[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 134 (Monday, July 13, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41910-41912]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14940]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-1099; Product Identifier 2018-SW-026-AD; Amendment
39-21164; AD 2020-15-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Airbus Helicopters Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters. This AD
requires modifying the wiring of the attitude and heading reference
system (AHRS) connector. This AD was prompted by a report of wiring of
the AHRS contrary to approved design specifications. The actions of
this AD are intended to address an unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 17, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of August 17, 2020.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at
https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You
may view the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
1099.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
1099; or in person at Docket Operations 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 (now European Union
Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD, any service information that is
incorporated by reference, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is 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: George Schwab, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA,
10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On February 28, 2020, at 85 FR 11879, the FAA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register, which proposed to
amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Airbus
Helicopters Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters. The NPRM proposed to
require modifying the wiring at connector 11 ALPHA based on the
helicopter configuration and in accordance with specified portions of
the applicable service information. The proposed requirements were
intended to correct the AHRS wiring, and prevent the display of
misleading attitude and vertical speed information and subsequent loss
of control of the helicopter in instrument meteorological conditions
(IMC).
    The NPRM was prompted by EASA AD No. 2018-0069, dated March 26,
2018, issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member
States of the European Union, to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus
Helicopters Model EC 155 B and EC 155 B1 helicopters. EASA advises that
the AHRS1 and AHRS2 on Model EC 155-series helicopters use the same
flight/ground signal contrary to the approved design specification,
which requires the AHRS1 and AHRS2 to use independent signals to ensure
redundancy. EASA states that if AHRS1 and AHRS2 both receive an
incorrect ``ground'' status due to a single failure while in flight, it
will generate an error in the computation of the attitude and vertical
speed and, as a result, an incorrect display of these indications to
the flight crew. EASA advises that this condition, if not corrected,
could lead to erroneous attitude and vertical speed indications,
resulting in increased workload for the flight crew and reduced control
of the helicopter during flight in IMC.
    Accordingly, the EASA AD requires modifying the connection of
connector 11 ALPHA, and based on the helicopter configuration, also
modifying the wiring to connector 11 ALPHA.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received comments from one
commenter. The commenter commented in support of the NPRM.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA has reviewed the relevant information and determined that
an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
helicopters of these same type designs and that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The compliance time for the EASA AD is within 7 or 12 months
depending on helicopter configuration. The compliance time for this AD
is before further flight in IMC or within 660 hours time-in-service,
whichever occurs first.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
No. EC155-34A033, Revision 2, dated January 30, 2018. This service
information specifies re-allocating the electronic board output
connections by modifying the wiring of connector 11 ALPHA for
helicopters with modification (MOD) 0722B51 installed and modifying the
wiring to connector 11 ALPHA for those helicopters that also have a
combined voice and flight data recording system (MOD 0731B89)
installed.
    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters ASB No. EC155-34A037,
Revision 0, dated February 19, 2018. This service information specifies
installing MOD 0722B51 by modifying the wiring of connector 11 ALPHA to
separate the flight/ground information so the left-hand landing gear
flight information is also used by the automatic pilot system as well
as but separately from the right-hand landing gear flight information.
This service information also specifies re-allocating the electronic
board output connections by modifying the wiring of connector 11 ALPHA.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters ASB No. EC155-34A033,
Revision 0, dated July 19, 2017, and Airbus Helicopters ASB No. EC155-
34A033, Revision 1, dated October 9, 2017. Revisions 0 and 1 of this
service information contain the same procedures for modifying the
wiring as Revision 2. However, Revision 1 clarifies the applicable
helicopter configurations and updates the post-modification testing
procedures, and Revision 2 clarifies the post-modification test
procedures and updates a figure.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 17 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. The FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85
per work-hour.
    Modifying the wiring takes about 4 work-hours and parts cost about
$20 for an estimated cost of $360 per helicopter and $6,120 for the
U.S. fleet.

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.
    The FAA is 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 helicopters identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
    2. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

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):

2020-15-01 Airbus Helicopters: Amendment 39-21164; Docket No. FAA-
2019-1099; Product Identifier 2018-SW-026-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model EC 155B and EC155B1
helicopters, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as incorrect wiring of an
attitude and heading reference system (AHRS). This condition could
result in the display of misleading attitude and vertical speed
information, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter in
instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective August 17, 2020.

