[Federal Register: October 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 200)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 60940-60942]
[DOCID:fr15oc08-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0923; Airspace Docket 08-AEA-22]

Modification of Class E Airspace; Culpeper, VA; Removal of Class
E Airspace; Pelham Lake, VA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct Final rule, Request for Comments.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies and restores Class E airspace that had
inadvertently been omitted at Culpeper, VA. Additionally, this action
transfers airspace listed under Pelham Lake, VA to that listed under
Culpeper, VA, more appropriately identifying its official location.
This rule increases the safety and management of the National Airspace
System (NAS) around the Culpeper Regional Airport and the Culpeper
Memorial Hospital Heliport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, January 15, 2009. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before December 1, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building, Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001; Telephone: 1-
800 647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the Docket Number
FAA-2008-0923; Airspace Docket No. 08-AEA-22, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You may review the public docket containing the rule, any comments
received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office
(see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    An informal docket may also be examined during normal business
hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daryl Daniels, Operations Support,
Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box
20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Direct Final Rule Procedure

    The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comments, and, therefore, issues it as a direct final rule.
The FAA has determined that this rule only involves an established body
of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally current. This rule is effective
and there will be no further action by the FAA unless a written adverse
or negative comment or a written notice of intent to submit an adverse
or negative comment is received within the comment period. If the FAA
receives, within the comment period, an adverse or negative comment, or
written notice of intent to submit such a comment, a document
withdrawing the direct final rule will be published in the Federal
Register, and a notice of proposed rulemaking may be published with a
new comment period.

Comments Invited

    Although this action is in the form of a direct final rule, and was
not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, interested persons are
invited to comment on this rule by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments as they may desire. An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded from and comments may be submitted and reviewed at
http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can

also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov. or
the Federal Register's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/
index.html. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be
submitted in triplicate to the address specified under the caption
ADDRESSES above or through the Web site. All communications received on
or before the closing date for comments will be considered, and this
rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of the comments received.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. Factual information that supports
the commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in
evaluating the effectiveness of this action and determining whether
additional rulemaking action would be needed. All comments submitted
will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments,
in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. Those
wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in
response to this rule must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on
which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-
2008-0923; Airspace Docket No. 08-AEA-22.'' The postcard will be date
stamped and returned to the commenter.

History

    Class E airspace is established via rulemaking provisions set forth
by the FAA, Department of Transportation and other Agencies of these
United States of America. Due to the large number and frequency of
changes, the designations are not carried in Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR), part 71. For ease of reference, the FAA provides
a compilation of airspace designations and reporting points via FAA
Order 7400.9. An evaluation uncovered an omission from the FAA Order
7400.9R caused by a rulemaking airspace action intended to supplement
the established Class E airspace at Culpeper, VA. It was also
discovered that the referenced city for airspace around Culpeper
Memorial Hospital Heliport was addressed to a local community area
(Pelham Lake) instead of being appropriately associated with the city
of Culpeper. This action additionally corrects the spelling as shown in
FAA Order 7400.9R from Culpepper to Culpeper. Minor changes to the
dimensions to the established Class E airspace have become necessary
due to better computation methods of established Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 modifies E5 airspace at Culpeper, VA by reconstituting
previously omitted airspace descriptions for the Culpeper Regional
Airport, amending said airspace by replacing the decommissioned
Culpeper NDB with the Nailr NDB and extending the airspace to 16 miles
southwest of the Nailr NDB. Additionally this amendment removes the
Culpeper Memorial Hospital's airspace that is linked with Pelham Lake,
VA, appropriately associates this Hospital's airspace with the city of
Culpeper, VA and substitutes the UDNEW WAYPOINT for the listed Point in
Space Coordinates, being the same and part of the Instrument Approach
Procedure that is used to develop the airspace serving the Hospital.
    Class E5 airspace designations for airspace areas extending upwards
from 700 feet above the surface of the Earth are published in Paragraph
6005 of FAA Order 7400.9R, dated August 15, 2007, and effective
September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1.
The Class E5 airspace designations listed in this document will be
published subsequently in the Order.

