[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26979-26982]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12078]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 13, 2017 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0740; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-24-AD;
Amendment 39-18905; AD 2017-11-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-05-32 for
all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D,
PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117-PW-100 turbofan engines. AD 2014-05-32
required one-time eddy current inspection (ECI) of affected engines
with certain diffuser and high-pressure turbine (HPT) cases installed.
AD 2014-05-32 also required a fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) of
the diffuser case rear flange and the HPT case front flange. This AD
requires additional repetitive, on-wing ECI inspections. This AD was
prompted by the manufacturer determining through analysis that the
inspections required by AD 2014-05-32 are not adequate to maintain
safety for certain diffuser cases. We are issuing this AD to correct
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:  This AD is effective July 18, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 18,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone:
860-565-0140; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view
this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. 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-2013-0740.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.govby searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0740; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 781-
238-7199; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2014-05-32, Amendment 39-17804 (79 FR 17856,
March 31, 2014), (``AD 2014-05-32''). AD 2014-05-32 applied to all PW
PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and
F117-PW-100 turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on December 22, 2016 (81 FR 93855) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM
was prompted by the manufacturer determining through analysis that the
inspections required by AD 2014-05-32 were not adequate to maintain
safety for diffuser cases that incorporate a wrought M-flange. Also,
repaired wrought flanges cannot be distinguished from other wrought
flanges or from non-repaired flanges on diffuser cases installed on the
affected engines. The NPRM, therefore, proposed to add additional
repetitive, on-wing ECIs. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the diffuser-to-HPT case flange, which could lead to uncontained engine
failure and damage to the airplane.

Comments

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

Request for New AD Instead of Supersedure AD

    PW, Delta Airlines (Delta), FedEx Express (FedEx), and United
Airlines (United) requested that the NPRM to supersede AD 2014-05-32 be
withdrawn and the requirements of the NPRM be included in a new AD that
does not supersede AD 2014-05-32. Delta indicated that the NPRM applies
only to a sub-population of diffuser cases. Delta recommended that
further field data be captured to validate PW's analysis prior to
issuance of the final rule AD. PW, Delta, and United added that the
repetitive ECIs introduced by this AD are different from those mandated
by AD 2014-05-32.
    We disagree. AD 2014-05-32 and this AD address the same safety
issue, which is cracking and rupture of the diffuser case M-flange.
Therefore, AD 2014-05-32 and this AD have the same applicability.
Differences in compliance time reflect different levels of risk
associated with different sub-populations of diffuser cases. We
therefore find it appropriate that this AD replaces AD 2014-05-32. We
are, however, revising the Previous Credit section of this AD to allow
credit for ECIs of the diffuser case M-flange performed using either PW
Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW2000 72-763, Revision No. 1, dated August
30, 2013; and PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW2000 A72-765,
Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016.

Request To Exclude F117 Engines From Applicability

    PW requested that the F117-PW-100 turbofan engine be excluded from
the applicability of this AD. PW indicated that the F117 engine meets
all safety requirements and does not warrant a service bulletin or an
AD. PW asked that if this AD does not remove the F117 engine from
applicability, then this AD should clarify that the repetitive ECIs in

paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD do not apply to the F117 engine.
Further, this AD should reference PW SB F117 72-410, Revision 1, dated
December 17, 2013.
    We partially agree. We agree that the original build F117-PW-100
engines used only cast material M-flanges and, therefore, are not
susceptible to the safety issue responsible for this AD. We note,
however, that an F117 diffuser case flange can be repaired using the
wrought material making these flanges susceptible to the unsafe
condition represented by this AD. We, therefore, find it necessary to
include the F117-PW-100 engine in the applicability of this AD.
    We disagree with removing the F117 engine from the recurring ECIs
in paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD since these inspections apply
to all applicable engines.
    We disagree with referencing PW SB F117 72-410, Revision 1, dated
December 17, 2013, as this is not an equivalent instruction for the
repetitive inspections of this AD. We did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Criteria for Recurrent ECI Inspection

    PW, Delta, FedEx, and UPS requested that the re-inspection required
by paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD be changed to occur ``within 2,500
cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever
occurs last'' instead of ``within 2,500 cycles since last ECI or last
piece-part FPI inspection, whichever occurs first'' as proposed. The
commenters indicated that using the criteria ``whichever occurs first''
would not allow the repetitive inspection interval to be reset
following an ECI inspection. PW also commented that the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD should
reference PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12,
2016.
    We partially agree. We agree that changing the criteria in
paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD to ``whichever occurs last'' maintains
an acceptable level of safety and changed this paragraph accordingly.
Paragraph (f)(4) of this AD references direct compliance in accordance
with PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016.
There is no need to repeat that instruction in paragraph (f)(4)(ii).

