies with the general guidelines, except for the requirement to retain records for up to eight years, as described in 4( b)( ii) below.

3( f) Confidentiality We hold information from the engine manufacturers as confidential until the associated engines are available for purchase. Manufacturers may submit proprietary information, consisting generally of sales projections and certain sensitive technical descriptions. We grant confidentiality in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, and class determinations issued by our Office of General Council.

3( g) Sensitive Questions We do not ask sensitive questions. This collection complies with The Privacy Act and OMB Circular A 108.

4. Respondents and Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ NAICS and SIC Codes The respondents are generally involved in the industries shown in Table 2.

Table 2 NAICS and SIC Codes for Respondent Categories Respondent Categories NAICS Codesa SIC Codesb Manufacturers of new nonroad diesel engines 333618 3519 Manufacturers of farm machinery and equipment 333111 3523 Manufacturers of lawn and garden tractors ( home) 333112 3524 Manufacturers of industrial trucks 333924 3537 Manufacturers of construction machinery 333120 3531 Manufacturers of mining machinery and equipment 333131 3532 Manufacturers of oil and gas field machinery and equipment 333132 3533 aNorth American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) bStandard Industrial Classification ( SIC) system code.

4( b) Respondents and Information Requested ( i) Data Items 6 Manufacturers must send us an application for certification, including emission data and other descriptive information. In addition, manufacturers create engine labels and send us information in some cases regarding engines that are exempt from emission standards or other specific requirements.

( ii) Respondent Activities Companies retain records as hard copy and may also reduce the information to microfilm, computer disks, etc. We require very little submission of information to process applications for certification. This reduces the resource burden, both for the industry and for us. However, because we don't have the information on file, we depend on manufacturers to retain the records to allow us to verify compliance throughout the useful life of the engines. Eight years is sufficient time for this information for most engines. Any investigation of in use engines generally does not start until three or more years after the manufacturer completes the application for certification.

Manufacturers must send us an application for certification with extensive information about their engines. For example, this includes the following things:

" Data showing an engine's emission level of various regulated pollutants for comparison to the emission standards. We also require manufacturers to send data regarding CO 2 emissions so that we can verify their calculations. Emission data generally relates to new engines or to engines that have been operated for an extended period to allow for estimating the performance of the emission control system after accounting for deterioration over the full useful life.

" A description of all their emission related components and emission control strategies and how they tested their engines.

" Maintenance instructions for users.

" Installation instructions for equipment manufacturers.

" Information related to adjustable parameters.

" Instructions related to reading information from the engine's onboard computer.

" Projected production volumes.

We sometimes exempt engines from current emission standards, but require manufacturers to meet less stringent emission standards as a condition of the exemption. In these cases, manufacturers must generally use engines that are identical to those they have already certified. If they can't make engines that are identical to previously certified engines, we require them to generate the same information that they would need to certify, but stop short of requiring them to submit the data and apply for a certificate of conformity.

Some manufacturers also participate in emission credit programs, in which they produce some engines with emissions above the standard and others with emissions below the standard and report annually to show that they have sufficient credits to meet applicable requirements. This is an optional program, so we don't include specific estimates related to any additional reporting or recordkeeping for generating or using emission credits. 7 As part of the requirements related to certification, manufacturers must label all their engines to show their status relative to certification. Most engines will have a label describing how the engine is certified. Some engines need a label describing how they are exempt from current emission standards. In some cases, engine manufacturers need to send additional labels for equipment manufacturers to apply to equipment after installing the engine to alert operators to any particular engine requirements related to fuel quality. Manufacturers may also need to send duplicates of their certification label to equipment manufacturers who find that the original label is obscured once the engine is installed in the equipment.

Over the course of the year, manufacturers must amend their application for certification if they change their engines or add new engines under an existing certificate. They must also notify us in certain cases if they change their maintenance instructions for users. Manufacturers must annually report their production volumes, divided by certain characteristics.

We may require manufacturers to test their engines at the production line in a selective enforcement audit. This involves testing several engines to show that the meet emission standards. Similarly, we may require manufacturers to supply us with production engines for our testing.

Manufacturers must also report to us if they learn that a substantial number of their engines have emission related defects. This is normally not a requirement to collect information, but if manufacturers learn that there is or might be a substantial number of emission related defects, then they must send us information describing the defects.

