Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2004 / Proposed Rules 59837

published withdrawing the direct final 

rule and all public comments received 

will be addressed in a subsequent final 

rule. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this proposed action 

should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received on or before 

November 5, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit adverse comments 

or notice of intent to submit adverse 

comments by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instruction for submitting 

comments. 

• Agency Web site: http://

www.usda.gov/rus/

index2.Comments.htm. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: RUSComments@usda.gov. 

Include in the subject line of the 

message ‘‘7 CFR 1783.’’

• Mail: Addressed to Richard Annan, 

Acting Director, Program Development 

and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities 

Service, United States Department of 

Agriculture, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, STOP 1522, Washington, DC 

20250–1522. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Addressed 

to Richard Annan, Acting Director, 

Program Development and Regulatory 

Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, United 

States Department of Agriculture, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., