[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 135 (Tuesday, July 15, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41095-41098]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15527]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0440; Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-075-AD;
Amendment 39-17885; AD 2014-13-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH
Helicopters) (AHD)

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for AHD
Model EC135P1, P2, P2+, T1, T2, and T2+ helicopters. This AD requires
repetitive visual inspections of the ring frame X9227 for a crack and,
if there is a crack, replacing the ring frame before further flight.
This AD is prompted by a fatigue crack in the ring frame. These actions
are intended to detect a crack in the ring frame and prevent loss of
the tail rotor and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 30, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of July 30, 2014.
    We must receive comments on this AD by September 15, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address 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 AD, the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, the economic evaluation, any incorporated by
reference service information, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus
Helicopters, Inc., 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at
http://www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub.
    You may review the referenced 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: Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, 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 resulted
from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific
portion of the AD, 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 them 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 rulemaking during the
comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may
conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments.

Discussion

    We are adopting a new AD for AHD Model EC135P1, P2, P2+, T1, T2,
and T2+ helicopters with certain mounting ring frames installed. This
AD requires repetitive visual inspections of the ring frame X9227 for a
crack and, if there is a crack, replacing the ring frame with an
airworthy part before further flight. These actions are intended to
detect a crack in the ring frame and prevent loss of tail rotor and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
    This AD was prompted by AD No. 2013-0289-E, dated December 6, 2013,
issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of
the European Union, to correct an unsafe condition for AHD Model
EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC635P2+,
EC635T1, and EC635T2+ helicopters equipped with mounting ring frame
X9227, part number (P/N) L535H2120301, P/N L535H2120303, or P/N
L535H2120304 without frame reinforcement. EASA advises that ring frames
X9227 with frame reinforcement P/N L535H2100201 are not affected by its
AD. EASA advises that the fuselage tail boom structure of the EC135/
EC635 type design is connected to the tail rotor ``fenestron'' housing
by means of a ring frame attached by two rivet rows each. EASA states
that during a recent post flight check, the pilot detected a crack that
ran along three rivets across the ring frame. According to EASA, this
condition if not corrected would gradually reduce the structural
integrity of the tail boom fenestron attachment, potentially resulting
in detachment of the fenestron and loss of the helicopter. To address
this condition, EASA AD No. 2013-0289-E requires repetitive visual
inspections of the ring frame X9227.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Germany and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with Germany, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter issued Safety Information Notice No. 2636-S-53, dated
October 10, 2013, alerting operators that during a post-flight check a
pilot discovered a crack at the rear ring frame between the rear
structure tube and the fenestron box. The Notice reminds operators to
conduct the dedicated visual ring frame check according to the flight
manual's pre-flight check so any cracked ring frames will be
immediately discovered.
    Eurocopter also issued Alert Service Bulletin ASB EC 135-53A-029,
Revision 0, dated November 19, 2013 (ASB). The ASB specifies, every 50
flight hours, visually inspecting ring frame X9227 for a crack in
addition to the visual pre-flight check of the ring frame. The ASB
states that a crack within the ring frame and between the rivet heads
is not permissible, and if detected in this area, AHD must be contacted
before further flight.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires, on or before reaching 100 hours TIS, or within 50
hours TIS for helicopters with more than 100 hours TIS, and thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS, using a 10X or higher power
magnifying glass and a light, visually inspecting the ring frame X9227
for a crack between the rivets. If a crack is found, this AD requires,
before further flight, replacing the ring frame X9227 with an airworthy
part.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD applies to EC635P2+, EC635T1, and EC635T2+ helicopters,
and this AD does not because those helicopters are non-FAA type
certificated. The EASA AD requires contacting the manufacturer if a
crack is found in the ring frame. This AD requires replacing the ring
frame if a crack is found.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 275 helicopters of U.S.
Registry.
    We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order
to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work hour.
We estimate 0.2

work hour to do the inspection for a total estimated cost of $17 per
helicopter and $4,675 for the U.S. fleet per inspection cycle.
Replacing a ring frame will require 5 work hours and $18,500 for parts
for a total cost of $18,925 per helicopter.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    Providing an opportunity for public comments before adopting these
AD requirements would delay implementing the safety actions needed to
correct this known unsafe condition. Therefore, we find that the risk
to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment before
adopting this rule because the required corrective actions in a
structural critical area must be done within 50 hours TIS, a very short
time period based on the average flight-hour utilization rate for air
ambulance and law enforcement operations of these helicopters.
    Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate
adoption of this AD, we determined that notice and opportunity for
public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good
cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

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, 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this 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.