Many companies import engines. First, some companies import engines that are not subject to emission standards; they must, however, fill out a form documenting the status of their engine and the reason for their exemption. Since most engines are now covered by emission standards, this has become much less common. It is now generally limited to engines used for stationary, underground mining, and hobby applications. Second, some companies import engines as Independent Commercial Importers, meaning that they do their own testing instead of importing engines that have been certified by engine manufacturers.

We have also adopted special provisions that allow equipment manufacturers to sell equipment with uncertified engines ( or engines certified to less stringent standards). This involves a one time notification before using this flexibility and annual reporting to document compliance with these provisions. This is a voluntary program that substantially reduces the costs of compliance for engine manufacturers, so we have not included specific costs related to these reporting or recordkeeping activities here.

All reports, submissions, notifications, and requests for approval must be addressed to: Manager, Engine Programs Group ( 6405 J), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, DC 20460. Respondents must submit information in an approved EPA information format. 8 5. The Information Collected Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 5 ( a) Agency Activities Our certification and tracking process involves reviewing applications and emission data from engine and vehicle manufacturers. From this data, we issue certificates of conformity, and may confirm that production and in use engines continue to comply with standards. We may also select families to be tested in a given production year and require additional testing, based on an analysis of the submitted data.

5 ( b) Collection Methodology and Management We currently use computers extensively to collect information from vehicle manufacturers. Based on this approach as a model, much routine information ( test results, projections) can be electronically transmitted directly from the manufacturers to our computer database. We expect to publish this information on our website once certified engines go into production ( www. epa. gov/ otaq/).

5 ( c) Small Entity Flexibility We have included provisions to ease the compliance burden on small businesses. For instance, some small manufacturers of nonroad diesel engines will be allowed the option to delay compliance with emission standards. For small manufacturers of nonroad diesel equipment, we also permit the installation of a limited number of engines that meet less stringent emission standards.

5( d) Collection Schedule The principal reporting requirements are associated with certification to the emission standards, which begin to apply in 2008. Reporting requirements therefore do not begin until the end of the preceding year at the earliest. Annual reporting is based on the beginning of the model year, which can vary for each manufacturer and for each engine family.

6. Estimating Burden and Cost of the Collection Engine manufacturers comply with emission standards by submitting an application for certification, which obligates them to do a certain amount of testing to show they comply with the standards. The following discussion develops burden and cost estimates for the first three years of the program.

6 ( a) Estimating Respondent Burden 9 The estimates of respondent burden utilize data from the affected industries or commercially available databases. Burden hours per engine family are based upon established hour amounts for engine families, as published in the " Application for Motor Vehicle Emission Certification and Fuel Economy Labeling" ( OMB No. 2060 0104).

The burden for certification testing is generally based on conducting four engine tests for each engine family, then using that test data for several years. The estimated cost for full certification testing, including durability demonstration testing, is $ 15,000 per engine test ( combining labor and O& M expenses). The manufacturer's application for certification involves an extensive effort the first year, followed by relatively little effort in subsequent years. We estimate that manufacturers will conduct new certification testing every five years; the costs have been estimated on an annual average basis.

In addition to testing, manufacturers must prepare the application for certification and maintain appropriate records. We have estimated the cost of these combined activities, which include engineering and clerical effort, to be $ 10,000 per engine family per certification cycle. As with the testing costs, we are presenting annual average costs.

Manufacturers are also expected to conduct testing on their production engines in a selective enforcement audit. We base the estimated costs on testing 10 engine families annually, at approximately $ 80,000 per family. This allows for testing multiple engines in each family.

The estimated burden also takes into account the manufacturers' need to investigate and report emission related defects. The analysis bases this estimate on a scenario in which 10 percent of engine families trigger the defect investigation threshold. We estimate that each of these families would require on average 126 hours of effort to perform the investigation and submit the required reports.

These burden estimates apply equally whether the manufacturer conducts the required activities, or if the manufacturer hires a third party for some of these activities.

6 ( b) Estimating Respondent Costs ( i) Estimating Labor Costs Labor rates on a per hour basis, are taken from the Bureau of Labor Statistics web site at http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t12. htm ( accessed November 24, 2000). Technical labor is $ 42.89/ hr, managerial labor is $ 65.19/ hr, clerical labor is $ 27.11/ hr. Labor rates were multiplied by 1.5 to account for fringe benefits and other overhead expenses.

( ii) Estimating Operations and Maintenance Costs Operation and maintenance costs include expenses related to engine testing. Costs are for 10 laboratory time, the use of test equipment, engine parts, fuel and other supplies, and fabrication of test tools and fixtures. Direct labor costs and operations and maintenance costs combine for the total test costs described above.

( iii) Capital/ Start up Costs Companies required to conduct testing generally either have testing facilities or are expected to conduct testing at a contractor's laboratory. Thus, no capital or startup costs are anticipated for purchasing emission testing equipment.

( iv) Annualizing Capital Costs With no estimated capital or start up costs, there is no need to annualize these costs.

6 ( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost Our Engine Programs Compliance Group administers emission certification programs. This group has approximately 17 full time employees. We project 50 hours per week of staff time ( at $ 40 per hour, loaded) to manage engine compliance programs related to new emission standards. This comes to approximately 2,500 hours or $ 100,000 per year to oversee the requirements of the final rule.

6 ( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs The following tables shows the labor and other costs associated with meeting the new requirements for each engine family. This includes certification costs, plus the cost of any additional testing. Per family costs are multiplied by the number of engine families and added to estimated capital costs to arrive at an estimated total cost. 11 Table 3 Annual Respondent Burden and Cost   Nonroad Diesel Engine Manufacturers Information Collection Activity Average annual burden and cost per family # of Families Annualized Capital &

Startup cost Total Hours and Costs Mgr. @

$ 65/ hr Tech. @

$ 43/ hr Cler. @

$ 27/ hr Hours per family Labor cost per family O& M Cost Total Hours/ yr Total Cost/ yr Cert. application* 2 36 6 44 $ 1,840 $ 0 1077 $ 0 47,388 $ 4,303,692 Recordkeeping 0.2 2.2 2 4.4 $ 162 $ 0 1077 $ 0 4,739 $ 174,043 Cert./ durability testing 0 168 0 168 $ 7,224 $ 4,776 1077 $ 35,973,829 180,936 $ 48,897,829 Selective enforcement audits 5 100 10 115 $ 4,895 $ 75,105 10 $ 0 1,150 $ 800,000 Defect reporting 6 40 80 126 $ 4,270 $ 0 108 $ 0 13,570 $ 459,879 Subtotal Total O& M cost =

$ 5,894,802   $ 35,973,829 247,783 $ 54,635,443 * Costs for certification application include fees assessed at $ 2,156 per family. 12 Table 4 Average Annual Respondent Burden and Cost   Importers Information Collection Activity Average annual burden and cost per family # of Families Annualized Capital &

Startup cost Total Hours and Costs Mgr. @

$ 65/ hr Tech. @

$ 43/ hr Cler. @

$ 27/ hr Hours per family Labor cost per family O& M Cost Total Hours/ yr Total Cost/ yr Reporting 1 0 6.5 7.5 $ 241 $ 0 15 $ 0 113 $ 3,608 Recordkeeping 1 0 6.5 7.5 $ 241 $ 0 15 $ 0 113 $ 3,608 Testing 0 16 0 16 $ 688 $ 10,000 15 $ 0 240 $ 160,320 Exemption forms ( 3520 21) 0 0 0.5 0.5 $ 14 $ 0 125 $ 0 63 $ 1,688 Subtotal Total O& M cost = $ 150,000   $ 0 529 $ 169,224 13 6 ( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables ( i) Respondent Tally Bottom line burden and cost for the first three years of the rulemaking are shown in Table 5. The table shows industry totals and average values for each respondent by category. These estimated costs include startup expenses ( for example, the purchase of emission sampling equipment and new recordkeeping software).

Table 5 Summary of Bottom line Burden Hours and Cost Affected Entities Number of Respondents Industry Totals Average per Respondent Annualized Capital Costs Total O& M Costs per Year Total Hours per Year Total Costs per Year Total Hours per Year Total Costs per Year Nonroad diesel engine manufacturers 75 $ 35,973,829 $ 5,894,802 247,783 $ 54,635,443 3,304 $ 728,473 Independent Commercial Importers 15 $ 0 $ 150,000 466 $ 167,535 31 $ 11,169 Exempt importers 25 $ 0 $ 0 63 $ 1,688 3 $ 68 Total 115 $ 35,973,829 $ 6,044,802 248,312 54,804,666 2,159 $ 476,562 ( ii) Agency Tally Our estimated burden is approximately 2,500 hours or per year ( or $ 100,000) to oversee the requirements of the final rule, as described in Section 6( c).

