[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 33 (Friday, February 16, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6970-6972]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03192]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2017-0340; FRL-9974-47-Region 2]

Approval and Revision of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State
of New York; Regional Haze State and Federal Implementation Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
source-specific revision to the New York State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The SIP revision establishes Best Available Retrofit Technology
(BART) emission limits for sulfur dioxide that are identical to those
set by the EPA's Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the Roseton
Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, which was promulgated in an action
taken on August 28, 2012. The EPA finds that the SIP revision fulfills
the requirements of the Clean Air Act and the EPA's Regional Haze Rule
for Roseton Units 1 and 2. In conjunction with this approval, the EPA
is withdrawing the FIP that addresses BART for Roseton Units 1 and 2.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-2017-0340. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential
business information (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 through www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section for
additional available information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene B. Nielson, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, New York, New
York 10007-1866 at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What action is the EPA taking today?
II. What significant comments were received in response to the EPA's
proposed action?
III. What are the EPA's conclusions?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is the EPA taking today?

    The EPA is approving a source-specific State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision for Units 1 and 2 of the Roseton Generating Station
submitted by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) on April 18, 2017. The EPA is approving emission
limits for sulfur dioxide (SO2) for Roseton Units 1 and 2
that are equivalent to the emission limits established by the EPA's
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), which was promulgated on August 28,
2012 (77 FR 51915).
    In its submittal, the NYSDEC included the following BART emission
limits for Roseton Units 1 and 2: 0.55 pounds of SO2 per
million British thermal unit (lb SO2/MMBtu) calculated on a
24-hour average for each unit.\1\ As a result of the EPA's approval,
the EPA is withdrawing those portions of the FIP that address BART for
Roseton Units 1 and 2. The reader is referred to the EPA's proposal, 82
FR 48942 (October 23, 2017), for a detailed discussion of this SIP
revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In the SIP submittal and in subsequent correspondence with
the EPA, NYSDEC notes the oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and
Particulate Matter (PM) limits for Roseton Generating Station Units
1 and 2, which were not subject to the FIP and are not part of this
SIP action, are consistent with BART limits approved by EPA in its
August 28, 2012 Final Action on New York's Regional Haze SIP (77 FR
51915).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What significant comments were received in response to the EPA's
proposed action?

    During the public comment period, three interested parties
submitted comments on the EPA's proposal. Two comments expressed
support of this action. A third commenter expressed support for the
benefits of reduced sulfur for public health and raised the following
two additional comments.
    Comment 1: The commenter questioned the need for the SIP revision
since the FIP was already in place.
    Response: The Clean Air Act (CAA) obligates the EPA to act on a
State's SIP submittal or revision, provided the submittal meets minimum
completeness criteria. CAA section 110(k) (1); 40 CFR

part 51, appendix V. Because the SIP revision meets CAA requirements,
we are required to approve it. See CAA section 110(k)(3), (l).
    Comment 2: The commenter suggested that the State should submit new
or updated enforcement rules.
    Response: It is unclear what the commenter means by ``new or
updated enforcement rules.'' NYSDEC submitted a SIP revision to address
the BART requirements for Roseton Units 1 and 2. The commenter has not
identified any issues with the SIP revision that would warrant a change
in the EPA's proposal to approve it.

III. What are the EPA's conclusions?

    The EPA has evaluated the Roseton SIP Revision and is determining
that it meets the requirements of the CAA and the Regional Haze Rule.
Therefore, the EPA is approving the BART emission limits and related
administrative requirements (i.e., monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements) for Roseton Units 1 and 2, which are identical
to those contained in the EPA's 2012 FIP: 0.55 pounds of SO2
per million British thermal unit (lb SO2/MMBtu) calculated
on a 24-hour average for each unit (Units 1 and 2). Consequently, the
EPA is withdrawing those portions of the 2012 FIP that address BART for
Roseton Units 1 and 2.
    At the time of the proposal, Roseton and Danskammer were the only
two sources in New York State subject to the Regional Haze FIP (77 FR
51915). In a separate action, effective January 3, 2018, the EPA
withdrew the FIP requirements for Danskammer after approving a source-
specific SIP (82 FR 57126). In this action, the EPA is similarly
approving a source-specific SIP for Roseton and withdrawing the FIP
requirements for that facility. Upon the effective date of the Federal
Register notice, the requirements in the approved SIP for Roseton
Generating Station Units 1 and 2 will apply, the FIP requirements for
Roseton Generating Station Units 1 and 2 will be withdrawn, and the
Regional Haze FIP, 40 CFR 52.1686, will be removed in its entirety.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1
CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of a
single-source SIP revision, dated April 18, 2017, for Roseton Units 1
and 2 (Facility DEC ID<PHONE_NUMBER>), including Title V permit conditions
(permit ID 3-3346-00075/0008) that include BART emission limits for
SO2. The summary of emission limits and other enforceable
requirements in this SIP revision are included in section I of this
notice. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 2
Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion
in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by the EPA into that
plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the
CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of the EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by the Director of the Federal
Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is exempt from review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) because it will result in the approval of a SIP submitted
by the NYSDEC for Roseton Units 1 and 2. Approval of SIPs falls within
a category of actions that is exempt from review by OMB. It was
therefore not submitted to OMB for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action falls within the category of actions that OMB has
exempted from review. This action specifically is an approval of a SIP.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).\3\ Because this
final rule has identical recordkeeping and reporting requirements to
the EPA's 2012 FIP, the PRA does not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
rule does not impose any requirements or create impacts on small
entities as no small entities are subject to the requirements of this
rule.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Because this final
rule has identical BART emission limits and related administrative
requirements (i.e., monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements) to the EPA's 2012 FIP, this final rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA. This final rule is
also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It 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 the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on
tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
rule.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or
safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately
affect children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
the EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). As
explained previously, the SIP revision being approved in this action
includes identical BART emission limits and related administrative
requirements (i.e., monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements) to the EPA's 2012 FIP.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This rule is exempt from the CRA because it is a rule of particular
applicability.

M. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 17, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See CAA section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

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

    Dated: February 8, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart HH--New York

0
2. In Sec.  52.1670, the table in paragraph (d) is amended by revising
the entry ``Roseton Generating Station-Dynegy'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1670  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                                EPA-Approved New York Source-Specific Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State       EPA approval
          Name of source                Identifier No.     effective date       date              Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Roseton Generating Station........  NYSDEC Facility No.         12/5/2016       2/16/2018  Best Available
<PHONE_NUMBER>5.                                           Retrofit Technology
                                                                                (BART) emission
                                                                                limits for SO2
                                                                                pursuant to 6 NYCRR
                                                                                part 249 for Units 1
                                                                                and 2.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Sec.  52.1686  [Removed and Reserved]

0
3. Section 52.1686 is removed and reserved.

[FR Doc. 2018-03192 Filed 2-15-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 186)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 59170-59172]
[DOCID:fr27se10-38]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0942; Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-049-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; British Aerospace Regional Aircraft
Models Jetstream Series 3101 and Jetstream Model 3201 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    As a result of the fatigue-testing programme on the Jetstream
fatigue test specimen, it has been identified that failure of the
undercarriage jack mounting shaft assembly can occur.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to a Main Landing
Gear (MLG) collapse on the ground or during landing and consequently
damage to the aeroplane or injury to the occupants.

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 12,
2010.