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):

2014-13-09 Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH): Amendment 39-17885;
Docket No. FAA-2014-0440; Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-075-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model EC135P1, P2, P2+, T1, T2, and T2+
helicopters with mounting ring frame X9227, part number (P/N)
L535H2120301, P/N L535H2120303, or P/N L535H2120304, installed,
except those with frame reinforcement P/N L535H2100201 installed,
certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a fatigue crack in a
ring frame. This condition could result in loss of a tail rotor and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective July 30, 2014.

(d) 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.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) On or before 100 hours time-in-service (TIS), or within 50
hours TIS for helicopters with more than 100 hours TIS, and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS, using a 10X or
higher power magnifying glass and a light, visually inspect the ring
frame X9227 for a crack between the rivets as shown in Figure 2 of
Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin ASB EC135-53A-029, Revision 0,
dated November 19, 2013. Paint cracks are permissible.
    (2) If there is a crack, before further flight, replace the ring
frame X9227 with an airworthy part.

(f) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation
Safety Engineer, Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate,
FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817)
222-5110; 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.

(h) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter Safety Information Notice No. 2636-S-53, Revision
0, dated October 10, 2013, which is not incorporated by reference,
contains additional information about the subject of this AD. 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 (EASA) AD No. 2013-0289-E, dated December 6, 2013. You
may view the EASA AD on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FAA-2014-0440.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 5302 Tail Rotor.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference 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) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin ASB EC135-53A-029,
Revision 0, dated November 19, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus Helicopters, Inc., 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX

75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (972) 641-
3775; or at http://www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. 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 Fort Worth,
Texas, on June 25, 2014.

Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-15527 Filed 7-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 27, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6313-6315]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03343]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2018-1017; Special Conditions No. 25-741-SC]

Special Conditions: Boeing Model 777-9 Airplanes; Post-Crash Fire
Survivability, Airplane Level of Safety Provided by Composite Fuel-Tank
Structure

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for The Boeing Company
(Boeing) Model 777-9 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or
unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology
envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport-category
airplanes. This design feature is composite fuel-tank structure as it
relates to post-crash fire survivability. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for
this design feature. These 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: This action is effective on Boeing on February 27, 2019. Send
comments on or before April 15, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2018-1017 using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     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 website, 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).
    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 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: Suzanne Lucier, Propulsion and
Mechanical Systems Section, AIR-672, Transport Standards Branch, Policy
and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines,
Washington 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of, and
opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is
impracticable because the substance of these special conditions has
been published in the Federal Register for public comment in several
prior instances with no substantive comments received. Therefore, the
FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment are
unnecessary, and finds that, for the same reason, good cause exists for
adopting these special conditions upon publication in the Federal
Register.

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 by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On March 12, 2015, Boeing applied for an amendment to Type
Certificate No. T00001SE to include the new 777-9 airplane. This
airplane, which is a derivative of the Boeing Model 777 airplane
currently approved under Type Certificate No. T00001SE, is a twin-
engine, transport-category airplane with seating for 495 passengers and
a maximum takeoff weight of 775,000 pounds.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Boeing must show that the Model 777-9 airplane meets the
applicable

provisions of the regulations listed in Type Certificate No. T00001SE,
or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for
the change, except for earlier amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Boeing Model 777-9 airplane
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 novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Boeing Model 777-9 airplane must comply with the fuel-
vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the
noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    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.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Boeing Model 777-9 airplane will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design feature:
    Composite fuel-tank structure as it relates to post-crash fire
survivability.