Agency Findings

    The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of government. Therefore, it is
determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation 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
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    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
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 modifies the Class E Airspace at Culpeper Regional Airport and
Culpeper Memorial Hospital located in Culpeper, VA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AEA VA E5 Culpeper, VA [Revised]

Culpeper Regional Airport
    (Lat. 38[deg]31'32'' N., long. 77[deg]51'35'' W.)
Nailr NDB
    (Lat. 38[deg]27'16'' N., long. 77[deg]54'19'' W.)
Culpeper Memorial Hospital Heliport
    (Lat. 38[deg]27'18'' N., long. 78[deg]00'49'' W.)
UDNEW WAYPOINT
    (Lat. 38[deg]27'54'' N., long. 78[deg]01'07'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
of the Earth within a 6.5-mile radius of Culpeper Regional Airport
and within 8 miles either side of the 217[deg] bearing from the
Nailr NDB to 16 miles

southwest of the NDB, and that airspace within a 6.0-mile radius of
the UDNEW WAYPOINT that serves the Culpeper Memorial Hospital
Heliport.
* * * * *

AEA VA E5 Pelham Lake, VA [Remove]

* * * * *

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 26, 2008.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
 [FR Doc. E8-22467 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8984-8985]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04304]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC18-60-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy, Inc., SCANA Corporation, South
Carolina Electric & Gas Company.
    Description: Joint Application for Approval under Section 203 of
the Federal Power Act and Request for Waivers and Confidential
Treatment of Dominion Energy, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 2/23/18.
    Accession Number: 20180223-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/24/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC18-61-000.
    Applicants: NRG Yield, Inc., NRG Renew LLC, Carlsbad Energy Center
LLC.
    Description: Application for Approval Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action of NRG Yield, Inc.,
et. al.
    Filed Date: 2/23/18.
    Accession Number: 20180223-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC18-62-000.
    Applicants: Stephentown Spindle, LLC, Hazle Spindle, LLC,
Convergent Energy and Power LP.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act, Request for Waivers, and Request for
Expedited Action of Stephentown Spindle, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 2/23/18.
    Accession Number: 20180223-5175.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/16/18.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2507-015.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Westar
Energy, Inc.
    Filed Date: 2/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20180226-5097.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3297-012.
    Applicants: Powerex Corp.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Powerex
Corp.

    Filed Date: 2/23/18.
    Accession Number: 20180223-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-880-001.
    Applicants: Plum Point Services Company, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Market-Based Rate Tariff Revisions
to be effective 2/27/2018.
    Filed Date: 2/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20180226-5064.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-902-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy Generation Marketing, Inc., Dominion
Energy Fairless, LLC.
    Description: Request for Limited Waiver and Expedited Consideration
of Dominion Energy Generation Marketing, Inc., et. al.
    Filed Date: 2/23/18.
    Accession Number: 20180223-5060.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-907-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: First Revised Transmission
Service Agreement No. 497 to be effective 2/9/2018.
    Filed Date: 2/23/18.
    Accession Number: 20180223-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-909-000.
    Applicants: Plum Point Energy Associates, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Market-Based Rate Tariff
Revisions to be effective 2/27/2018.
    Filed Date: 2/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20180226-5065.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-910-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Raven Solar Development
(Dodge Solar) LGIA Filing to be effective 2/22/2018.
    Filed Date: 2/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20180226-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-911-000.
    Applicants: Graphic Packaging International Inc.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Market-
Based Rate Tariff to be effective 2/27/2018.
    Filed Date: 2/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20180226-5142.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-912-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of ISA, SA
No. 3982; Queue No. R52 to be effective 4/23/2018.
    Filed Date: 2/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20180226-5149.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/18.

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

    Dated: February 26, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-04304 Filed 3-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 8, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 4)]
[Notices]
[Page 767-768]
[DOCID:fr08ja07-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-48-000]

Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC; Notice of
Application

December 28, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 20, 2006, Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas
Transmission LLC (KMIGT), 370 Van Gordon Street, Lakewood, Colorado
80228-8304, filed in Docket No. CP07-48-000 an application pursuant to
section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) for permission and approval
to abandon the Clay Center Compressor Station located in Clay County,
Nebraska, by sale, to the Clay County Historical Society of Clay
County, Nebraska, all as more fully set forth in the application.
    Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are
available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the
Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-

free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this request may be directed to Skip
George, Manager of Regulatory, Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas
Transmission LLC, P.O. Box 281304, Lakewood, Colorado 80228-8304, or
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Specifically, in 1956, KMIGT was authorized to install and operate,
among other things, three 125-horsepower compressor units with
auxiliary equipment at its Clay Center Compressor Station. The subject
compressor units, a total of 375 installed horsepower, are the only
units located at Clay Center. KMIGT states that the compression of
natural gas at the Clay Center Compressor Station has not been utilized
since August 1995. KMIGT states that the need for compression at the
Clay Center has been supplanted with the natural gas KMIGT receives
through an existing third-party interconnect with Trailblazer Pipeline
Company located in Clay County. Therefore, KMIGT proposes to abandon
the compressor station and to remove the station from natural gas
service.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages filings of comments, protests
and interventions electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper.
See, 18 CFR385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site under the ``e-filing'' link.
    If the Commission decides to set the application for a formal
hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the Commission will issue
another notice describing that process. At the end of the Commission's
review process, a final Commission order approving or denying a
certificate will be issued.
    Comment Date: January 26, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-22672 Filed 1-5-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


the actual date of initial startup shall include both the home office
and the current address or location of the portable plant.
    (j) The requirements of this section remain in force until and
unless the Agency, in delegating enforcement authority to a State under
section 111(c) of the Act, approves reporting requirements or an
alternative means of compliance surveillance adopted by such States. In
that event, affected facilities within the State will be relieved of
the obligation to comply with the reporting requirements of this
section, provided that they comply with requirements established by the
State.
    (k) Notifications and reports required under this subpart and under
subpart A of this part to demonstrate compliance with this subpart need
only to be sent to the EPA Region or the State which has been delegated
authority according to Sec.  60.4(b).