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

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket 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: Taylor Martin, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<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-2010-0942;
Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-049-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 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No.: 2010-0162, dated August 4, 2010 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    As a result of the fatigue-testing programme on the Jetstream
fatigue test specimen, it has been identified that failure of the
undercarriage jack mounting shaft assembly can occur.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to a Main Landing
Gear (MLG) collapse on the ground or during landing and consequently
damage to the aeroplane or injury to the occupants.
    BAE SYSTEMS have now defined safe life limits for these
components.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires the
application of safe life limits to these components.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    BAE Systems has issued British Aerospace Jetstream Series 3100 &
3200 Service Bulletin 05-JA090143, dated April 30, 2009; and British
Aerospace Regional Aircraft has issued British Aerospace Jetstream
Series 3100 & 3200 Service Bulletin 32-JA990142, dated March 26,1999.
The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 80 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 15 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost
about $10,000 per product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $902,000, or $11,275 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft: Docket No. FAA-2010-0942;
Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-049-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 12, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to British Aerospace Regional Aircraft
Models Jetstream Series 3101 and Jetstream Model 3201 airplanes, all
serial numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    As a result of the fatigue-testing programme on the Jetstream
fatigue test specimen, it has been identified that failure of the
undercarriage jack mounting shaft assembly can occur.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to a Main Landing
Gear (MLG) collapse on the ground or during landing and consequently
damage to the aeroplane or injury to the occupants.
    BAE SYSTEMS have now defined safe life limits for these
components.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires the
application of safe life limits to these components.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
establish the number of landings accumulated since installation of
each left and right main landing gear radius rod mounting shaft
assemblies following paragraph 2.(A) of BAE Systems British
Aerospace Jetstream Series 3100 & 3200 Service Bulletin 05-JA090143,
dated April 30, 2009.
    (2) Replace the left and right main landing gear radius rod
mounting shaft assembly with an airworthy assembly following British
Aerospace Jetstream Series 3100 & 3200 Service Bulletin 32-JA990142,
dated March 26, 1999, within the following:
    (i) For Model Jetstream Series 3101: Within 38,220 total
landings accumulated on each main landing gear radius rod mounting
shaft assembly or within 1,000 landings after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later; and
    (ii) For Model Jetstream Model 3201: Within 31,038 total
landings accumulated on each main landing gear radius rod mounting
shaft assembly or within 1,000 landings after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (3) After replacing each main landing gear radius rod mounting
shaft assembly as required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD,
repetitively thereafter replace each assembly with an airworthy
assembly at intervals not to exceed the following life limits:
    (i) For Model Jetstream Series 3101: Within 38,220 total
landings; and
    (ii) For Model Jetstream Model 3201: Within 31,038 total
landings.
    (4) For operators that do not have landing records, determine
the number of landings by multiplying the number of hours time-in-
service (TIS) accumulated on each main landing gear radius rod
mounting shaft assembly by 0.75. For the purpose of this AD:
    (i) 1,000 landings equals 1,333 hours TIS;
    (ii) 31,038 landings equals 41,384 hours TIS; and
    (ii) 38,220 landings equals 50,960 hours TIS.
    (5) Compliance with the life limits set in paragraph (f)(3) of
this AD may be done by incorporating these limits into the
limitations section of the aircraft maintenance manual. You may do
this by inserting a copy of this AD into the limitations section of
aircraft maintenance manual.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to Attn: Taylor Martin, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.:
2010-0162, dated August 4, 2010; BAE Systems British Aerospace
Jetstream Series 3100 & 3200 Service Bulletin 05-JA090143, dated
April 30, 2009; and British Aerospace Regional Aircraft British
Aerospace Jetstream Series 3100 & 3200 Service Bulletin 32-JA990142,
dated March 26, 1999, for related information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 21, 2010.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-24180 Filed 9-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55958-55963]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24502]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-1421; Product Identifier 2014-NM-177-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening
of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposal for certain The Boeing
Company Model 767-300 and -300F

series airplanes. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) by adding new high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for
cracking of an expanded area of the lower outboard wing skin for
certain airplanes. We are proposing this airworthiness directive (AD)
to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions
would impose an additional burden over those in the NPRM, we are
reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment
on these changes.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on June 5, 2015 (80 FR 32066), is reopened.
    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by January 11, 2018.

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: 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 SNPRM, contact Aviation
Partners Boeing, 2811 S. 102nd Street, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98168;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com. You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-2015-
1421; 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 SNPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone:
800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Rauschendorfer, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2015-1421;
Product Identifier 2014-NM-177-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this SNPRM 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 SNPRM.

Discussion

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that
would apply to certain The Boeing Company Model 767-300 and -300F
series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 5,
2015 (80 FR 32066). The NPRM was prompted by reports of fatigue
cracking on airplanes with Aviation Partners Boeing winglets installed.
The NPRM proposed to require an HFEC inspection for cracking of the
lower outboard wing skin, and repair or modification if necessary. The
NPRM also proposed to require one of three follow-on actions: repeating
the HFEC inspections; modifying certain internal stringers and
oversizing and plugging the existing fastener holes of the lower wing;
or modifying the external doubler/tripler and doing repetitive post-
modification inspections.