Request To Revise Initial Inspection Threshold

    Delta and United requested that the initial inspection intervals be
increased. Delta also requested that the initial inspection threshold
of 5,500 cycles since new or since M-flange replacement, as specified
in paragraph (f)(4)(i)(A) of this AD, be extended to 6,500 cycles since
new. United asked that the initial inspection threshold in this
paragraph (f)(4)(i)(C) be aligned with the service information, which
provides an inspection interval of 1,500 cycles for engines with more
than 2,500 cycles since last engine shop visit.
    We partially agree. We agree that closer alignment of the initial
inspection threshold with PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 1,
dated July 13, 2016, maintains an acceptable level of safety. We
therefore increased the initial inspection threshold in paragraph
(f)(4)(i)(C) of this AD from 500 cycles to 1,000 cycles from the
effective date of this AD. We do not, however, have data to support
increasing the interval from 5,500 to 6,500 cycles since new.
Therefore, we did not change paragraph (f)(4)(i)(A) of this AD.

Request To Clarify References to Diffuser Cases

    PW and Delta requested that we revise sections in the preamble of
the NPRM, particularly the ``Summary'' and the ``Actions Since AD 2014-
05-32 Was Issued'' sections, to clarify that the ``subpopulation
identified by the manufacturer'' refers to diffuser cases manufactured
or repaired using wrought flanges. Also, PW and Delta want to clarify
that repaired flanges cannot be distinguished from non-repaired since
they share the same part number.
    We partially agree. The summary of an AD is not intended to provide
the level of detail requested by the commenters, but we added a
reference to clarify that we are referring to a certain population of
diffuser cases. The ``Actions Since AD 2014-05-32 Was Issued'' section
does not exist in a final rule AD, but we clarified in the Discussion
sections of this AD that we are referring to diffuser cases that
incorporate a wrought M-flange. We also added a statement in the
Discussion to note that repaired flanges cannot be distinguished from
non-repaired flanges.

Request To Update Service Information References

    PW, Delta, United, and FedEx requested that we revise references in
the compliance section of this AD from PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765,
Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765,
Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. PW and Delta also requested that
we allow compliance to later revisions of this ASB. PW and Delta
indicated that they expect an additional revision to this ASB prior to
issuance of this final rule. Delta further asked that publication of
this final rule AD be delayed until the latest version of this ASB is
published.
    We partially agree. We agree to update the references to PW ASB No.
PW2000 A72-765 to Revision 2, dated August 12, 2016, in the compliance
section of this AD. We do not agree to delay publication of this final
rule AD or to revise the references to service information to allow
compliance to revisions that have not been published. We cannot require
compliance to service information that does not exist.

Request To Clarify References to Diffuser Cases M-flange

    PW, Delta, FedEx, and United requested that we clarify that the
inspections required by paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD are for
cracks from the diffuser case M-flange bolthole towards the case body.
The commenters note that flange bolthole cracks away from the case body
do not contribute to the unsafe condition.
    We agree. We changed this AD by revising paragraphs (f)(4)(iii) and
(iv) to refer to ``bolthole ID crack'' as defined by ASB No. PW2000
A72-765.

Request To Revise SUMMARY

    PW requested that we clarify in the SUMMARY that FPI is performed
at ``piece part opportunity.''
    We disagree. The compliance section of this AD specifies that the
FPI is performed at piece-part opportunity. The SUMMARY is not intended
to provide that level of detail. We did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Definition

    Delta requested that the Definition of ``piece-part opportunity''
in paragraph (g) of this AD be revised to exclude diffuser cases that
will not be returned to service. Delta noted that diffuser cases that
will be scrapped should not be required to be inspected.
    We disagree. This AD is only applicable to parts that are
installed. Parts that will be scrapped do not need to be inspected. We
did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Previous Credit Section

    PW and Delta requested that the reference to the HPT case M-flange
be removed from the Credit for Previous Actions section of this AD. PW
commented that only the diffuser case M-flange should be referenced.
    PW also requested that in the Credit for Previous Actions section
we refer to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765,

Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016, instead of Revision No. 1 of
this SB. PW and Delta asked that we correct the date of PW SB No.
PW2000 72-763, Revision No. 1, from August 13, 2013, to August 30,
2013.
    We partially agree. We disagree with removing the reference to the
HPT case M-flange. In order to have complied with this AD, the operator
must have performed an ECI of the diffuser and HPT case M-flange as
specified in this AD. As noted in our previous comment response, we
agreed to update the reference to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765 to Revision
No. 2 in the compliance section of this AD. We do not need to refer to
Revision No. 2 in the Credit for Previous Actions section. The purpose
of the Credit for Previous Actions section is to allow credit for
actions that use earlier versions of service information required by
this AD. We agree to correct the date for PW SB No. PW2000 72-763,
Revision No. 1, to August 30, 2013.

Request Update to Contact Information

    PW requested that we update the manufacturer's contact information
in this AD to Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> ; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    We agree. We updated the manufacturer's contact information in the
ADDRESSES and Material Incorporated by Reference sections of this AD.

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance Estimate

    PW commented that that this AD affects 638 engines installed on
U.S. airplanes. FedEx commented that the cost of the repetitive ECI
proposed in this AD is $618,800.
    We disagree. When AD 2014-05-32 was issued, there were only 638
affected engines in the U.S. Registry. However, a more recent inquiry
for this AD located 910 engines listed in the U.S. Registry. We
disagree with FedEx that the cost for a repetitive ECI is $618,800
because FedEx assumes all engines will be subject to the repetitive
ECI. We estimate that the additional inspections affect only 339 of the
910 engines. We did not change this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD 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 AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed PW SB No. PW2000 72-763, Revision No. 1, dated August
30, 2013; and PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated August
12, 2016. This service information describes procedures for a one-time
ECI inspection of the engine diffuser case and the HPT case, and
repetitive on-wing ECIs of the engine diffuser case assembly,
respectively. 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 910 engines installed on airplanes
of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts                              Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost          cost      Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-wing/module ECI Inspection.....  8 work-hours x $85            $0  $680................  $230,520 per
                                     per hour = $680.                                        inspection cycle.
FPI Inspection....................  3 work-hours x $85            20  $275 per inspection   $250,250 per
                                     per hour = $255.                  cycle.                inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2014-05-32, Amendment 39-17804 (79 FR 17856, March 31, 2014), and
adding the following new AD:

2017-11-06 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 39-18905; Docket No. FAA-2013-
0740; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-24-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective July 18, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2014-05-32, Amendment 39-17804 (79 FR 17856,
March 31, 2014).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2037, PW2037D,
PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117-PW-100
turbofan engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 72, Turbine/
Turboprop Engine.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a rupture of the diffuser-to-high-
pressure turbine (HPT) case flange. We are issuing this AD to
prevent failure of the diffuser-to-HPT case flange, which could lead
to uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Unless already done, comply with this AD within the compliance
times specified.
    (1) For diffuser case, part number (P/N) 1B7461, serial numbers
(S/Ns) DGGUAK1306 and DGGUAK1308, and HPT case, P/N 1B2440, S/N
DKLBCS1032:
    (i) Within 100 flight cycles or 30 days after May 5, 2014,
whichever is later, eddy current inspect the diffuser case and the
HPT case M-flange. Use PW Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW2000 72-763,
Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013, to do the inspection.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (2) For all diffuser and HPT cases, at the next piece-part
opportunity and every piece-part opportunity thereafter, perform a
high sensitivity fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) of the
entire diffuser case rear flange (M-flange) and boltholes, and the
entire HPT case forward flange (M-flange) and boltholes.
    (3) For diffuser cases that have not incorporated PW SB PW2000-
72-364 or have incorporated either PW SB PW2000-72-700 or PW2000
Series Engine Manual, Repair-28, Task 72-41-01-300-028 (M-flange
replacement), perform initial and repetitive eddy current
inspections (ECIs) of the M-flange of the diffuser case in
accordance with paragraph (f)(4) of this AD.
    (4) Use, as applicable, either the Accomplishment Instructions,
``For Engines Installed on the Aircraft,'' paragraphs 3.(I) through
3.(J), or the Accomplishment Instructions, ``For Engines Removed
from the Aircraft,'' paragraphs 3.(D) through 3.(E), of PW Alert
Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated
August 12, 2016 to do the ECI as follows:
    (i) Perform an initial inspection within the following period,
whichever occurs later:
    (A) Within 5,500 cycles since new or since M-flange replacement,
or
    (B) Within 2,500 cycles since last piece-part FPI inspection, or
    (C) Within 1,000 cycles from the effective date of this AD.
    (ii) If no crack indications are found, re-inspect within 2,500
cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever
occurs later.
    (iii) If bolthole ID crack indications are found, measure the
length and determine the re-inspect interval in accordance with:
    (A) Paragraphs 5.(C) through 5.(D) of PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765,
Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016 ``For Engines Installed on the
Aircraft''; or
    (B) Paragraphs 4.(C) through 4.(D) of PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765,
Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016, ``For Engines Removed from
the Aircraft.''
    (iv) Remove from service diffuser cases with bolthole ID cracks
exceeding 0.170 inches.