  Table 1 to Subpart OOO.--Exceptions to Applicability of Subpart A to
                               Subpart OOO
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Applies to  subpart
     Subpart A reference               OOO                 Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
60.4, Address...............  Yes.................  Except in Sec.
                                                     60.4 (a) and (b)
                                                     submittals need not
                                                     be submitted to
                                                     both the EPA Region
                                                     and delegated State
                                                     authority (Sec.
                                                     60.676(k)).
60.7, Notification and        Yes.................  Except in (a)(1)
 recordkeeping.                                      notification of the
                                                     date construction
                                                     or reconstruction
                                                     commenced (Sec.
                                                     60.676(h)). Also,
                                                     except in (a)(6)
                                                     performance tests
                                                     involving only
                                                     Method 9 (40 CFR
                                                     part 60, Appendix A-
                                                     4) require a 7-day
                                                     advance
                                                     notification
                                                     instead of 30 days
                                                     (Sec.   60.675(g)).
60.8, Performance tests.....  Yes.................  Except in (d)
                                                     performance tests
                                                     involving only
                                                     Method 9 (40 CFR
                                                     part 60, Appendix A-
                                                     4) require a 7-day
                                                     advance
                                                     notification
                                                     instead of 30 days
                                                     (Sec.   60.675(g)).
60.11, Compliance with        Yes.................  Except in (b) under
 standards and maintenance                           certain conditions
 requirements.                                       (Sec.  Sec.
                                                     60.675(c)), Method
                                                     9 (40 CFR part 60,
                                                     Appendix A-4)
                                                     observation is
                                                     reduced from 3
                                                     hours to 30 minutes
                                                     for fugitive
                                                     affected
                                                     facilities.
60.18, General control        No..................  Flares will not be
 device.                                             used to comply with
                                                     the emission
                                                     limits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 2 to Subpart OOO.--Stack Emission Limits for Affected Facilities With Capture Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                You must demonstrate
                                          You must meet a PM      And you must meet an    compliance with these
              For . . .                     limit of . . .      opacity limit of . . .,   limits by conducting .
                                                                                . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected facilities (as defined in     0.05 g/dscm (0.022 gr/   7 percent for dry        An initial performance
 Sec.  Sec.   60.670 and 60.671) that   dscf) \a\.               control devices \b\.     test according to Sec.
 commence construction,                                                                     60.8 of this part
 reconstruction, or modification                                                          and Sec.   60.675 of
 after August 31, 1983 but before                                                         this subpart; and
 April 22, 2008.                                                                         Monitoring of wet
                                                                                scrubber parameters
                                                                                according to Sec.
                                                                                60.674(a) and Sec.
                                                                                60.676 (c), (d), and
                                                                                (e).
Affected facilities (as defined in     0.032 g/dscm (0.014 gr/  Not applicable (except   An initial performance
 Sec.  Sec.   60.670 and 60.671) that   dscf) \a\.               for individual           test according to Sec.
 commence construction,                                          enclosed storage           60.8 of this part
 reconstruction, or modification on                              bins);                   and Sec.   60.675 of
 or after April 22, 2008.                                       7 percent for dry         this subpart; and
                                                                 control devices on      Monitoring of wet
                                                                 individual enclosed      scrubber parameters
                                                                 storage bins;.           according to Sec.
                                                                                60.674(a) and Sec.
                                                                                60.676(c), (d), and
                                                                                (e); and
                                                                                Monitoring of baghouses
                                                                                according to Sec.
                                                                                60.674(c) or (d) and
                                                                                Sec.   60.676(b).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Exceptions to the PM limit apply for individual enclosed storage bins and other equipment. See Sec.   60.672
  (d) through (h).
\b\ The stack opacity limit and associated opacity testing requirements do not apply for affected facilities
  using wet scrubbers.