Discussion

    As with previous applicant airplane designs with underwing-mounted
engines, the wing tanks and center tanks are located in proximity to
the passengers and near the engines. Experience indicates post-crash
survivability is greatly influenced by the size and intensity of any
fire that occurs. Tests conducted at the FAA Technical Center have
shown the ability of aluminum wing surfaces to withstand post-crash
fire conditions. These tests have verified adequate dissipation of heat
across wetted aluminum fuel-tank surfaces so that localized hot spots
do not occur, thus minimizing the threat of explosion. This inherent
capability of aluminum to dissipate heat also allows the wing lower
surface to retain its load-carrying characteristics during a fuel-fed
ground fire. These properties significantly delay wing collapse and
burn-through for a time interval that usually exceeds evacuation times.
In addition, as an aluminum fuel tank is heated with significant
quantities of fuel inside, fuel vapor accumulates in the ullage space,
exceeding the upper flammability limit relatively quickly, and thus
reducing the threat of a fuel-tank explosion prior to fuel-tank burn-
through. The service history of conventional aluminum airplanes has
shown that fuel-tank explosions caused by ground fires have been rare
on airplanes configured with flame arrestors in the fuel-tank vent
lines. Fuel tanks constructed with composite materials, a new
technology, may or may not have equivalent capability.
    Current regulations were developed and have evolved under the
assumption that wing construction would be of aluminum materials, which
provide inherent properties. Current regulations may not be adequate
when applied to airplanes constructed of different materials.
    Aluminum has the following properties with respect to fuel tanks
and fuel-fed external fires.
    Aluminum is highly thermally conductive. It readily transmits the
heat of a fuel-fed external fire to fuel in the tank. This has the
benefit of rapidly driving the fuel-tank ullage to exceed the upper
flammability limit prior to burn-through of the fuel-tank skin, or
heating of the wing upper surface above the auto-ignition temperature.
This greatly reduces the threat of fuel-tank explosion.
    Aluminum panels at thicknesses previously used in wing lower
surfaces of large transport-category airplanes have been fire resistant
as defined in 14 CFR part 1, and Advisory Circular (AC) 20-135,
``Powerplant Installation and Propulsion System Component Fire
Protection Test Methods, Standards and Criteria.''
    The heat-absorption capacity of both aluminum and fuel prevent
burn-through and wing collapse for a time interval that generally
exceeds the passenger evacuation time.
    The extensive use of composite materials in the design of the
Boeing Model 777-9 airplane wing and fuel-tank structure is considered
a major change from conventional and traditional methods of
construction. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain
specific standards for post-crash fire-safety performance of wing and
fuel-tank skin or structure.
    To provide the same level of safety as exists with conventional
airplane construction, the applicant must demonstrate that the airplane
has sufficient post-crash survivability to enable occupants to safely
evacuate in the event that the wings are exposed to a large fuel-fed
fire. Factors in fuel-tank survivability are the structural integrity
of the wing and tank, flammability of the tank, burn-through resistance
of the wing skin, and the presence of auto-ignition threats during
exposure to a fire. The FAA assessed post-crash survival time during
the adoption of Amendment 25-111 for fuselage burn-through protection.
Studies conducted by and on behalf of the FAA indicated that, following
a survivable accident, prevention of fuselage burn-through for
approximately 5 minutes can significantly enhance survivability. (See
report numbers DOT/FAA/AR-99/57 and DOT/FAA/AR-02/49.) Research reveals
little benefit in requiring wing-skin design to prevent wing-skin burn-
through beyond five minutes, due to the effects of the fuel fire itself
on the rest of the airplane. That assessment was carried out based on
accidents involving airplanes with conventional fuel tanks, and
considering the ability of ground personnel to rescue occupants. In
addition, AC 20-135 indicates that, when aluminum is used for fuel
tanks, the tank should withstand the effects of fire for 5 minutes
without failure. Therefore, to be consistent with existing capability
and related requirements, the applicant airplane fuel tanks must be
capable of resisting a post-crash fire for at least 5 minutes. In
demonstrating compliance, the applicant must address a range of fuel
loads from minimum to maximum, as well as any other critical fuel load.
    These 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.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Boeing Model 777-9 airplane. Should Boeing apply at a later date for a
change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating
the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions
would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