(g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, piece-part opportunity is defined as
when the part is completely disassembled.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) You may take credit for the diffuser case and HPT case
inspections required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) of this AD if you
performed:
    (i) An ECI of the diffuser case and the HPT case M-flange using
the Accomplishment Instructions of PW SB No. PW2000 72-763, Revision
No. 1, dated August 30, 2013, or an earlier version; or
    (ii) a high sensitivity FPI of the diffuser case and the HPT
case at a piece-part opportunity after January 1, 2010.
    (2) You may take credit for only the diffuser case inspections
required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) of this AD if you performed an
ECI of the M-flange using the Accomplishment Instructions of PW SB
No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, or an
earlier version.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request. You may email your request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Brian Kierstead,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) 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) Pratt & Whitney (PW) Service Bulletin No. PW2000 72-763,
Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013.
    (ii) PW Alert Service Bulletin No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No.
2, dated August 12, 2016.
    (3) For PW service information identified in this AD, contact
Pratt & Whitney,400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860-
565-0140; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
781-238-7125.
    (5) You may view this service information 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 Burlington, Massachusetts, on May 17, 2017.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-12078 Filed 6-12-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 203)]
[Notices]
[Page 61278-61279]
[DOCID:fr21oc05-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL06-3-000]

City of Vernon, California, Complainant v. Mirant Americas Energy
Marketing, L.P., Respondent; Notice of Complaint

October 14, 2005.
    Take notice that on October 12, 2005, the City of Vernon,
California filed a Petition for an Order declaring that a termination
payment demanded by Mirant Americas Energy Marketing, L.P., is unjust,
unreasonable, contrary to the public interest, or not permitted under a
rate schedule. In the alternative, pursuant to sections 205, 206, 306
and 309 of the Federal Power Act, section 1290 of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005, and Rules 206 and 207 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure
of the Commission, 18 CFR 385.206 and 385.207, the City of Vernon asks
the Commission to consider this filing as a complaint against Mirant
Americas Energy Marketing, L.P.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of

intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all parties to this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on November 1, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5810 Filed 10-20-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 9770]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03034]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Request to Release Airport Property

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Rule on Request to Release Airport Property
at the Colonel James Jabara Airport (AAO), Wichita, KS.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the
release of land at the Colonel James Jabara Airport (AAO), Wichita,
Kansas, under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 13, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to
the FAA at the following address: Lynn D. Martin, Airports Compliance
Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration, Airports Division, ACE-
610C, 901 Locust Room 364, Kansas City, MO 64106.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be
mailed or delivered to: John Oswald, Airport Engineer, Colonel James
Jabara Airport, Wichita Airport Authority; 2173 Air Cargo Rd., Wichita,
KS 67209,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn D. Martin, Airports Compliance
Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration, Airports Division, ACE-
610C, 901 Locust Room 364, Kansas City, MO 64106,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    The request to release property may be reviewed, by appointment, in
person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA invites public comment on the
request to release approximately 48.24 acres of airport property at the
Colonel James Jabara Airport (AAO) under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.
47107(h)(2). On July 30, 2012, the City of Wichita's Airport Engineer
requested from the FAA that approximately 48.24 acres of property be
released for sale to the City of Wichita. On Nov. 5, 2012, the FAA
determined that the request to release property at Colonel James Jabara
Airport (AAO) submitted by the Sponsor meets the procedural
requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration and the release of
the property does not and will not impact future aviation needs at the
airport. The FAA may approve the request, in whole or in part, no
sooner than thirty days after the publication of this Notice.
    The following is a brief overview of the request:
    Colonel James Jabara Airport (AAO) is proposing the release of a
parcel, totaling 48.24 acres. The release of land is necessary to
comply with Federal Aviation Administration Grant Assurances that do
not allow federally acquired airport property to be used for non-
aviation purposes. The sale of the subject property will result in the
land at the Colonel James Jabara Airport (AAO) being changed from
aeronautical to nonaeronautical use and release the surface lands from
the conditions of the AIP Grant Agreement Grant Assurances, but
retaining the mineral rights. In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
47107(c)(2)(B)(i) and (iii), the airport will receive fair market value
for the property, which will be subsequently reinvested in purchasing
land adjacent to the Wichita Mid-continent Airport (ICT), which is also
owned by the City of Wichita, Wichita Airport Authority.
    Any person may inspect, by appointment, the request in person at
the FAA office listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In
addition, any person may, upon appointment and request, inspect the
application, notice and other documents determined by the FAA to be
related to the application in person at the Colonel James Jabara
Airport.