        Table 3 to Subpart OOO.--Fugitive Emission Limits for Affected Facilities Without Capture Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          You must meet the
                                          following fugitive
                                         emissions limit for
                                           grinding mills,
                                        screening operations,      You must meet the       You must demonstrate
                                          bucket elevators,        following fugitive     compliance with these
              For . . .                transfer points on belt    emissions limit for     limits by conducting .
                                          conveyors, bagging         crushers . . .                . .
                                         operations, storage
                                          bins, and enclosed
                                           truck or railcar
                                        loading stations . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected facilities (as defined in     10 percent opacity.....  15 percent opacity.....  An initial performance
 Sec.  Sec.   60.670 and 60.671) that                                                     test according to Sec.
 commence construction,                                                                     60.11 of this part
 reconstruction, or modification                                                          and Sec.   60.675 of
 after August 31, 1983 but before                                                         this subpart.
 April 22, 2008.
Affected facilities (as defined in     7 percent opacity......  12 percent opacity.....  An initial performance
 Sec.  Sec.  60.670 and 60.671) that                                                      test according to Sec.
 commence construction,                                                                     60.11 of this part
 reconstruction, or modification on                                                       and Sec.   60.675 of
 or after April 22, 2008.                                                                 this subpart; and
                                                                                Periodic inspections of
                                                                                water sprays according
                                                                                to Sec.   60.674(b)
                                                                                and Sec.   60.676(b);
                                                                                and
                                                                                A repeat performance
                                                                                test within 5 years
                                                                                from the previous
                                                                                performance test for
                                                                                fugitive affected
                                                                                facilities without
                                                                                water sprays according
                                                                                to Sec.   60.11 of
                                                                                this part and Sec.
                                                                                60.675 of this
                                                                                subpart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart UUU--[Amended]

    3. Section 60.730 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  60.730  Applicability and designation of affected facility.

* * * * *
    (b) An affected facility that is subject to the provisions of
subpart LL of this part, Metallic Mineral Processing Plants, is not
subject to the provisions of this subpart. Also, the following are not
subject to the provisions of this subpart:
    (1) The following processes and process units used at mineral
processing plants: vertical shaft kilns in the magnesium compounds
industry; the chlorination-oxidation process in the titanium dioxide
industry; coating kilns, mixers, and aerators in the roofing granules
industry; tunnel kilns, tunnel dryers, apron dryers, and grinding
equipment that also dries the process material used in any of the 17
mineral industries (as defined in Sec.  60.731, ``Mineral processing
plant''); and
    (2) Processes for thermal reclamation of industrial sand at metal
foundries.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E8-8677 Filed 4-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 4, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62632-62633]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26327]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension: Rule 17f-4, SEC File No. 270-232, OMB Control No. 3235-
0225.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) (the ``Paperwork Reduction Act''),
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') is
soliciting comments on the collection of information summarized below.
The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of information
to the Office of Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Section 17(f) (15 U.S.C. 80a-17(f)) under the Investment Company
Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') \1\ permits registered management investment
companies and their custodians to deposit the securities they own in a
system for the central handling of securities (``securities
depositories''), subject to rules adopted by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 80a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17f-4 (17 CFR 270.17f-4) under the Act specifies the
conditions for the use of securities depositories by funds \2\ and
their custodians.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As amended in 2003, rule 17f-4 permits any registered
investment company, including a unit investment trust or a face-
amount certificate company, to use a security depository. See
Custody of Investment Company Assets With a Securities Depository,
Investment Company Act Release No. 25934 (Feb. 13, 2003) (68 FR 8438
(Feb. 20, 2003)). The term ``fund'' is used in this Notice to mean a
registered investment company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission staff estimates that 142 respondents (including an
estimated 80 active funds that may deal directly with a securities
depository, an estimated 49 custodians, and 13 possible securities
depositories) \3\ are subject to the requirements in rule 17f-4. The
rule is elective, but most, if not all, funds use depository custody
arrangements.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission staff estimates that, as permitted by the
rule, an estimated 2% of all active funds may deal directly with a
securities depository instead of using an intermediary. The number
of custodians is estimated based on information from Morningstar
Direct\SM\. The Commission staff estimates the number of possible
securities depositories by adding the 12 Federal Reserve Banks and
one active registered clearing agency. The Commission staff
recognizes that not all of these entities may currently be acting as
a securities depository for fund securities.
    \4\ Based on responses to Item 18 of Form N-SAR (17 CFR
274.101), approximately 97 percent of funds' custodians maintain
some or all fund securities in a securities depository pursuant to
rule 17f-4.