(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

    Before further flight in IMC or within 660 hours time-in-
service, whichever occurs first:
    (1) For helicopters with wiring change modification (MOD)
0722B51 installed, modify the wiring of connector 11 ALPHA as
depicted in Figure 1 of Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB) No. EC155-34A033, Revision 2, dated January 30, 2018 (ASB
EC155-34A033). If a combined voice and flight data recording system
(MOD 0731B89) is installed, also modify the wiring to connector 11
ALPHA as depicted in Figure 2 of ASB EC155-34A033.
    (2) For helicopters without wiring change MOD 0722B51 installed,
modify the wiring of connector 11 ALPHA as depicted in Figure 1 and
Figure 2 of Airbus Helicopters ASB No. EC155-34A037, Revision 0,
dated February 19, 2018.

(f) Special Flight Permits

    A special flight permit may be issued for operation under visual
flight rules only.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, may approve
AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: George Schwab, Aviation
Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards
Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; 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, the FAA suggests
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) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. EC155-
34A033, Revision 0, dated July 19, 2017, and Airbus Helicopters ASB
No. EC155-34A033, Revision 1, dated October 9, 2017, which are not
incorporated by reference, contain additional information about the
subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD,
contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view a copy of the service information at the
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) No.
2018-0069, dated March 26, 2018. You may view the EASA AD on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2019-1099.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 3420, Attitude and
Direction Data System.

(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) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. EC155-
34A033, Revision 2, dated January 30, 2018.
    (ii) Airbus Helicopters ASB No. EC155-34A037, Revision 0, dated
February 19, 2018.
    (3) For Airbus Helicopters service information identified in
this AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 972-
641-3775; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. 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, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on July 7, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-14940 Filed 7-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39651-39653]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15890]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0211; FRL-9829-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia addressing the basic
program elements specified in 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). This submission is commonly
referred to as an infrastructure SIP. This action does not include any
proposed action on element (I) which pertains to the nonattainment
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, because this element is not
required to be submitted by the 3-year submission deadline of CAA
section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate action. This
action is being taken under the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2013-0211 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0211, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Air Protection Division,
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2013-

0211. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change, and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629
East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Schmitt,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 23, 2012, the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ) submitted a revision to its SIP to
satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.

I. Background

    On March 27, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone based
on 8-hour average concentrations. EPA revised the level of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts per million (ppm). Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three
years following the promulgation of such NAAQS or within such shorter
period as EPA may prescribe. The contents of that submission may vary
depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and
analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits
the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains.
    Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to
submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)
within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or
within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(1)
provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs and section
110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as
requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal
authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. In the case of the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, states typically have met the basic program elements
required in section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP submissions in
connection with the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS to EPA no later than March 2011.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    On July 23, 2012, VADEQ provided a submittal to satisfy the
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
This submittal addressed the following infrastructure elements, which
EPA is proposing to approve: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) (for
enforcement and regulation of minor sources), (D)(i)(II) (for
visibility protection), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J),
(K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof. EPA is taking separate action
on the portions of (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to
Virginia's PSD program and (E)(ii) as it relates to CAA section 128
(State Boards). This action does not include any proposed action on
section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA which pertains to the nonattainment
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, because this element is not
required to be submitted by the 3-year submission deadline of CAA
section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate process. This
action also does not include proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, because this element, or portions
thereof, is not required to be submitted by a state to meet CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until the EPA has quantified a state's obligations
under that section. See EME Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA, 696 F.3d
7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), reh'g denied 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1623 (Jan. 24.,
2013). A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for approving
Virginia's submittal may be found in the Technical Support Document
(TSD) for this proposed rulemaking action, which is available online at
www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0211.

III. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger

to the public health or environment; or (4) are required by law.
    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec.  10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
    Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
PSD, NSR, or Title V programs consistent with the Federal requirements.
In any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit
privilege and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot
have any impact on Federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time
invoke its authority under the CAA, including, for example, sections
113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions
of the state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In
addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise
unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the following CAA section 110(a)(2)
elements of Virginia's SIP revision: (A), (B), (C) (for enforcement and
regulation of minor sources), (D)(i)(II) (for visibility protection),
(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or
portions thereof. Virginia's SIP revision provides the basic program
elements specified in CAA section 110(a)(2) necessary to implement,
maintain, and enforce the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This SIP revision was
submitted on July 23, 2012. This action does not include any proposed
action on section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA which pertains to the
nonattainment requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, since this
element is not required to be submitted by the 3-year submission
deadline of CAA section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate
process. This action also does not include proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, because this element, or portions
thereof, is not required to be submitted by a state to meet CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until the EPA has quantified a state's obligations
under that section. EPA is taking separate action on the portions of
(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to Virginia's PSD program and
(E)(ii) as it relates to CAA section 128 (State Boards). EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.