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that new HFEC
inspections for cracking of an expanded area of the lower outboard wing
skin are necessary to address the identified unsafe condition for
certain airplanes.
    Aviation Partners Boeing (APB) has released Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017. In the NPRM, we refer to APB
Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 7, dated November 4, 2014, as
the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the
proposed actions. APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated
April 3, 2017, corrects certain errors and omissions that were in the
Accomplishment Instructions of APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010,
Revision 7, dated November 4, 2014, and provides clarification of
certain procedures. APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11,
dated April 3, 2017, also removes all work related to stringer L-6.5
due to recent analysis that the modification was not sufficient to meet
the 767 design service objective.
    In light of this analysis, new repetitive post-modification HFEC
inspections have been added for airplanes on which the optional
terminating modification of the existing skin or external skin doubler
has been done. We have revised this proposed AD to refer to APB Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, for
accomplishing proposed actions for stringer L-9.5.
    APB has also released Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1,
dated April 12, 2017. APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1,
dated April 12, 2017, includes procedures for inspections, repair
(modification), and repair of stringer L-6.5 of the lower outboard wing
skin (which replace the actions that were removed from APB Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated
April 3, 2017. The service information describes procedures for an HFEC
inspection for cracking of the external surface of the lower outboard
wing skin at stringer L-9.5 and on-condition actions that include
repetitive HFEC inspections; modification by oversizing and plugging
the existing fastener holes of the wing skin; repair (modification) of
the stringer with new stringer; repair (modification) of the stringer
with external doubler/tripler; repetitive post-repair inspections for
cracking; and repair.
    We also reviewed APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1,
dated April 12, 2017. The service information describes procedures for
an HFEC inspection for cracking of the lower outboard wing skin at
stringer L-6.5 and on-condition actions that include repetitive HFEC
inspections; repair (modification) of the stringer with new stringer;
repetitive post-repair

HFEC inspections for cracking; and repair.
    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.

Comments

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

Request To Clarify Service Information and Actions in the Proposed AD

    Multiple commenters (United Airlines, Delta Air Lines, American
Airlines, Japan Airlines, FedEx, Boeing) requested that the actions
specified in APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 7, dated
November 4, 2014, be revised. Commenters noted that APB Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 7, dated November 4, 2014, contained
multiple errors. United Airlines, Delta Air Lines, American Airlines
and Boeing also requested that the actions specified in the proposed AD
be revised for clarity because certain language in the proposed AD did
not match the language in APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision
7, dated November 4, 2014. APB stated APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-
010, Revision 7, dated November 4, 2014, is being revised to include
corrections and clarifications and additional work. APB recommend that
we refer to updated service information.
    We acknowledge the commenters' request and have revised this SNPRM
to refer to the updated service information in APB Service Bulletin
AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, and APB Service
Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017.

Request To Allow Previously Approved Repairs

    American Airlines, APB, and Boeing requested that we give credit
for repairs in the subject area that had received 8100-9 approval prior
to the effective date of the AD.
    We agree to give credit for repairs that we have determined will
address the identified unsafe condition. We replaced the content of
paragraph (i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) with new content in this
proposed AD to specify that repairs of the lower outboard wing skin
done after June 15, 2017, and before the effective date of this AD,
that are approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, are approved for the applicable repairs
required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.

Request To Allow Previous Modifications

    Air New Zealand requested that we give credit for accomplishing the
proposed modification before the effective date of the AD by adding the
required service information to paragraph (i) of the proposed AD, which
specifies credit for previous actions.
    We acknowledge the comment. However, no change to this proposed AD
is necessary. Operators who accomplish the actions required by an AD
using the required service information before the effective date of an
AD are in compliance with the AD. Paragraph (f) of this proposed AD
states ``comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.'' Credit for previous actions in ADs is used
primarily to give credit for earlier revisions of required service
information that are also acceptable for compliance if done before the
effective date of the AD.