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

    Rule 17f-4 contains two general conditions. First, a fund's
custodian must be obligated, at a minimum, to exercise due care in
accordance with reasonable commercial standards in discharging its duty
as a securities intermediary to obtain and thereafter maintain
financial assets. If the fund deals directly with a depository, the
depository's contract or written rules for its participants must
provide that the depository will meet similar obligations. All funds
that deal directly with securities depositories in reliance on rule
17f-4 should have either modified their contracts with the relevant
securities depository, or negotiated a modification in the securities
depository's written rules when the rule was amended. Therefore, we
estimate there is no ongoing burden associated with this collection of
information.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission staff assumes that new funds relying on 17f-4
would choose to use a custodian instead of directly dealing with a
securities depository because of the high costs associated with
maintaining an account with a securities depository. Thus, new funds
would not be subject to this condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the custodian must provide, promptly upon request by the
fund, such reports as are available about the internal accounting
controls and financial strength of the custodian. If a fund deals
directly with a depository, the depository's contract with or written
rules for its participants must provide that the depository will
provide similar financial reports. Custodians and depositories usually
transmit financial reports to funds twice each year.\6\ The Commission
staff estimates that 49 custodians spend approximately 914 hours (by
support staff) annually in transmitting such reports to funds.\7\ In
addition, approximately 80 funds (i.e., two percent of all funds) deal
directly with a securities depository and may request periodic reports
from their depository. Commission staff estimates that depositories
spend approximately 19 hours (by support staff) annually transmitting
reports to the 80 funds.\8\ The total annual burden estimate for
compliance with rule 17f-4's reporting requirement is therefore 933
hours.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The estimated 49 custodians would handle requests for
reports from 3,917 fund clients (approximately 80 fund clients per
custodian) and the depositories from the remaining 80 funds that
choose to deal directly with a depository. It is our understanding
based on staff conversations with industry representatives that
custodians and depositories transmit these reports to clients in the
normal course of their activities as a good business practice
regardless of whether they are requested. Therefore, for purposes of
this PRA estimate, the Commission staff assumes that custodians
transmit the reports to all fund clients.
    \7\ (3,917 fund clients x 2 reports) = 7,834 transmissions. The
staff estimates that each transmission would take approximately 7
minutes for a total of approximately 914 hours (7 minutes x 7,834
transmissions).
    \8\ (80 fund clients who may deal directly with a securities
depository x 2 reports) = 160 transmissions. The staff estimates
that each transmission would take approximately 7 minutes for a
total of approximately 19 hours (7 minutes x 160 transmissions).
    \9\ 914 hours for custodians and 19 hours for securities
depositories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a fund deals directly with a securities depository, rule 17f-4
requires that the fund implement internal control systems reasonably
designed to prevent an unauthorized officer's instructions (by
providing at least for the form, content, and means of giving,
recording, and reviewing all officers' instructions). All funds that
seek to rely on rule 17f-4 should have already implemented these
internal control systems when the rule was amended. Therefore, there is
no ongoing burden associated with this collection of information
requirement.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Commission staff assumes that new funds relying on 17f-
4 would choose to use a custodian instead of directly dealing with a
securities depository because of the high costs associated with
maintaining an account with a securities depository. Thus new funds
would not be subject to this condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the foregoing, the Commission staff estimates that the
total annual hour burden of the rule's collection of information
requirements is 933 hours.
    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act. This estimate is not derived
from a comprehensive or even representative survey or study of the
costs of Commission rules.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collections of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burdens of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Charles Riddle, Acting
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
C/O Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an
email to: [email protected].

    Dated: November 28, 2018.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-26327 Filed 12-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 1, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32990-32991]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11568]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 1141

[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-3065]
RIN 0910-AI39

Tobacco Products; Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and
Advertisements; Delayed Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: As required by an order issued by the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of Texas, this action delays the effective date of
the final rule (``Tobacco Products; Required Warnings for Cigarette
Packages and Advertisements''), which published on March 18, 2020. The
new effective date is July 8, 2023.

DATES: The effective date of the rule amending 21 CFR part 1141
published at 85 FR 15638, March 18, 2020, and delayed at 85 FR 32293,
May 29, 2020; 86 FR 3793, January 15, 2021; 86 FR 36509, July 12, 2021;
86 FR 50855, September 13, 2021; 86 FR 70052, December 9, 2021; and 87
FR 11295, March 1, 2022, is further delayed until July 8, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney Smith, Office of Regulations,
Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document
Control Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002, 1-877-287-1371, email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of March 18, 2020,
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) issued a final rule
establishing new cigarette health warnings for cigarette packages and
advertisements. The final rule implements a provision of the Family
Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) (Pub.
L. 111-31) that requires FDA to issue regulations requiring color
graphics depicting the negative health consequences of smoking to
accompany new textual warning label statements. The Tobacco Control Act
amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965 (Pub.
L. 89-92) to require each cigarette package and advertisement to bear
one of the new required warnings. The final rule specifies the 11 new
textual warning label statements and accompanying color graphics.
Pursuant to section 201(b) of the Tobacco Control Act, the rule was
published with an effective date of June 18, 2021, 15 months after the
date of publication of the final rule.
    On April 3, 2020, the final rule was challenged in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.\1\ On May 8, 2020,
the court granted a joint motion to govern proceedings in that case and
postpone the effective date of the final rule by 120 days.\2\ On
December 2, 2020, the court granted a new motion by the plaintiffs to
postpone the effective date of the final rule by an additional 90
days.\3\ On March 2, 2021, the court granted another motion by the
plaintiffs to postpone the effective date of the final rule by an
additional 90 days.\4\ On May 21, 2021, the court granted another
motion by the plaintiffs to postpone the effective date of the final
rule by an additional 90 days.\5\ On August 18, 2021, the court issued
an order to postpone the effective date of the final rule by an
additional 90 days.\6\ On November 12, 2021, the court issued another
order to postpone the effective date of the final rule by an additional
90 days.\7\ On February 10, 2022, the court issued another order to
postpone the effective date of the final rule by an