    Re-Issued in Kansas City, MO on February 4, 2013.
Jim A. Johnson,
Manager, Airports Division.
[FR Doc. 2013-03034 Filed 2-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 11, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40822-40823]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16857]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0546; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-15-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Division Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Pratt & Whitney PW4050, PW4052, PW4056, PW4060, PW4060A, PW4060C,
PW4062, PW4062A, PW4152, PW4156, PW4156A, PW4158, PW4160, PW4460,
PW4462, and PW4650 turbofan engines, including models with any dash
number suffix. This proposed AD was prompted by 16 reports of damaged
or failed 3rd stage low-pressure turbine (LPT) duct segments. This
proposed AD would require removing from service certain part numbers
(P/Ns) of 3rd stage LPT duct segments. We are proposing this AD to
prevent failure of the 3rd stage LPT duct segments, which could lead to
LPT rotor damage, uncontained engine failure, and damage to the
airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 10,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860-565-
8770; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
& Propeller Directorate, FAA, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-0546;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-15-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We received 16 reports of damaged or failed 3rd stage LPT duct
segments that resulted in 5 in-flight shutdowns, two of which were
uncontained engine failures. The 3rd stage LPT duct segment assembly
has seal plates that are attached with rivets. During normal engine
operation, vibration may cause these seal plates to loosen or fall off,
which allows hot gaspath air to enter the cavity behind the duct. This
can cause the 3rd stage LPT duct segment to distort, fall into the
gaspath, and damage the downstream LPT rotor blades. This condition, if
not corrected, could result in failure of the 3rd stage LPT duct
segments, which could lead to LPT rotor damage, uncontained engine
failure, and damage to the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Pratt & Whitney Engine-Duct Segment, Third Stage LPT
Assembly Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW4ENG 72-488, Revision 3, dated
August 13, 2009. The SB lists the part numbers of parts to be removed
and parts to be installed.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require removal from service of 3rd stage
LPT duct segments P/Ns 50N095; 50N095-001; 50N235; 50N235-001; 50N494-
01; 50N494-001; 50N495-01; and 50N495-001, at the next piece-part
exposure after the effective date of the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 151 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate that no additional
labor costs would be incurred to perform the required work as the work
is done when the 3rd stage LPT duct segments are at piece-part
exposure. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts
would cost about $44,441 per engine. Based on these figures, we
estimate the total cost of the AD to U.S. operators to be $6,710,591.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Pratt & Whitney Division: Docket No. FAA-2012-0546; Directorate
Identifier 2012-NE-15-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by September 10, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney PW4050, PW4052, PW4056,
PW4060, PW4060A, PW4060C, PW4062, PW4062A, PW4152, PW4156, PW4156A,
PW4158, PW4160, PW4460, PW4462, and PW4650 turbofan engines,
including models with any dash number suffix, with 3rd stage LPT
duct segments P/N 50N095; 50N095-001; 50N235; 50N235-001; 50N494-01;
50N494-001; 50N495-01; or 50N495-001, installed.

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by 16 reports of damaged or failed 3rd
stage low-pressure turbine (LPT) duct segments. We are issuing this
AD to prevent failure of the 3rd stage LPT duct segments, which
could lead to LPT rotor damage, uncontained engine failure, and
damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) 3rd Stage LPT Duct Segments Removal From Service

    At the next piece-part exposure after the effective date of this
AD, remove from service 3rd stage LPT duct segments, P/Ns 50N095;
50N095-001; 50N235; 50N235-001; 50N494-01; 50N494-001; 50N495-01;
and 50N495-001.

(g) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install into any
engine any 3rd stage LPT duct segment, P/N 50N095; 50N095-001;
50N235; 50N235-001; 50N494-01; 50N494-001; 50N495-01; or 50N495-001,
that is at piece-part exposure.