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 proposes to approve 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the 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, which satisfies certain infrastructure
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, 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, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds, Nitrogen dioxide.

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

    Dated: June 13, 2013.
W. C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-15890 Filed 7-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 9, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21469-21471]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09323]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9303; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-093-AD;
Amendment 39-18875; AD 2017-10-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Dassault Aviation Model FAN JET FALCON airplanes; all Model FAN JET
FALCON SERIES C, D, E, F, and G airplanes; and all Model MYSTERE-FALCON
20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and 20-F5 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
determination that inspections for discrepancies of the fuselage
bulkhead are necessary. This AD requires repetitive inspections for
discrepancies of the fuselage bulkhead, and repair if

necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 13, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9303; 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 street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Dassault Aviation Model
FAN JET FALCON airplanes; all Model FAN JET FALCON SERIES C, D, E, F,
and G airplanes; and all Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and
20-F5 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on November
1, 2016 (81 FR 75757) (``the NPRM'').
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2016-0096, dated May 19, 2016 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Dassault Aviation
Model FAN JET FALCON airplanes; all Model FAN JET FALCON SERIES C, D,
E, F, and G airplanes; and all Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-
E5, and 20-F5 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A detailed inspection (DET) of the fuselage bulkhead at frame
(FR) 33 is established through a subset of inspection/check
maintenance procedure referenced in the applicable aircraft
maintenance manual (AMM), task 53-10-0-6 ``MAIN FRAME--INSPECTION/
CHECK'', with periodicity established in Chapter 5-10, at every C-
Check. Failure to accomplish this DET could lead to deterioration of
the affected structure.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
bulkhead failure, possibly resulting in a rapid depressurization of
the aeroplane and consequent injury to occupants.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive DET of the bulkhead at FR33 [for discrepancies, such as
buckling, deformations, cracks, loose countersinks, scratches,
dents, and corrosion], and depending on findings, repair of the
affected structure.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9303.

Comments

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

Request To Reduce Compliance Time

    The commenter, Mark Reiner, asked that the compliance time for the
repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of the proposed AD be
reduced from 5,000 to 2,500 flight cycles. The commenter reasoned that
since so many airplanes are flying around the world and accumulating
numerous flight cycles, the chances of problems occurring on an
airplane are greatly increased.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this action, we considered not only the
degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe
condition, but the manufacturer's recommendation for an appropriate
compliance time, and the practical aspect of accomplishing the
inspections within an interval of time that corresponds to the typical
scheduled maintenance for the majority of affected operators. Further,
we determined that the compliance time recommended by the manufacturer
and EASA, and the time required for the rulemaking process provide an
acceptable level of safety. Therefore, we have not changed this AD in
this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed, except for 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 133 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it takes about 8 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $90,440, or $680 per product.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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 that 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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2017-10-01 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-18875; Docket No. FAA-
2016-9303; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-093-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective June 13, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Dassault Aviation airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any
category, all manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Model FAN JET FALCON and FAN JET FALCON SERIES C, D, E, F,
and G airplanes.
    (2) Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and 20-F5
airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that inspections for
discrepancies of the fuselage bulkhead at frame (FR) 33 are
necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
discrepancies of the fuselage bulkhead; such discrepancies could
result in the deterioration and subsequent failure of the bulkhead,
which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane and
consequent injury to occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections

    Before exceeding 5,000 total flight cycles since first flight of
the airplane, or within 500 flight cycles after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do a detailed inspection for
discrepancies of the fuselage bulkhead at FR 33 using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles.

(h) Repair

    If any discrepancy is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or Dassault
Aviation's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must
include the DOA-authorized signature. Repair of an airplane as
required by this paragraph does not constitute terminating action
for the repetitive actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
unless specified otherwise in the repair instructions.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

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

(j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0096, dated May 19, 2016, for
related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2016-9303.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 1, 2017.

Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-09323 Filed 5-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 164)]
[Notices]
[Page 50057]
[DOCID:fr24au06-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-486-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Refund
Report

August 18, 2006.
    Take notice that on August 15, 2006, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line
Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing a report reflecting the flow
through of refunds received from Texas Gas Transmission, LLC (Texas
Gas) in Docket No. RP05-317.
    Transco states that on August 15, 2006, in accordance with Section
4 of its Rate Schedule FT-NT, flowed through the amount of $169,074.46
refunded by Texas Gas to its FT-NT customer.
    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 in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-14017 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 7092]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02634]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL00-95-288]

San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sellers of Energy and
Ancillary Services Into Markets Operated by the California Independent
System Operator Corporation and the California Power Exchanges; Notice
of Compliance Filing

    Take notice that on February 4, 2016, APX, Inc. submitted its
Compliance Filing to Order on Rehearing of Opinion No. 536.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. Sellers of Energy & Ancillary
Servs., 153 FERC ] 61,144 (2015) (``Order on Rehearing''), denying
rehearing of San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. Sellers of Energy &
Ancillary Servs., Opinion No. 536, 149 FERC ] 61,116 (2014)
(``Opinion No. 536'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 5 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 9, 2016.

    Dated: February 4, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-02634 Filed 2-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY                 NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY                              2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD                            ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									          	OFFICE OF 										AIR AND RADIATION

December 29, 2010

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Webinar with CALSTART

FROM:	Angela Cullen, Mechanical Engineer

TO:		Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held on Thursday, December 16, 2010 between CALSTART, EPA, and NHTSA.  The attendees included:              CALSTART: Bill VanAmburg, Susan Romeo, and CALSTART members       EPA: Byron Bunker and Angela Cullen        NHTSA: Jim Tamm

Byron Bunker and Jim Tamm presented an overview of the Heavy Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Consumption proposal.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 15, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38637-38641]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16776]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0774; Product Identifier 2017-NM-036-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-12-
05, which applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C,
-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. AD 2012-12-05 currently requires
repetitive inspections for cracking under the stop fittings and
intercostal flanges and for cracking of the intercostal web, attachment
clips, stringer splice channels, frame, reinforcement angle, shear web,
frame outer chord and inner chord; a one-time inspection to detect
missing fasteners; repetitive inspections of the cargo barrier net
fitting for cracking; repetitive inspections for cracking of the
stringer S-15L aft intercostal; and repair or corrective action if
necessary. Since we issued AD 2012-12-05, we have received reports of
additional cracking in locations not covered by the inspections in that
AD. For certain airplanes, this proposed AD would add new repetitive
inspections of certain areas of the frame inner chord, and applicable
on-condition actions. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 29,
2017.

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 NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740; telephone
562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on
the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0774.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0774; 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: Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-
627-5324; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2017-0774;
Product Identifier 2017-NM-036-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

    On June 4, 2012, we issued AD 2012-12-05, Amendment 39-17084 (77 FR
36139, June 18, 2012) (``AD 2012-12-05''), for all The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. AD
2012-12-05 superseded AD 2004-09-09, Amendment 39-13598 (69 FR 23646,
April 30, 2004); and AD 2009-16-14, Amendment 39-15987 (74 FR 38901,
August 5, 2009). AD 2012-12-05 requires repetitive inspections for
cracking under the stop fittings and intercostal flanges and for
cracking of the intercostal web, attachment clips, stringer splice
channels, frame, reinforcement angle, shear web, frame outer chord and
inner chord; a one-time inspection to detect missing fasteners;
repetitive inspections of the cargo barrier net fitting for cracking;
repetitive inspections for cracking of the stringer S-15L aft
intercostal; and repair or corrective action if necessary. AD 2012-12-
05 resulted from reports of cracking of the station (STA) 348.2 frame
above the two outboard fasteners attaching the frame inner chord and
door stop fittings, and in the outboard chord at stringer S-16L. AD
2012-12-05 also resulted from reports of missing fasteners in the STA
348.2 frame inner chord. We issued AD 2012-12-05 to detect and correct
fatigue cracking of the intercostals on the forward and aft sides of
the forward entry door cutout, which could result in loss of the
forward entry door and rapid decompression of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2012-12-05 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2012-12-05, we have received reports of
additional cracking in the STA 351.2 frame inner chord at stringer S-
17L, at the fastener hole location common to the frame inner chord,
door sill, and shear web. The cracks were reported on Model 737-300 and
-500 airplanes that had accumulated between 40,600 and 65,500 total
flight cycles. The STA 351.2 frame inner chord at stringer S-17L is
hidden under the shear web and the door sill; therefore, any cracking
at this location cannot be visually detected.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2,
dated November 2, 2016. The service information describes procedures
for, among other actions, repetitive inspections of the fastener holes
in the STA 351.2 frame inner chord at stringer 17L, and applicable on-
condition actions. 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.

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 retain all requirements of AD 2012-12-05.
Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the actions in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 1, dated June 29,
2010, that are part of the requirements of AD 2012-12-05, this proposed
AD would retain those requirements. Those requirements are referenced
in the service information identified previously, which, in turn, is
referenced in paragraph (p) of this proposed AD. Paragraph (p) of this
proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions identified as
``RC'' (required for compliance) in the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2, dated November
2, 2016, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this proposed AD.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times for Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016,
see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0774.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 411 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Action                   Labor cost         Parts cost    Cost per product   Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections for cracking       18 work-hours x $85                $0  $1,530 per        $628,830 per inspection
 under the stop fittings and    per hour = $1,530                      inspection        cycle.
 intercostal flanges            per inspection cycle.                  cycle.
 [retained actions from AD
 2012-12-05] (411 airplanes).
Inspection of areas forward    2 work-hours x $85                  0  $170 per          $69,870 per inspection
 of the aft entry door          per hour = $170 per                    inspection        cycle.
 [retained actions from AD      inspection cycle.                      cycle.
 2012-12-05] (411 airplanes).
Inspection of areas aft of     1 work-hour x $85 per               0  $85 per           $34,935 per inspection
 the forward entry door         hour = $85 per                         inspection        cycle.
 [retained actions from AD      inspection cycle.                      cycle.
 2012-12-05] (411 airplanes).
Inspection for missing         1 work-hour x $85 per             476  $561............  $230,571.
 fasteners [retained actions    hour = $85.
 from AD 2012-12-05] (411
 airplanes).
Inspection of fastener holes   27 work[dash]hours x                0  $2,295 per        $367,200 per inspection
 (new proposed action) (160     $85 per hour =                         inspection        cycle.
 airplanes).                    $2,295 per                             cycle.
                                inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that
would be required based on the results of the inspections. We have no
way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
repairs:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair of cracking done in accordance with   24 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $11,856         $13,896
 Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240.   $2,040.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the other on-condition corrective actions specified
in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have 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 that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2012-12-05, Amendment 39-17084 (77 FR 36139, June 18, 2012), and adding
the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2017-0774; Product Identifier
2017-NM-036-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 29,
2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2012-12-05, Amendment 39-17084 (77 FR 36139,
June 18, 2012) (``AD 2012-12-05'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the station (STA)
348.2 frame above the two outboard fasteners attaching the frame
inner chord and door stop fittings, and in the outboard chord at
stringer S-16L; missing fasteners in the STA 348.2 frame inner
chord; and additional cracking in locations not covered by the
inspections in AD 2012-12-05. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking of the intercostals on the forward and aft
sides of the forward entry door cutout, which could result in loss
of the forward entry door and rapid decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Initial Compliance Time for Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. For all Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, as identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007:
Before the accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles, or within
4,500 flight cycles after November 1, 2005 (the effective date of AD
2005-20-03, Amendment 39-14296 (70 FR 56361, September 27, 2005)
(``AD 2005-20-03'')), whichever occurs later: Do the inspections
required by paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD.

(h) Retained Initial Compliance Time for Model 737-200C Series
Airplanes, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. For all Model 737-200C series
airplanes, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1204, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007: Before the accumulation
of 15,000 total flight cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles after
September 9, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-16-14, Amendment
39-15987 (74 FR 38901, August 5, 2009) (``AD 2009-16-14'')),
whichever occurs later, do the inspection required by paragraph (k)
of this AD.

(i) Retained Initial Inspection for Group 1 Configuration Airplanes,
With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. For Group 1 airplanes identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated March
26, 2007: Perform a detailed inspection for cracking of the
intercostal web, attachment clips, and stringer splice channels; and
a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for cracking of the
stringer splice channels located forward and aft of the forward
entry door; and do all applicable corrective actions before further
flight; in accordance with Parts

1 and 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-53-1204, dated June 19, 2003, or Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; or in
accordance with Parts 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June
24, 2010. After September 9, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-16-
14), and until July 23, 2012 (the effective date of AD 2012-12-05),
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated March
26, 2007; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2,
dated June 24, 2010; may be used to accomplish the actions required
by this paragraph. As of July 23, 2012, only Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010, may be used
to accomplish the actions required by this paragraph.