additional 90 days.\8\ On May 10, 2022, the court issued another order
to postpone the effective date of the final rule by an additional 90
days.\9\ The court ordered that the new effective date of the final
rule is July 8, 2023. Pursuant to the court order, any obligation to
comply with a deadline tied to the effective date is similarly
postponed, and those obligations and deadlines are now tied to the
postponed effective date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. et al. v. United States Food and
Drug Administration et al., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex. filed April
3, 2020).
    \2\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex. May
8, 2020) (order granting joint motion and establishing schedule),
Doc. No. 33.
    \3\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex.
December 2, 2020) (order granting Plaintiffs' motion and postponing
effective date), Doc. No. 80.
    \4\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex.
March 2, 2021) (order granting Plaintiffs' motion and postponing
effective date), Doc. No. 89.
    \5\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex. May
21, 2021) (order granting Plaintiffs' motion and postponing
effective date), Doc. No. 91.
    \6\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex.
August 18, 2021) (order postponing effective date), Doc. No. 92.
    \7\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex.
November 12, 2021) (order postponing effective date), Doc. No. 93.
    \8\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex.
February 10, 2022) (order postponing effective date), Doc. No. 94.
    \9\ R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 6:20-cv-00176 (E.D. Tex. May
10, 2022) (order postponing effective date), Doc. No. 96.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To the extent that 5 U.S.C. 553 applies to this action, the
Agency's implementation of this action without opportunity for public
comment, effective immediately upon publication today in the Federal
Register, is based on the good cause exception in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Seeking public comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to
the public interest. The 90-day postponement of the effective date,
until July 8, 2023, is required by court order in accordance with the
court's authority to postpone a rule's effective date pending judicial
review (5 U.S.C. 705). Seeking prior public comment on this
postponement would have been impracticable, as well as contrary to the
public interest in the orderly issuance and implementation of
regulations.

    Dated: May 24, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-11568 Filed 5-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: November 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 215)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 62802-62805]
[DOCID:fr07no07-22]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0163; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-046-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600,
-700, -700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800,
and -900 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require installing a
new circuit breaker, relays, and wiring to allow the flightcrew to turn
off electrical power to the in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems and
other non-essential electrical systems through a switch in the flight
compartment, and doing other specified actions. This proposed AD
results from an IFE systems review. We are proposing this AD to ensure
that the flightcrew is able to turn off electrical power to IFE systems
and other non-essential electrical systems through a switch in the
flight compartment. The flightcrew's inability to turn off power to IFE
systems and other non-essential electrical systems during a non-normal
or emergency situation could result in the inability to control smoke
or fumes in the airplane flight deck or cabin.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 24,
2007.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shohreh Safarian, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0163;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-046-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