6 ( f) Burden Statement As shown in Table 5, these new requirements account for almost 250,000 burden hours and about $ 6 million dollars in O& M costs annually. These estimates include time to conduct testing, prepare applications, prepare and submit reports, and record and keep required information.

Burden means the total time for, or financial resources expended by, persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems 14 for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 2,159 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OAR 2003 0012, which is available for public viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room and the Air Docket is ( 202) 566 1744. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. EDOCKET is available for submitting or viewing public comments, accessing the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and accessing those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select " search," then key in the docket ID number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. ( OAR 2003 0012) and OMB control number ( 2060 0460) in any correspondence.

6 ( g) Reason for Change in Burden We are proposing emission standards for nonroad diesel engines. This information collection 15 request updates the estimated burden to reflect the additional effort required to meet the new standards and consolidates all the various recordkeeping and reporting items for these engines. 16 Appendix to ICR # 1897.07 The original ICR (# 1897.02) for marine diesel engines was approved Oct. 12, 2001 and announced in the Federal Register on February 28, 2003 ( 68 FR 9746).

Summary of Bottom line Burden Hours and Cost ( 1897.02)

Affected Entities Number of Respondents Industry Totals Average per Respondent Annualized Capital Costs Total O& M Costs per Year Total Hours per Year Total Costs per Year Total Hours per Year Total Costs per Year Manufacturers and Marinizers 12 $ 0 $ 200,000 20,280 $ 2,453,632 1,690 $ 204,469 Dressers 20 $ 0 $ 0 40 $ 1,840 2 $ 92 Rebuilders 200 $ 0 $ 0 1,200 $ 38,800 6 $ 194 Total 232 $ 0 $ 200,000 21,520 $ 2,494,272 93 $ 10,751 ICR supplement (# 1897.04) for multiple engine categories was approved January 31, 2003. The ICR items for recreational marine diesel engines and for Category 3 marine diesel engines were announced in the Federal Register on February 28, 2003 ( 68 FR 9746). The items for Large SI engines, recreational vehicles, and engine rebuilders will be announced in the nonroad diesel Tier 4 NPRM.

Summary of Bottom line Burden Hours and Cost ( 1897.04)

Affected Entities Number of Respondents Industry Totals Average per Respondent Annualized Capital Costs Total O& M Costs per Year Total Hours per Year Total Costs per Year Total Hours per Year Total Costs per Year Large SI engine manufacturers 12 $ 174,419 $ 2,507,790 21,986 $ 3,617,683 1,832 $ 301,474 Recreational marine diesel engine manufacturers 12 $ 0 $ 870,238 7,273 $ 1,178,061 606 $ 98,172 Category 3 marine diesel engine manufacturers 6 $ 0 $ 67,104 1,812 $ 144,022 302 $ 24,004 Engine rebuilders 200 $ 0 $ 0 1,200 $ 38,800 6 $ 194 Total 230 $ 174,419 $ 3,445,132 32,271 $ 4,978,566 140 $ 21,646


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29766-29768]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12012]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2013-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final Notice.

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

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries
or zone designations, and/or the regulatory floodway (hereinafter
referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the
table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood
hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