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

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Boeing Model 777-9 airplanes.
    In addition to complying with 14 CFR part 25 regulations governing
the fire-safety performance of the fuel tanks, wings, and nacelle, the
Boeing Model 777-9 airplane must demonstrate acceptable post-crash
survivability in the event the wings are exposed to a large fuel-fed
ground fire. Boeing must demonstrate that the wing and fuel-tank design
can endure an external fuel-fed pool fire for at least 5 minutes. This
must be demonstrated for minimum fuel loads (not less than reserve fuel
levels) and maximum fuel loads (maximum-range fuel quantities), and
other identified critical fuel loads. Considerations must include fuel-
tank flammability, burn-through resistance, wing structural-strength-
retention properties, and auto-ignition threats during a ground-fire
event for the required duration.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on February 19, 2019.
Victor Wicklund,
Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-03343 Filed 2-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34894-34897]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14220]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2012-0385]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Bostock 50th Anniversary Fireworks, Long Island
Sound; Manursing Island, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
on the navigable waters of Long Island Sound in the vicinity of
Manursing Island, NY for a fireworks display. This temporary safety
zone is necessary to protect spectators and vessels from the hazards
associated with fireworks displays. This rule is intended to restrict
all vessels from a portion of Long Island Sound before, during, and
immediately after the fireworks event.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before July 12, 2012.
    Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 19, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:

    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Ensign Kimberly Farnsworth, Coast Guard; Telephone (718)
354-4163, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

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

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2012-0385 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] by 11 inches, suitable
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and
would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period and may change
the rule based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2012-0385 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

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

4. Public Meeting

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

B. Regulatory History and Information

    There is no prior Regulatory history for this proposed safety zone.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    This proposed safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
spectators and vessels from hazards associated with the fireworks
display. Based on the inherent hazards associated with fireworks, the
Captain of the Port (COTP) New York has determined that fireworks
launches in close proximity to water crafts pose a significant risk to
public safety and property. The combination of increased number of
recreational vessels, congested waterways, darkness punctuated by
bright flashes of light, and debris especially burning debris falling
on passing or spectator vessels has the potential to result in serious
injuries or fatalities. The proposed temporary safety zone will
restrict vessel movement in the Long Island Sound around the location
of the fireworks launch platform before, during, and after the
fireworks display.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Bay Fireworks is sponsoring a fireworks display for an anniversary
party on the navigable waters of Long Island Sound in the vicinity of
Manursing Island, NY. The proposed safety zone is necessary to ensure
the safety of spectators and vessels from hazards associated with the
fireworks display.
    The fireworks display will occur from 10:15 p.m. until 10:20 p.m.
In order to coordinate the safe movement of vessels within the area and
to ensure that the area is clear of unauthorized persons and vessels
before, during, and immediately after the fireworks launch, this zone
will be enforced from 9:45 p.m. until 10:50 p.m. on September 8, 2012.
    The proposed safety zone will include all navigable waters of Long
Island Sound within a 240-yard radius of the fireworks barge located in
approximate position 40[deg]58'01'' N, 073[deg]39'24'' W, approximately
775-yards northeast of the southern tip of Manursing Island, NY.
Vessels will still be able to transit the surrounding area and may be
authorized to transit through the proposed safety zone with the
permission for the COTP. The COTP

does not anticipate any negative impact on vessel traffic due to this
proposed safety zone.
    The fireworks barge will also have a sign on its port and starboard
side labeled ``FIREWORKS--STAY AWAY.'' The sign will consist of 10''
high by 1.5'' wide red lettering on a white background.
    This rule is being proposed to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waters during the event and to give the marine community the
opportunity to comment on the proposed zone location, size, and length
of time the zone will be activated.

E. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The Coast Guard's enforcement of this proposed safety zone will be
of short duration, approximately 75 minutes during the scheduled
fireworks event. The proposed safety zone will restrict access to only
a small portion of the navigable waterways of the Long Island Sound.
Vessels will be able to navigate around the proposed safety zone.
Furthermore, vessels may be authorized to transit through the proposed
safety zone with the permission of the COTP.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This proposed rule will affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in a small portion of the Long Island
Sound during the effective period.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
proposed rule would be in effect for only 75 minutes late at night when
vessel traffic is low. Vessel traffic could pass safely around the
safety zone. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue
maritime advisories widely available to users of the waterway.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

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

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT'' section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use because it is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and
is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of

energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action.
Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under
Executive Order 13211.