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) completed a review of in-
flight entertainment (IFE) systems installed on transport category
airplanes. The review focused on the interface between the IFE system
and airplane electrical system, with the objective of determining if
any unsafe conditions exist with regard to the interface.
    The type of IFE systems considered for review were those that
contain video monitors (cathode ray tubes or liquid crystal displays,
either hanging above the aisle or mounted on individual seat backs or
seat trays), or complex circuitry (i.e., power supplies, electronic
distribution boxes, extensive wire routing, relatively high power
consumption, multiple layers of circuit protection, etc.). In addition,
in-seat power supply systems that provide power to more than 20 percent
of the total passenger seats were also considered for the review. The
types of IFE systems not considered for review include systems that
provide only audio signals to each passenger seat, ordinary in-flight
telephone systems (e.g., one telephone handset per group of seats or
bulkhead-mounted telephones), systems that have only a video monitor on
the forward bulkhead(s) (or a projection system) to provide passengers
with basic airplane and flight information, and in-seat power supply
systems that provide power to less than 20 percent of the total
passenger seats.
    Items considered during the review include the following:
     Can the electrical bus(es) supplying power to the IFE
system be de-energized when necessary without removing power from
systems that might be required for continued safe flight and landing?
     Can IFE system power be removed when required without
pulling IFE system circuit breakers (i.e., is there a switch (dedicated
to the IFE system or a combination of loads) located in the flight deck
or cabin that can be used to remove IFE power?)?
     If the IFE system requires changes to flightcrew
procedures, has the airplane flight manual (AFM) been properly amended?
     If the IFE system requires changes to cabin crew
procedures, have they been properly amended?
     Does the IFE system require periodic or special
maintenance?
    In all, we reviewed approximately 180 IFE systems. The review
results indicate that unsafe conditions exist on some IFE systems
installed on various transport category airplanes. These conditions can
be summarized as:
     Electrical bus(es) supplying power to the IFE system
cannot be de-energized when necessary without removing power from
systems that might be required for continued safe flight and landing.
     Power cannot be removed from the IFE system when required
without pulling IFE system circuit breakers (i.e., there is no switch
dedicated to the IFE system or combination of systems for the purpose
of removing power).
     Installation of the IFE system has affected crew
(flightcrew and/or cabin crew) procedures, but the procedures have not
been properly revised.
    Currently, certain Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -
700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes do not have a switch in the
flight compartment allowing the flightcrew to turn off power to IFE
systems and other non-essential electrical systems, in the event of
smoke or fumes. The flightcrew's inability to turn off electrical power
to IFE systems and other non-essential electrical systems, if not
corrected, could result in the inability to control smoke or fumes in
the airplane flight deck or passenger cabin during a non-normal or
emergency situation.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1145, dated March
4, 2004, for Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-24-1145 describes procedures for installing a new
circuit breaker, relays, and wiring to allow the flightcrew to turn off
electrical power to IFE systems through the IFE/galley switch and for
doing other specified actions. The other specified actions include
rerouting the wiring between the IFE relays, disconnect panels, and
circuit breakers; replacing the lightplate assembly at the P5-13 module
assembly with a new lightplate assembly; and testing the IFE control
systems.
    We have also reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1147, Revision
1, dated March 1, 2007, for Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900
series airplanes. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1147 describes
procedures for installing a new circuit breaker, relays, and wiring to
allow the flightcrew to turn off electrical power to the IFE systems
and other non-essential electrical systems through a utility switch in
the flight compartment. Part 1 of the Work Instructions, which is
applicable to Groups 1 and 2 airplanes, describes procedures for
changing the wiring on the E4-2 shelf assembly and testing the changed
electrical control system to ensure it operates correctly. For Group 2
airplanes, Part 1 also describes procedures for installing new wiring
and changing certain wiring between a terminal bus and circuit breaker.