(j) Retained Initial Inspection for Cargo Configuration Airplanes
(Forward of the Forward Entry Door), With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (l) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. For Group 2 cargo airplanes identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated
March 26, 2007: Perform a detailed inspection for cracking of the
intercostal webs and attachment clips located forward of the forward
entry door, and do all applicable corrective actions before further
flight, in accordance with Part 3 of the Work Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1204, dated June 19, 2003,
or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated
March 26, 2007; or in accordance with Part 3 of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010. After
September 9, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-16-14), and until
July 23, 2012 (the effective date of AD 2012-12-05), Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; or
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June
24, 2010; may be used to accomplish the actions required by this
paragraph. As of July 23, 2012, only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010, may be used to
accomplish the actions required by this paragraph.

(k) Retained Initial Inspection for Cargo Configuration Airplanes (Aft
of the Forward Entry Door), With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (m) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. For Group 2 cargo airplanes identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated
March 26, 2007: Perform a detailed inspection for cracking of the
intercostal webs and attachment clips located aft of the forward
entry door, and do all applicable corrective actions before further
flight, in accordance with Part 4 of the Work Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1, dated March 26,
2007; or in accordance with Part 3 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010. As of July 23, 2012
(the effective date of AD 2012-12-05), only Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010, may be used
to accomplish the actions required by this paragraph.

(l) Retained Repetitive Inspections, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (n) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. Repeat the inspections required by
paragraphs (i), (j), and (k) of this AD thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 6,000 flight cycles after the previous inspection, or
within 3,000 flight cycles after September 9, 2009, whichever occurs
later.

(m) Retained Exceptions to Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
737-53-1204, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (o) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. Do the actions required by paragraphs
(g), (h), (i), (j), (k), and (l) of this AD by accomplishing all the
applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1204, dated June
19, 2003; Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 1,
dated March 26, 2007; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; except as provided by paragraphs
(m)(1) and (m)(2) of this AD. After September 9, 2009 (the effective
date of AD 2009-16-14), and until July 23, 2012 (the effective date
of AD 2012-12-05), Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; may be used to
accomplish the actions required by this paragraph. As of July 23,
2012, only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2,
dated June 24, 2010, may be used to accomplish the actions required
by this paragraph.
    (1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1204,
dated June 19, 2003; Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010, specifies to contact
Boeing for repair instructions: Before further flight, repair using
a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (s) of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1204,
dated June 19, 2003; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; specifies a compliance time
relative to the date of a service bulletin, this AD requires
compliance relative to September 9, 2009 (the effective date of AD
2009-16-14). Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-
1204, dated June 19, 2003; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1204, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; specifies a compliance
time relative to the date of the initial release of a service
bulletin, this AD requires compliance relative to November 1, 2005
(the effective date of AD 2005-20-03).

(n) Retained Exceptions to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
With No Changes

    This paragraph restates exceptions to Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1204 specified in paragraph (r) of AD 2012-12-05,
with no changes.
    (1) The access and restoration instructions identified in the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010, are not required by this AD.
Operators may perform those actions in accordance with approved
maintenance procedures.
    (2) The use of Boeing Drawing 65-88700 is not allowed when
accomplishing the actions required by this AD in accordance with the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204,
Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010.

(o) Retained Initial and Repetitive Inspections of the S-15L Aft
Intercostal and Cargo Barrier Net Fitting for Model 737-200C Series
Airplanes, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (s) of AD
2012-12-05, with no changes. For Group 2 airplanes identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June
24, 2010: Before the accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles, or
within 4,500 flight cycles after July 23, 2012 (the effective date
of AD 2012-12-05), whichever occurs later, do initial detailed and
HFEC inspections for cracking of the S-15L aft intercostal between
BS 348.2 and BS 360, and do a detailed inspection of the cargo
barrier net fitting at the intercostal, in accordance with Figure 3
of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1204, Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010. If any cracking is
found, before further flight, repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (s) of this
AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed
6,000 flight cycles.

(p) Actions for Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Including
New Repetitive Inspections of Certain Fastener Holes

    (1) For airplanes identified as Group 1 and Group 3 in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2, dated November 2,
2016: Except as required by paragraph (q) of this AD, at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2, dated
November 2, 2016, do all applicable actions identified as ``RC''
(required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1240, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016.
    (2) For airplanes identified as Group 2 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016: Within 120
days after the effective date of this AD, do actions to correct the
unsafe condition using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (s) of this AD.