DATES: The effective date for each LOMR is indicated in the table
below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers
of local circulation and ninety (90) days have elapsed since that
publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is
shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard determinations are the basis for
the floodplain management measures that the community is required
either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order
to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP).
    These new or modified flood hazard determinations, together with
the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the
minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that
the community must change any existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community
may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to
policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    These new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to
calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new
buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Location and case    Chief executive officer       Community map
         State and county                   No.                 of community             repository       Effective date of modification   Community No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Mexico: Sandoval (FEMA Docket  City of Rio Rancho    The Honorable Thomas E.    City Hall, 3200       March 7, 2013.................          350146
 No.: B-1290).                      (12-06-2669P).        Swisstack, Mayor, City     Civic Center Circle
                                                          of Rio Rancho, 3200        Northeast, Rio
                                                          Civic Center Circle        Rancho, NM 87144.
                                                          Northeast, Rio Rancho,
                                                          NM 87144.
Pennsylvania:
    Cumberland (FEMA Docket No.:   Borough of            The Honorable James E.     1 Park Lane,          March 14, 2013................          420369
     B-1290).                       Shiremanstown (13-    Reagan, Mayor, Borough     Shiremanstown, PA
                                    03-0052P).            of Shiremanstown, 1 Park   17011.
                                                          Lane, Shiremanstown, PA
                                                          17011.
    Cumberland (FEMA Docket No.:   Township of Hampden   The Honorable Al           Township of Hampden,  March 14, 2013................          420360
     B-1290).                       (13-03-0052P).        Bienstock, President,      230 South Sporting
                                                          Hampden Township Board     Hill Road,
                                                          of Commissioners, 230      Mechanicsburg, PA
                                                          South Sporting Hill        17050.
                                                          Road, Mechanicsburg, PA
                                                          17050.
    Cumberland (FEMA Docket No.:   Township of Lower     The Honorable H. Edward    Township of Lower     March 14, 2013................          421016
     B-1290).                       Allen (13-03-0052P).  Black, President, Lower    Allen, 2233
                                                          Allen Township Board of    Gettysburg Road,
                                                          Commissioners, 2233        Camp Hill, PA 17011.
                                                          Gettysburg Road, Camp
                                                          Hill, PA 17011.