    Part 2 of the Work Instructions, which is applicable to Groups 3
through 139 airplanes, describes the following procedures:
     Installing a circuit breaker on the P6-11 panel door, a
new terminal board and two new relays on the aft wall of the P6
electrical panel, a new relay adapter plate on the relay panel
assembly, new wires W40 between the relays, terminal board, and the P6
disconnect panel assemblies, and a new relay on the relay plate
assembly; and installing new wires W40/W44 and changing the wiring
between the relays, circuit breakers, and disconnect panel assemblies.
     Replacing the P5-13 module assembly with a new improved or
modified P5-13 module assembly and installing new wires W2510 between
the P5 overhead panel and the P6 electrical panel.
     Changing the wiring W422 on the E4-2 shelf assembly and
installing new wires W44 between the E4-2 shelf assembly and P6
electrical panel.
     Testing the electrical supply and IFE control systems to
ensure that they operate correctly.
    Part 3 of the Work Instructions, which is applicable to Groups 140
through 169 airplanes, describes procedures for making a wiring change
to a certain wire bundle for the printer and testing the printer and
changed systems to ensure they operate correctly.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1145 specifies concurrent
accomplishment of Boeing Component Service Bulletin 69-37321-31-03,
dated August 21, 2003, for Model 737-300 series airplanes equipped with
P5-13 module assembly, part number (P/N) 69-37321-81. Boeing Component
Service Bulletin 69-37321-31-03 describes procedures for replacing the
lightplate assembly at the P5-13 module assembly with a new lightplate
assembly and reidentifying and testing the modified P5-13 module
assembly.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1147 specifies concurrent
accomplishment of Boeing Component Service Bulletin 285A1840-24-02,
dated August 28, 2003, for Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900
series airplanes equipped with P5-13 module assembly, P/N 285A1840-3 or
-4. Boeing Component Service Bulletin 285A1840-24-02 describes
procedures for modifying the P5-13 module assembly. The modification
includes installing new analog and interface printed wire assemblies
(PWAs) on the processor PWA, new toggle switches on the new front panel
assembly, a new PWA cable between the analog and interface PWAs, new
standoff posts on the interface and processor PWAs, the new front panel
assembly on the new standoff posts, and a new light plate on the
modified module assembly.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1147 specifies prior or concurrent
accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-23-1189, dated June 27,
2002, for two Model 737-800 series airplanes. Boeing Service Bulletin
737-23-1189 describes procedures for installing wiring for the No. 4
video display unit (VDU) cluster, an INOP marker, and stow clip at the
P6-1 circuit breaker panel; rerouting certain wiring for the No. 4 VDU
cluster between stations 685 and 767; and doing a continuity test of
the newly installed and rerouted wire bundles.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 1,617 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs, at
an average labor rate of $80 per hour, for U.S. operators to comply
with this proposed AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                                                              Cost per     U.S. -
            Model                   Action      Work hours       Parts        airplane   registered   Fleet cost
                                                                                airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model 737-300, -400, and -500  Installation of    Up to 31    Up to $2,925       $5,405           1       $5,405
 series airplanes.              circuit
                                breaker,
                                relays, and
                                wiring.
Model 737-300 series           Concurrent                1           2,327        2,407           1        2,407
 airplanes.                     modification
                                of P5-13
                                module
                                assembly.
737-600, -700, -700C, -800,    Installation of    Up to 52    Up to 10,968       15,128         586    8,865,008
 and -900 series airplanes.     circuit
                                breaker,
                                relays, and
                                wiring.
                               Concurrent                4           9,241        9,561         586    5,602,746
                                modification
                                of P5-13
                                module
                                assembly.
737-800 series airplanes.....  Installation of          12           3,372        4,332           2        8,664
                                wiring for the
                                No. 4 VDU.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this 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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2007-0163; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
046-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by December
24, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the Boeing airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1145, dated March 4,
2004.
    (2) Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes,
as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1147, Revision 1,
dated March 1, 2007.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from an in-flight entertainment (IFE)
systems review. We are issuing this AD to ensure that the flightcrew
is able to turn off electrical power to IFE systems and other non-
essential electrical systems through a switch in the flight
compartment. The flightcrew's inability to turn off power to IFE
systems and other non-essential electrical systems during a non-
normal or emergency situation could result in the inability to
control smoke or fumes in the airplane flight deck or cabin.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Install Circuit Breaker, Relays, and Wiring on Model 737-300, -400, and
-500 Series Airplanes

    (f) For Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes: Within
60 months after the effective date of this AD, install a new circuit
breaker, relays, and wiring to allow the flightcrew to turn off
electrical power to the IFE systems through the IFE/galley switch
and do all other specified actions as applicable, by accomplishing
all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1145, dated March 4,
2004.

Concurrently Modify P5-13 Module Assembly on Model 737-300 Series
Airplanes

    (g) For Model 737-300 series airplanes identified as Group 6
airplanes in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1145, dated March 4,
2004, and equipped with P5-13 module assembly part number (P/N) 69-
37321-81: Prior to or concurrently with accomplishing the actions
required by paragraph (f) of this AD, replace the lightplate
assembly of the P5-13 module assembly with a new lightplate assembly
and reidentify and test the modified P5-13 module assembly, in
accordance with Boeing Component Service Bulletin 69-37321-31-03,
dated August 21, 2003.

Install Circuit Breaker, Relays, and Wiring on Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes

    (h) For Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes: Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD,
install a new circuit breaker, relays, and wiring, as applicable, to
allow the flightcrew to turn off electrical power to the IFE systems
and other non-essential electrical systems through a utility switch
in the flight compartment, by accomplishing all of the applicable
actions specified in Parts 1, 2, or 3 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1147, Revision 1, dated March 1,
2007.

Concurrently Modify P5-13 Module Assembly on Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes

    (i) For Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes identified as Groups 1 through 139 inclusive in Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-24-1147, Revision 1, dated March 1, 2007, and
equipped with P5-13 module assembly P/N 285A1840-3 or -4: Prior to
or concurrently with accomplishing the actions required by paragraph
(h) of this AD, modify the P5-13 module assembly, in accordance with
Boeing Component Service Bulletin 285A1840-24-02, dated August 28,
2003.

Wiring Installation for the Video Display Unit (VDU)

    (j) For Model 737-800 series airplanes identified in paragraph
1.A.1. of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-23-1189, dated June 27, 2002:
Prior to or concurrently with accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, install wiring for the No. 4 VDU cluster,
an INOP marker, and stow clip at the P6-1 circuit breaker panel;
reroute certain wiring for the No. 4 VDU cluster between stations
685 and 767; and do a continuity test of the newly installed and
rerouted wiring; in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-23-
1189, dated June 27, 2002.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 15, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-21843 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P