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

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

F. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping
requirements, waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREA

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

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

    2. Add Sec.  165.T01.0385 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0385  Safety Zone; Bostock 50th Anniversary Fireworks,
Long Island Sound; Manursing Island, NY.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a temporary safety zone:
all navigable waters of the Long Island Sound within a 240-yard radius
of the fireworks barge located in approximate position 40[deg]58'01''
N, 073[deg]39'24'' W, in the vicinity of Manursing Island, NY.
    (b) Effective Period. This rule will be effective from 9:45 p.m. to
10:50 p.m. on September 8, 2012.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    (1) Designated Representative. A ``designated representative'' is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Sector
New York (COTP), to act on his or her behalf. The designated
representative may be on an official patrol vessel or may be on shore
and will communicate with vessels via VHF-FM radio or loudhailer. In
addition, members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to inform
vessel operators of this regulation.
    (2) Official Patrol Vessels. Official patrol vessels may consist of
any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law enforcement
vessels assigned or approved by the COTP.
    (d) Regulations.
    (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23, as well as
the following regulations, apply.
    (2) No vessels, except for fireworks barge and accompanying
vessels, will be allowed to transit the safety zone without the
permission of the COTP.
    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the COTP or the designated representative. Upon being hailed by a U.S.
Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the
operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the
regulated area shall contact the COTP or the designated representative
via VHF channel 16 or<PHONE_NUMBER> (Sector New York command center) to
obtain permission to do so.

    Dated: May 24, 2012.
G.P. Hitchen,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2012-14220 Filed 6-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 117 (Monday, June 18, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28179-28181]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13045]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0503; FRL-9979-55--Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Minor New Source Review Permitting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of West Virginia. This revision pertains to changes to West
Virginia's minor New Source Review (NSR) permit program. This action is
being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0503 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Talley,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 6, 2017, the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection (WVDEP) submitted on behalf of the State of West Virginia a
formal revision, requesting EPA's approval of its revised minor NSR
regulations, ``45CSR13--Permits for Construction, Modification,
Relocation and Operation of Stationary Sources of Air Pollutants,
Notification Requirements, Administrative Updates, Temporary Permits,
General Permits, Permissions to Commence Construction, and Procedures
for Evaluation,'' as a revision to the West Virginia SIP.
    Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires SIPs to include a
preconstruction permit program for both major and minor sources. More
specifically, SIPs must include the permit programs required under
subpart C of title I and must have minor preconstruction programs that
assure that the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) are
maintained. Additionally, 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.163 outline the
federal requirements which apply to minor permit issuance, including
the required administrative and federally enforceable procedures, and
the procedures for public

participation. Under the minor source permitting rules under the Code
of State Rules (CSR) at 45CSR13, West Virginia implements minor
preconstruction program requirements by issuing permits to: (1)
Construct and operate new stationary sources which are not major
sources, (2) modify non-major stationary sources, (3) make non-major
modifications to existing major stationary sources, and (4) relocate
non-major stationary sources. These rules also establish requirements
for obtaining a temporary permit and Class I and Class II general
permit registration. EPA last approved a revision to 45CSR13 on July
21, 2014. See 79 FR 42211.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

A. Summary of SIP Revision

    WVDEP's June 6, 2017 SIP submittal contains a number of revisions
to 45CRSR13, many of them administrative or clarifying in nature. The
non-administrative changes include: (1) Revisions to the definitions of
modification and stationary source; (2) Revisions to and clarifications
of the provisions allowing applicants to store equipment onsite prior
to receiving a permit; and (3) Revisions to the applicability criteria
for Class I and Class II administrative updates.