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.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a
result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on
this SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed Rule and the Service Information.''
    The compliance times vary depending on airplane configuration and
inspection area. The shortest initial compliance time is the later of:
1,500 flight cycles or 7,500 flight hours after winglet installation,
whichever occurs first; or 18 months after the effective date of the
AD. Except for one group of airplanes, the longest initial compliance
time is the later of: 7,800 flight cycles or 23,400 flight hours after
installation of a certain modification, whichever occurs first; or 18
months after the effective date of the AD. For one group of airplanes,
the longest initial compliance time is 29,000 total flight cycles or
111,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    The shortest repetitive interval is 1,500 flight cycles or 7,500
flight hours, whichever occurs first. The longest repetitive interval
is 12,000 flight cycles or 36,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and Service Information

    APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017, and APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1, dated April
12, 2017, specify to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how
to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require
repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes ODA whom we have authorized to make those findings.
    Table 5a of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of APB Service Bulletin
AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, does not provide a
grace period for airplanes that have exceeded a certain compliance
time. We have added a grace period of 6 months to paragraph (g)(2) of
this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 140 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                        Estimated Costs--Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                        Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFEC Inspections..................  6 work-hours x $85 per                 $0             $510          $71,400
                                     hour = $510.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition
actions that would be required based on the results of the proposed
inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these on-condition actions.

                                      Estimated Costs--On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post-repair Inspections....................  6 work-hours x $85 per hour = $510               $0            $510
                                              per inspection cycle.
Repair/Modification........................  262 work-hours x 85 per hour =                    0          22,270
                                              22,270.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for on-condition repairs for the post-repair inspections
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 determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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):

    The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2015-1421; Product Identifier
2014-NM-177-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 11, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-300 and -300F
series airplanes, certificated in any category, with Aviation
Partners Boeing winglets installed; as identified in Aviation
Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated
April 3, 2017; and Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracking in the lower
outboard wing skin at the inboard fastener of stringer L-9.5, and
the lower outboard wing skin of stringer L-6.5, on airplanes with
winglets installed per Supplemental Type Certificate ST01920SE. We
are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in the lower
outboard wing skin, which could result in failure and subsequent
separation of the wing and winglet and consequent reduced
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Stringer L-9.5 Inspections, Modification, Repair
(Modification), Repetitive Post-Repair Inspections, and Repair

    (1) For Group 1 and Group 2 airplanes identified in Aviation
Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated
April 3, 2017: At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, except as required by
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD: Do a high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection for cracking of the lower outboard wing skin at stringer
L-9.5, in accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision
11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (i) For airplanes on which ``Condition 1'' is found, as defined
in the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing
Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017,
during any inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(1)(i)(A)
of this AD: Do the applicable actions required by paragraph
(g)(1)(i)(A), (g)(1)(i)(B), (g)(1)(i)(C), or (g)(1)(i)(D) of this
AD.
    (A) Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (B) Do the applicable actions required by paragraphs
(g)(1)(i)(B)(1), (g)(1)(i)(B)(2), and (g)(1)(i)(B)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, do actions (modifications and repair
(modification)) in

accordance with Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5, as applicable,
of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing
Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (2) For airplanes on which the repair (modification) specified
in Part 5 of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010
was done: At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 12 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(i)(B)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (C) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(i)(C)(1) and
(g)(1)(i)(C)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable actions required
by paragraph (g)(1)(i)(C)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, repair (modify) in accordance with
Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 9 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(i)(C)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (D) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(i)(D)(1) and
(g)(1)(i)(D)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable actions required
by paragraph (g)(1)(i)(D)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, repair (modify) in accordance with
Part 11 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 13 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(i)(D)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (ii) For airplanes on which ``Condition 2'' is found, as defined
in the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing
Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017,
during any inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(1)(i)(A)
of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(A) or
(g)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(A)(1) and
(g)(1)(ii)(A)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable actions required
by paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(A)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, repair (modify) in accordance with
Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 9 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(A)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (B) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(B)(1) and
(g)(1)(ii)(B)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable actions required
by paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(B)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, repair (modify) in accordance with
Part 11 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 13 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(B)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (iii) For airplanes on which ``Condition 3'' is found, as
defined in the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017, during the actions specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i)(B)(1) of
this AD: Do the actions required by paragraph (g)(1)(iii)(A) or
(g)(1)(iii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(iii)(A)(1) and
(g)(1)(iii)(A)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable actions required
by paragraph (g)(1)(iii)(A)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, repair (modify) in accordance with
Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 9 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(iii)(A)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (B) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(iii)(B)(1) and
(g)(1)(iii)(B)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable actions required
by paragraph (g)(1)(iii)(B)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight, repair (modify) in accordance with
Part 11 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017, do a post-repair HFEC
inspection for cracking, in accordance with Part 13 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017; and repeat
the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1)(iii)(B)(2) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (iv) For airplanes on which ``Condition 4'' is found, as defined
in the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing
Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017,
during any action specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i)(C)(1),
(g)(1)(i)(D)(1), (g)(1)(ii)(A)(1), (g)(1)(ii)(B)(1),
(g)(1)(iii)(A)(1), and (g)(1)(iii)(B)(1) of this AD: Repair before
further flight using a method approved in accordance with the

procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (2) For Group 3 airplanes identified in Aviation Partners Boeing
Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3, 2017: At
the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11,
dated April 3, 2017, or within 6 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later, do an HFEC inspection for cracking
of the lower outboard wing skin at stringer L-9.5, in accordance
with Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable time
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017. If any cracking is found during any inspection, repair before
further flight using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD. An approved repair
terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(2)
of this AD.

(h) Repetitive Stringer L-6.5 Inspections, Repair (Modification),
Repetitive Post-Repair Inspections, and Repair

    (1) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017: At the applicable time
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12,
2017, except as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Do an HFEC
inspection for cracking of stringer L-6.5 of the lower outboard wing
skin, in accordance with Part 1 of Aviation Partners Boeing Service
Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017. If no
cracking is found, repeat the inspection thereafter at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1,
dated April 12, 2017, except as provided by paragraph (h)(3) of this
AD.
    (2) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, do the actions required by paragraphs
(h)(2)(i) and (h)(2)(ii) of this AD, and do all applicable actions
required by paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this AD.
    (i) Before further flight, repair (modify) stringer L-6.5, in
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1,
dated April 12, 2017.
    (ii) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017, except as required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, do an HFEC post-repair inspection for
cracking, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-
014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017, and repeat the inspection
thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017.
    (iii) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this AD, repair before further flight using
a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (3) As an option to the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, do the actions required by paragraphs
(h)(3)(i) and (h)(3)(ii) of this AD, and do all applicable actions
required by paragraph (h)(3)(iii) of this AD.
    (i) Before further flight after accomplishing the most recent
inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, repair (modify)
stringer L-6.5, in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-
014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017.
    (ii) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017, except as required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, do a post-repair HFEC inspection for
cracking, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-
014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017, and repeat the inspection
thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12, 2017.
    (iii) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of this AD, repair before further flight using
a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (k) of this AD.

(i) Repair Approval

    Repairs of the lower outboard wing skin done after June 15,
2017, and before the effective date of this AD, that are approved by
the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, are approved for the applicable repairs required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.

(j) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-010, Revision 11, dated April 3,
2017, specifies a compliance time of ``after the issue date of
Revision 11 of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance
within the specified compliance time after the effective date of
this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-014, Revision 1, dated April 12,
2017, specifies a compliance time of ``after the initial issue date
of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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 (l)(1) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 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 paragraphs (g)(1)(i)(B)(3),
(g)(1)(i)(C)(3), (g)(1)(i)(D)(3), (g)(1)(ii)(A)(3),
(g)(1)(ii)(B)(3), (g)(1)(iii)(A)(3), (g)(1)(iii)(B)(3), (g)(1)(iv),
(g)(2), (h)(2)(iii), and (h)(3)(iii) of this AD: For service
information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and
(k)(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.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Allen
Rauschendorfer, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle
ACO Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-
917-6450; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Aviation Partners Boeing, 2811 S. 102nd Street, Suite 200, Seattle,
WA 98168; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.aviationpartnersboeing.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 November 3, 2017.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-24502 Filed 11-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 56684]
[DOCID:fr28se05-120]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP05-317-000]

Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Informal Settlement
Conference

September 16, 2005.
    Take notice that an informal settlement conference will be convened
in this proceeding commencing at 10 a.m. (EST) on Tuesday, September
27, 2005, at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, for the purpose of
exploring the possible settlement of the above-referenced docket.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant as
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status
pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>
with the required accommodations.
    For additional information, please contact Bill Collins at (202)
502-8248,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Bob Keegan at<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5218 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P