    Northumberland (FEMA Docket    Borough of            The Honorable Larry Wary,  Borough Building, 36  March 11, 2013................          420742
     No.: B-1290).                  Snydertown (12-03-    President, Borough of      South Main Street,
                                    1407P).               Snydertown Council, 36     Snydertown, PA
                                                          South Main Street,         17877.
                                                          Snydertown, PA 17877.
Texas:
    Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of San Antonio   The Honorable Julian       Municipal Plaza, 114  March 7, 2013.................          480045
     1290).                         (12-06-1279P).        Castro, Mayor, City of     West Commerce, 7th
                                                          San Antonio, 100           Floor, San Antonio,
                                                          Military Plaza, San        TX 78205.
                                                          Antonio, TX 78205.
    Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas  The Honorable Nelson W.    Bexar County Public   March 1, 2013.................          480035
     1290).                         of Bexar County (12-  Wolff, Bexar County        Works Department,
                                    06-2751P).            Judge, Paul Elizondo       233 North Pecos-La
                                                          Tower, 101 West Nueva      Trinidad Street,
                                                          Street, 10th Floor, San    Suite 420, San
                                                          Antonio, TX 78205.         Antonio, TX 78207.
    Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of McKinney (12- The Honorable Brian        222 North Tennessee   February 22, 2013.............          480135
     1290).                         06-1512P).            Loughmiller, Mayor, City   Street, McKinney,
                                                          of McKinney, 222 North     TX 75069.
                                                          Tennessee Street,
                                                          McKinney, TX 75069.
    Dallas (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Garland (12-  The Honorable Ronald E.    800 Main Street,      March 18, 2013................          485471
     1290).                         06-1648P).            Jones, Mayor, City of      Garland, TX 75040.
                                                          Garland, 200 North 5th
                                                          Street, Garland, TX
                                                          75040.
    Dallas (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Rowlett (12-  The Honorable Todd W.      City Hall, 4000 Main  March 18, 2013................          480185
     1290).                         06-1648P).            Gottel, Mayor, City of     Street, Rowlett, TX
                                                          Rowlett, 4000 Main         75088.
                                                          Street, Rowlett, TX
                                                          75088.
    Dallas (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Sachse (12-   The Honorable Mike Felix,  Community             March 18, 2013................          480186
     1290).                         06-1648P).            Mayor, City of Sachse,     Development
                                                          3815 Sachse Road,          Department, 3815
                                                          Building B, Sachse, TX     Sachse Road,
                                                          75048.                     Building B, Sachse,
                                                                                TX 75048.
    Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas  The Honorable Mary Horn,   Denton County         March 18, 2013................          480774
     1290).                         of Denton County      Denton County Judge, 110   Government Center,
                                    (12-06-1316P).        West Hickory Street, 2nd   1505 East McKinney
                                                          Floor, Denton, TX 76201.   Street, Suite 175,
                                                                                Denton, TX 76209.
    Ellis (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Waxahachie    The Honorable Buck         City Hall, 401 South  March 7, 2013.................          480211
     1297).                         (12-06-0792P).        Jordan, Mayor, City of     Rogers Street,
                                                          Waxahachie, 401 South      Waxahachie, TX
                                                          Rogers Street,             75165.
                                                          Waxahachie, TX 75165.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Pasadena (12- The Honorable Johnny       Public Library, 1201  March 1, 2013.................          480307
     1305).                         02-3062P).            Isbell, Mayor, City of     Jeff Ginn Memorial
                                                          Pasadena, 1211 Southmore   Drive, Pasadena, TX
                                                          Avenue, Pasadena, TX       77502.
                                                          77502.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Southside     The Honorable Pat L.       City Hall, 6309       March 4, 2013.................          480312
     1290).                         Place (12-06-3459P).  Patterson, Mayor, City     Edloe Avenue,
                                                          of Southside Place, 6309   Houston, TX 77005.
                                                          Edloe Avenue, Houston,
                                                          TX 77005.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of West          The Honorable Bob R. Fry,  Public Works          March 4, 2013.................          480318
     1290).                         University Place      Mayor, City of West        Development
                                    (12-06-3459P).        University Place, 3800     Services, 3826
                                                          University Boulevard,      Amherst Street,
                                                          West University Place,     West University
                                                          TX 77005.                  Place, TX 77005.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas  The Honorable Ed Emmett,   Harris County, 10555  March 7, 2013.................          480287
     1290).                         of Harris County      Harris County Judge,       Northwest Freeway,
                                    (12-06-3003P).        1001 Preston, Suite 911,   Suite 120, Houston,
                                                          Houston, TX 77002.         TX 77092.
    Lubbock (FEMA Docket No.: B-   City of Lubbock (12-  The Honorable Glen         City Hall, 1625 13th  March 7, 2013.................          480452
     1290).                         06-1237P).            Robertson, Mayor, City     Street, Lubbock, TX
                                                          of Lubbock, P.O. Box       79401.
                                                          2000, Lubbock, TX 79457.
    Lubbock (FEMA Docket No.: B-   Unincorporated areas  The Honorable Tom Head,    Lubbock County        March 7, 2013.................          480915
     1290).                         of Lubbock County     Lubbock County Judge,      Courthouse, 904
                                    (12-06-1237P).        904 Broadway Street,       Broadway Street,
                                                          Suite 101, Lubbock, TX     Lubbock, TX 79401.
                                                          79401.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-   City of Fort Worth    The Honorable Betsy        1000 Throckmorton     March 1, 2013.................          480596
     1297).                         (12-06-2292P).        Price, Mayor, City of      Street, Fort Worth,
                                                          Fort Worth, 1000           TX 76102.
                                                          Throckmorton Street,
                                                          Fort Worth, TX 76102.
    Wilson (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Floresville   The Honorable Daniel M.    City Hall, 1120 D     February 21, 2013.............          480671
     1290).                         (12-06-1541P).        Tejada, Mayor, City of     Street,
                                                          Floresville, 1120 D        Floresville, TX
                                                          Street, Floresville, TX    78114.
                                                          78114.
Virginia:
    Augusta (FEMA Docket No.: B-   City of Waynesboro    The Honorable Bruce E.     City Hall, Charles    March 4, 2013.................          515532
     1305).                         (12-03-1604P).        Allen, Mayor, City of      Yancey Municipal
                                                          Waynesboro, 503 West       Building, 503 West
                                                          Main Street, Suite 210,    Main Street,
                                                          Waynesboro, VA 22980.      Waynesboro, VA
                                                                                22980.
    Augusta (FEMA Docket No.: B-   Unincorporated areas  The Honorable Tracy C.     Augusta County        March 4, 2013.................          510013
     1305).                         of Augusta County     Pyles, Jr., Chairman,      Community
                                    (12-03-1604P).        Augusta County Board of    Development Office,
                                                          Supervisors, 18            18 Government
                                                          Government Center Lane,    Center Lane,
                                                          Verona, VA 24482.          Verona, VA 24482.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-12012 Filed 5-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P