(q) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2,
dated November 2, 2016, uses the phrase ``after the Revision 2 date
of this service bulletin,'' for purposes of determining compliance
with the

requirements of this AD, the phrase ``after the effective date of
this AD'' must be used.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 2,
dated November 2, 2016, specifies contacting Boeing, and specifies
that action as RC: This AD requires using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (s) of this
AD.

(r) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (p) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1240, Revision 1, dated June 29, 2010, provided the conditions
specified in paragraphs (r)(1) and (r)(2) of this AD are met and
except as provided by paragraph (r)(3) of this AD. Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 1, dated June 29, 2010, was
incorporated by reference in AD 2012-12-05.
    (1) Note 1 of paragraph 3.A of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 1, dated June
29, 2010, was disregarded when accomplishing the actions.
    (2) Boeing Drawing 65-88700 was not used when accomplishing the
actions in accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1240, Revision 1, dated June 29, 2010.
    (3) The access and restoration instructions identified in the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1240,
Revision 1, dated June 29, 2010, are not required. Operators are
allowed to perform those actions in accordance with approved
maintenance procedures.

(s) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(t) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Galib Abumeri,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) Branch, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-
627-5210; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 2, 2017.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-16776 Filed 8-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10784-10785]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05041]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0103; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-1]

Amendment of Restricted Areas R-2907C, R-2910B, R-2910C, and R-
2910E; Pinecastle, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action updates the controlling agency information for
restricted areas R-2907C, R-2910B, R-2910C, and R-2910E; Pinecastle,
FL. This is an administrative change to reflect the current
organizations tasked with controlling agency responsibilities for the
restricted areas. It does not affect the boundaries, designated
altitudes, time of designation or activities conducted within the
restricted areas.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, May 24, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it updates the controlling agency for restricted areas R-
2907C, R-2910B, R-2910C and R-2910E; Pinecastle, FL, to reflect the
current responsible organizations.

The Rule

    This rule amends title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part
73 by updating the controlling agency name for restricted areas R-
2907C, R-2910B, R-2910C, and R-2910E; Pinecastle, FL. The controlling
agency for R-2907C and R-2910E is changed from ``FAA, Jacksonville
ARTCC,'' to ``FAA, Jacksonville TRACON.'' The controlling agency for R-
2910B and R-2910C is changed from ``FAA, Jacksonville ARTCC,'' to
``FAA, Central Florida TRACON.'' This action is necessary in order to
assign controlling agency responsibilities to the air traffic control
facilities having jurisdiction over the affected airspace.
    This is an administrative change that does not affect the
boundaries, designated altitudes, or activities conducted within the
restricted areas; therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C.
553(b) are unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this action only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (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);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of updating the agency
information for restricted areas R-2907C, R-2910B, R-2910C and R-2910E;
Pinecastle, FL, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F,
Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5.d,
``Modification of the technical description of special use airspace
(SUA) that does not alter the dimensions, altitudes, or times of
designation of the airspace (such as changes in designation of the
controlling or using agency, or correction of typographical errors).''
This airspace action is an administrative change to the description of
restricted areas R-2907C, R-2910B, R-2910C and R-2910E; Pinecastle, FL,
to update the controlling agency names. It does not alter the
dimensions, altitudes, time of designation, or use of the airspace.
Therefore, this airspace action is not expected to result in any
significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, this
action has been reviewed for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have a significant
environmental impact requiring further analysis, and it is determined
that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  73.29   [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.29 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

R-2907C Pinecastle, FL [Amended]

    By removing the words ``Controlling agency. FAA, Jacksonville
ARTCC,'' and adding in their place the words ``Controlling agency.
FAA, Jacksonville TRACON.''

R-2910B Pinecastle, FL [Amended]

    By removing ``Controlling agency. FAA, Jacksonville ARTCC,'' and
adding in its place ``Controlling agency. FAA, Central Florida
TRACON.''

R-2910C Pinecastle, FL [Amended]

    By removing ``Controlling agency. FAA, Jacksonville ARTCC,'' and
adding in its place ``Controlling agency. FAA, Central Florida
TRACON.''

R-2910E Pinecastle, FL [Amended]

    By removing ``Controlling agency. FAA, Jacksonville ARTCC,'' and
adding in its place ``Controlling agency. FAA, Jacksonville
TRACON.''