(h) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, piece-part exposure is when the 3rd
stage LPT duct segment is removed from the engine and completely
disassembled.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Pratt & Whitney Engine-Duct Segment, Third Stage LPT
Assembly Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW4ENG 72-488, Revision 3, dated
August 13, 2009.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact James Gray,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine & Propeller Directorate, FAA, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Pratt
& Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860-565-
8770; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may review copies of the service
information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on July 2, 2012.
Peter A. White,
Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-16857 Filed 7-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 173)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46342-46345]
[DOCID:fr09se09-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0465; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-244-AD;
Amendment 39-16012; AD 2009-18-16]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -
222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile]
France issued AD F-2005-078 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-02-06]
to require the modification (Airbus modification 13023), defined in
Airbus SB [service bulletin] A310-53-2124, to increase the service
life of junctions of center box upper frame bases to upper fuselage
arches. This structural modification falls within the scope of the
work related to the extension of the service life of A310 aircraft
and widespread fatigue damage evaluations.
    The threshold timescales for accomplishment of the tasks as
defined in SB A310-53-2124 were refined and reduced. * * *
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of the frame foot run-outs,
which could lead to rupture of the frame foot and cracking in adjacent
frames and skin, and which could result in reduced structural integrity
of the fuselage. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 14, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 14,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425)
227-1622; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 2, 2009 (74 FR
26312), and proposed to supersede AD 2006-02-06, Amendment 39-14458 (71
FR 3214, January 20, 2006). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile]
France issued AD F-2005-078 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-02-06,
Amendment 39-14458, 71 FR 3214, January 20, 2006] to require the
modification (Airbus modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB
[service bulletin] A310-53-2124, to increase the service life of
junctions of center box upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches.
This structural modification falls within the scope of the work
related to the extension of the service life of A310 aircraft and
widespread fatigue damage evaluations.
    The threshold timescales for accomplishment of the tasks as
defined in SB A310-53-2124 were refined and reduced. Consequently,
EASA issued AD 2007-0238 to require compliance with Revision 1 of SB
A310-53-2124 at the reduced compliance times, superseding (the
requirements of) DGAC France AD F-2005-078. Subsequently,

Airbus identified reference material that was erroneously introduced
into Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1. As a result, the SB
instructions could not be accomplished properly. Operators that
tried to apply SB A310-53-2124 at Revision 1 had to contact Airbus;
see also Airbus SBIT [service bulletin information telex] ref.
914.0135/08, dated 03 March 2008.
    Consequently, AD 2007-0238 was revised to exclude reference to
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1 and to require accomplishment of
the task(s) as described in the original SB A310-53-2124 instead,
although retaining the reduced compliance times introduced by AD
2007-0238 at original issue. This new [EASA] AD is published to
refer to Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 02, the corrected version
that is to be used to meet the requirements of this AD.

The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of the frame foot run-outs,
which could lead to rupture of the frame foot and cracking in adjacent
frames and skin, and which could result in reduced structural integrity
of the fuselage. The required actions include inspecting by rotating
probe for cracking of holes H1 through H29 on frame (FR) 43 through 46
inclusive, and inspecting holes H1 through H29 on FR 43 through 46
inclusive to determine the edge distance of the hole, and corrective
actions if necessary. You may obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received.

Request To Remove Reference to Modification 13023 From Paragraph (c) of
This AD

    Airbus requests we remove the reference to modification 13023 from
paragraph (c), Applicability, of the NPRM. The NPRM would have applied
to certain Airbus airplanes, except those on which Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A310-53-2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008, has
been accomplished, or those on which Airbus modification 13023 has been
accomplished in production. The commenter, Airbus, states that
modification 13023 is a retrofit modification only and was never
embodied in production. Modification 13023 is directly associated with
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-2124.
    We agree, for the reasons provided by the commenter. We have
revised this final rule accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD with the change described previously. We determined that this change
will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the
scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 68 products of U.S.
registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2006-02-06 and retained in this
AD take about 31 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of
$80 per work hour. Required parts cost about $1,730 per product. Based
on these figures, the estimated cost of the currently required actions
is $4,210 per product.
    We estimate that it will take about 41 work-hours per product to
comply with the new basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $4,400 per
product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that
are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $522,240, or $7,680 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 removing Amendment 39-14458 (71 FR
3214, January 20, 2006) and adding the following new AD:

2009-18-16 Airbus: Amendment 39-16012. Docket No. FAA-2009-0465;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-244-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective October
14, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2006-02-06, Amendment 39-14458.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222,
-304, -322, -324 and -325 airplanes; all serial numbers;
certificated in any category; except those airplanes on which Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-2124, dated April 4, 2005, has
been accomplished.