B. EPA Analysis

1. ``Modification'' and ``Stationary Source'' Definition Changes
    WVDEP added language excluding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under
the definitions of ``Modification'' and ``Stationary Source'' at
45CSR13 sections 45-13-2.17.a and 45-13-2.24.b, respectively. The
specific language added to both definitions is as follows, ``. . .
other than emissions of any one or the aggregate of all GHGs, the air
pollutant defined in 40 CFR 86.1818-12(a) as the aggregate group of six
greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane,
hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride.'' The
addition of this language to both definitions clarifies that GHG
emissions are not subject to the minor NSR permitting requirements of
45CSR13. In accordance with West Virginia's Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) regulations at 45CSR14, preconstruction permitting
requirements for GHG sources are only triggered for major sources or
major modifications, and only when such source/modification is already
``major'' for another pollutant (i.e., a source cannot be ``major'' for
GHGs alone). This is consistent with the federal PSD regulations at 40
CFR 51.166 and 52.21. Additionally, these revisions are appropriate and
meet the federal requirements of 40 CFR 51.160 and 51.161, and CAA
section 110(a)(2)(C). Further, the revisions are in accordance with
section 110(l) of the CAA because they will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable CAA requirement.
2. ``Store-on-Site'' Clarifications
    WVDEP's previously approved regulations allow sources to
``(r)eceive or store on-site or off-site any equipment or supplies
which make up in part or in whole an emission unit or any support
equipment, facilities, building or structure,'' prior to receiving a
permit under 45CSR13.\1\ See 45CSR13 section 45-13-5.1.i. WVDEP's June
6, 2017 submittal included a revision to 45-13-5.1.i which clarifies
that such supplies etc. may be stored on-site `` . . . on its permanent
pad or foundation or at any other location at the stationary source.''
In addition, section 45-13-2 has been revised to add a definition of
``store on-site'' which clarifies that any equipment stored on-site
must be kept in the same condition as it was received, and not `` . . .
modified, erected or installed.'' See 45CSR13 section 45-13-2.26. While
there are no corresponding federal regulations, EPA finds these
revisions approvable because they are essentially adding conditions to
an already approved regulation, and because they meet the requirements
of 40 CFR 51.160-51.163 and CAA section 110(a)(2)(C). Additionally,
they are consistent with CAA section 110(l) because they will not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress, or any other applicable CAA requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ WVDEP's ``store on-site'' provisions do not apply to major
PSD or nonattainment NSR permits issued in accordance with 45CSR14
or 45CSR19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Class I and Class II Administrative Updates
    WVDEP's June 6, 2017 submittal also revised the applicability
criteria for sources seeking Class I and Class II administrative
updates to minor NSR permits issued under 45CSR13.
    The primary difference between Class I and II updates is that,
pursuant to 45-13-4.1.d, public notice is not required for Class I
updates. For Class II updates, WVDEP provides a 30-day public notice
period, in accordance with 45-13-8.3. Additionally, sources requesting
Class I amendments may make the change upon submitting the request,
prior to receiving a revised permit from WVDEP. In WVDEP's currently
approved SIP, only changes to permit conditions which result in a
decrease in emissions can be approved under a Class I update. Class II
updates must be used for changes which result in an increase or no
change in emissions. See 45CSR13 sections 45-13-4.2.a.8 and 45-13-
4.2.b. WVDEP's June 6, 2017 submittal revised those provisions so that
rather than applying only to permit revisions which result in an
emissions decrease, a Class I update can be used for a permit revision
resulting in no emissions increase. A Class II update now must be used
in instances where the revision would result in an emissions increase.
EPA believes this is a reasonable approach to streamlining WVDEP's
administrative burden, and finds these revisions approvable because
they meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.160-51.163 and CAA section
110(a)(2)(C). Additionally, they are consistent with CAA section 110(l)
because they will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other
applicable CAA requirement.
4. Non-Substantive Changes
    In addition to the revisions previously discussed, WVDEP's June 6,
2017 submittal included a number of non-substantive, clarifying and/or
administrative changes. Some examples include the deletion of 45CSR13
section 45-13-1.5 which referenced the former version of 45CSR13, re-
codifications required by insertions or deletions, (e.g., 45CSR13
sections 45-13-2.26 through 45-13-28), and the deletion of 45CSR13
section 45-13-5.8, which was an antiquated reference to operating
permits (permits issued under 45CSR13 include authorization to
construct and operate). WVDEP's submittal included an underline/
strikeout version of the submittal so that all revisions to 45CSR13 can
been seen. This is included in the docket for this action and online at
www.regulations.gov.
    These changes to 45CSR13 have been made in order to clarify and
streamline the minor NSR program, and are appropriate and meet the
federal requirements of 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.163, and CAA section
110(a)(2)(C). Additionally, the revisions are in accordance with
section 110(l) of the CAA because they will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable CAA requirement.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA's review of this material indicates that WVDEP's June 6, 2017
SIP submittal meets the requirements under section 110 of the CAA. EPA
is proposing to approve the West Virginia SIP revision, adding the
revised version of 45CSR13 to the West Virginia SIP, which will replace
the current version of 45CSR13 last approved by EPA on July 21, 2014.
See 79 FR 42212. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before
taking final action.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA
rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference the West Virginia regulations at 45CSR13
regarding minor NSR permitting program requirements as discussed in
Section II of this preamble. EPA has made, and will continue to make,
these materials generally available through http://www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for
more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law.
    For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule, incorporating by reference the
West Virginia regulations at 45CSR13 regarding minor NSR permitting
program requirements, does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 6, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018-13045 Filed 6-15-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P