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 6, 2018.
Leslie M. Swann,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2018-05041 Filed 3-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22456-22457]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07770]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2016-D-1254]

Assessing Adhesion With Transdermal and Topical Delivery Systems
for Abbreviated New Drug Applications; Revised Draft Guidance for
Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a revised draft guidance for industry entitled
``Assessing Adhesion With Transdermal and Topical Delivery Systems for
ANDAs'' (Revision 2). This draft guidance (Revision 2) revises the
Revision 1 draft guidance of the same name, which was announced in the
Federal Register on October 10, 2018. This revised draft guidance
provides recommendations for the design and conduct of studies
evaluating the adhesion performance of a transdermal or topical
delivery system (collectively referred to as TDS). Depending on the
objectives of a generic TDS product development program, applicants may
choose to evaluate TDS adhesion in studies performed to evaluate TDS
adhesion only, or in studies performed with a combined purpose (e.g.,
for the simultaneous evaluation of adhesion and bioequivalence (BE)
with pharmacokinetic (PK) endpoints). The recommendations in this
revised draft guidance relate to studies submitted in support of an
abbreviated new drug application (ANDA).

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by June 12, 2023 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

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

Electronic Submissions

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

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA 2016-D-1254 for ``Assessing Adhesion With Transdermal and Topical
Delivery Systems for ANDAs.'' Received comments will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-
402-7500.

     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)). Submit written requests for single copies of this
guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New
Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD
20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that
office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for electronic access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Mannion, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 75, Rm. 1611, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-2747.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a revised draft guidance for
industry entitled ``Assessing Adhesion With Transdermal and Topical
Delivery Systems for ANDAs'' (Revision 2). This revised draft guidance
(Revision 2) revises the Revision 1 draft guidance of the same name,
which was announced in the Federal Register on October 10, 2018 (83 FR
50942). FDA received five comments on the revised draft guidance
(Revision 1), which were considered before publication of this revised
draft guidance (Revision 2).
    This revised draft guidance (Revision 2) provides recommendations
for the design and conduct of studies evaluating the adhesion
performance of a TDS submitted in support of an ANDA. Depending on the
objectives of a TDS product development program, applicants may choose
to evaluate TDS adhesion in studies performed to evaluate TDS adhesion
only or in studies performed with a combined purpose (e.g., for the
simultaneous evaluation of adhesion and BE with PK endpoints). FDA
recommends that applicants consult this revised draft guidance
(Revision 2) in conjunction with any relevant product-specific
guidances for industry when considering the design and conduct of
studies that may be appropriate to support the BE of a proposed generic
TDS product to its reference listed drug and/or reference standard
product.
    Specifically, in response to the comments received from industry,
FDA is clarifying the following components of the guidance. When
recording measurements of TDS adhesion, applicants may use appropriate
methods (e.g., a trained visual assessment and/or dot matrix templates)
and are encouraged to explore the use of alternative scales (other than
the five-point adhesion scale) to estimate the percentage of the entire
TDS surface area that is adhered to the skin. At each adhesion
assessment time point, applicants should also record photographic
evidence showing the extent of TDS adhesion to the skin. Because
percent adhesion can span a range and yet be classified as a single
score, the photographic evidence can be used to support the visual
observation of the percent adhesion reported at each time point and is
not intended to be used for automated or photometric analysis at this
time. Additional clarity is also provided related to the statistical
analysis of data. Finally, FDA recommends that an applicant who seeks
to use an alternative approach to FDA's recommendations for the design
and conduct of studies evaluating the adhesion performance of a TDS to
contact the Agency to discuss the proposed alternative approach to
evaluate adhesion performance for that particular drug product.
    This revised draft guidance (Revision 2) is being issued consistent
with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The
revised draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current
thinking of FDA on ``Assessing Adhesion With Transdermal and Topical
Delivery Systems for ANDAs.'' It does not establish any rights for any
person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this revised draft guidance (Revision 2) contains no
collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA
collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not required for this guidance. The
previously approved collections of information are subject to review by
OMB under the PRA. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 314
have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, https://www.regulations.gov, or https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs.

    Dated: April 7, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-07770 Filed 4-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 3:25 PM

To: Lee, Amanda I.

Subject: RE: concurrence on EPA's 2007 CUE MeBr rule

Amanda,

I am stuck in St. Louis.  Sorry for not responding earlier.  I looked

more closely at pages 42-47.  I made one small change.

I will continue to look at this, but recognize that you have to move on

it.

Burleson

Change:  p. 46,  “…if the Agency is informed of a severe inventory shortage, it may consider….”