Subject

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

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile]
France issued AD F-2005-078 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-02-06,
Amendment 39-14458, 71 FR 3214, January 20, 2006] to require the
modification (Airbus modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB
[service bulletin] A310-53-2124, to increase the service life of
junctions of center box upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches.
This structural modification falls within the scope of the work
related to the extension of the service life of A310 aircraft and
widespread fatigue damage evaluations.
    The threshold timescales for accomplishment of the tasks as
defined in SB A310-53-2124 were refined and reduced. Consequently,
EASA issued AD 2007-0238 to require compliance with Revision 1 of SB
A310-53-2124 at the reduced compliance times, superseding (the
requirements of) DGAC France AD F-2005-078. Subsequently, Airbus
identified reference material that was erroneously introduced into
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1. As a result, the SB instructions
could not be accomplished properly. Operators that tried to apply SB
A310-53-2124 at Revision 1 had to contact Airbus; see also Airbus
SBIT [service bulletin information telex] ref. 914.0135/08, dated 03
March 2008.
    Consequently, AD 2007-0238 was revised to exclude reference to
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1 and to require accomplishment of
the task(s) as described in the original SB A310-53-2124 instead,
although retaining the reduced compliance times introduced by AD
2007-0238 at original issue. This new [EASA] AD is published to
refer to Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 02, the corrected version
that is to be used to meet the requirements of this AD.

The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of the frame foot run-outs,
which could lead to rupture of the frame foot and cracking in
adjacent frames and skin, and which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the fuselage. The required actions include
inspecting by rotating probe for cracking of holes H1 through H29 on
frame (FR) 43 through 46 inclusive, and inspecting holes H1 through
H29 on FR 43 through 46 inclusive to determine the edge distance of
the hole, and corrective actions if necessary.

Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Except for airplanes identified in paragraph (f)(2) of this
AD, at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD, accomplish inspections by rotating probe for
cracking of holes H1 through H29 on frame FR 43 through 46
inclusive, and inspections of holes H1 through H29 on FR 43 through
46 inclusive to determine the edge distance of the hole, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A310-53-2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008
(``the service bulletin''). If no cracking is found and the edge
distance is equal to or greater than the distance specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin, before further
flight, do the cold expansion of the most fatigue sensitive fastener
holes, as identified in the service bulletin.
    (i) Inspect at the applicable time indicated in Table 1 of this
AD. Airbus Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes with an
average flight time (AFT) equal to or less than 3.17 flight hours
are short range airplanes. Airbus Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -
325 airplanes with an AFT exceeding 3.17 flight hours are long range
airplanes.
    (ii) Within 500 flight cycles or 800 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

                        Table 1--Compliance Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Affected Airplanes           Inspection/Modification Threshold,
                                         whichever occurs later
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model A310-304, -322, -324    Prior to              Within 3,000 flight
 and -325 short range          accumulation of       cycles after the
 airplanes.                    26,500 flight         effective date of
                               cycles or 74,300      this AD, without
                               flight hours since    exceeding 29,200
                               first flight of the   flight cycles or
                               airplane, whichever   81,800 flight hours
                               occurs first.         since first flight,
                                                     whichever occurs
                                                     first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model A310-304, -322, -324    Prior to              Within 3,000 flight
 and -325 long range           accumulation of       cycles after the
 airplanes.                    23,400 flight         effective date of
                               cycles or 117,100     this AD, without
                               flight hours since    exceeding 25,800
                               first flight of the   flight cycles or
                               airplane, whichever   129,000 flight
                               occurs first.         hours since first
                                                     flight, whichever
                                                     occurs first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model A310-203, -204, -221,   Prior to              Within 3,000 flight
 and A310-222.                 accumulation of       cycles after the
                               23,400 flight         effective date of
                               cycles or 46,800      this AD, without
                               flight hours since    exceeding 28,800
                               first flight of the   flight cycles or
                               airplane, whichever   57,700 flight hours
                               occurs first.         since first flight,
                                                     whichever occurs
                                                     first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 1: To establish the average flight time, take the
accumulated flight time (counted from the take-off up to the
landing) and divide by the number of accumulated flight cycles. This
gives the average flight time per flight cycle.

    (2) For airplanes that have been modified before the effective
date of this AD in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A310-53-2124, Revision 01, dated May 3, 2007: Within 500 flight
cycles or 800 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, contact Airbus and follow their corrective
actions.
    (3) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of
this AD, any cracking is found or if the edge distance is less than
the distance specified in Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-
2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008, before further flight,
contact Airbus and follow their corrective actions.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tom
Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (425)

227-1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which
the AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI)
or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Union Airworthiness Directive 2008-
0212, dated December 4, 2008; and Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A310-53-2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008; for related
information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-2124,
Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008, to do the actions required by this
AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2124,
Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008, under 5 U.S.C. 552 (a) and 1 CF
part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 24, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-21147 Filed 9-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 211 (Friday, October 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64806-64807]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25910]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0801]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Exports: Notification
and Recordkeeping Requirements; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice
that appeared in the Federal Register of October 14, 2014. The document
announced that a proposed collection of information had been submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. In this document, we correct
some errors that appeared in the notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2014-24293, appearing on page
61643 in the Federal Register of October 14, 2014 (79 FR 61643), we
make the following correction: On page 61644, replace table 1 with the
following table:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                        Average
         21 CFR section              Number of     responses per   Total annual     burden per      Total hours
                                    respondents     respondent       responses       response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.101(d) (Non-Tobacco) (CBER)...               5             193             965              15          14,475
1,101(d) (Non-Tobacco) (CDER)...               5             180             900              15          13,500
1.101(d) (Non-Tobacco) (CDRH)...              63             130           8,190              15         122,850
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total \2\...................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         150,825
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.
\2\ Due to a clerical error, the reporting burden for ``Exports: Notification and Recordkeeping Requirements'',
  which published on July 3, 2014 (79 FR 38036), was incorrect. Table 1 of this document contains the correct
  reporting burden for this collection.

    Dated: October 27, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-25910 Filed 10-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 168 (Thursday, August 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41400-41401]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18466]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-165-000.
    Applicants: ALLETE, Inc., United Taconite, LLC.
    Description: Application for Approval Pursuant to Section 203 of
the Federal Power Act of ALLETE, Inc., et. al.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5208.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1850-007; ER11-1846-007; ER11-1847-007; ER11-
1848-007; ER11-2598-010; ER13-1192-004.
    Applicants: Direct Energy Business, LLC, Direct Energy Business
Marketing, LLC, Direct Energy Marketing Inc., Direct Energy Services,
LLC, Gateway Energy Services Corporation, Energy America, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to June 28, 2017 Northeast Region Triennial
Report of the Direct Energy Sellers.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2356-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: Filing to Correct OATT Language
Errata (ER08-129-000) in Attachment M in the eTariff Viewer to be
effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2357-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Indiana, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Letter Agreement with WVPA--
RS 271 to be effective 8/28/2017.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2358-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended GIA Edom Hills
Project 1, LLC--Edom Hills Wind Park WDT1153QFC to be effective 8/25/
2017.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5138.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2359-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., MDU
Resources Group, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-08-25_Rate Schedule
50--MDU-Basin Revenue Sharing Agreement to be effective 5/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2360-000.
    Applicants: Appalachian Power Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: APCo submits 10th Revised
ILDSA No. 1252, FA and LA with BRPA to be effective 9/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2361-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of a Master JUA for
Distribution Underbuild with MiEnergy to be effective 10/24/2017.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5184.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2362-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT Sch. 12--
Appdx A re: RTEP Projects Approved by Board July 2017 to be effective
11/23/2017.
    Filed Date: 8/25/17.
    Accession Number: 20170825-5228.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 25, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-18466 Filed 8-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76750-76751]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30219]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0990]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Chambers Creek, Steilacoom, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Chambers Creek Railway Bridge across Chambers Creek, mile 0.0, at
Steilacoom, WA. The deviation is necessary to allow BNSF to perform
maintenance and upgrade items to this vertical lift bridge in support
of Positive Train Control requirements per the Rail Safety Improvement
Act of 2008. This will require locking the bridge in the closed
position and locking out the power to the drive system while the work
is conducted. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed
position for 45 days during the maintenance and upgrade work.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. on January 6, 2014 to 5
p.m. on February 19, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0990], is
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the
``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the
line associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Steven Fischer, Thirteenth District
Bridge Program Administrator, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) will be
performing lift bridge maintenance and upgrades for the BNSF Chambers
Creek Railway Bridge across Chambers Creek, mile 0.0, near Steilacoom,
WA. The

bridge provides 50 feet of vertical clearance in the raised position,
10 feet of vertical clearance in the closed position and 80 feet of
horizontal clearance. Reference plan is mean high water elevation of
12.2 feet. The normal operation schedule falls under 33 CFR Sec.  117.5
which states ``Except as otherwise authorized or required by this part,
drawbridges must open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels
when a request or signal to open is given in accordance with this
subpart.''
    This deviation period is effective from 8 a.m. on January 6, 2014
to 5 p.m. on February 19, 2014. The deviation is necessary for BNSF to
perform maintenance and upgrade items to this vertical lift bridge
including replacement of a link pin bearing in the lift system,
replacing lower racks for the counterweight and conducting signal
system upgrades in support of Positive Train Control requirements per
the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. This will require locking the
bridge in the closed position and locking out the power to the drive
system while the work is conducted.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed positions may
do so at anytime. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies
and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The
Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 9, 2013.
Steven M. Fischer,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District, Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-30219 Filed 12-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P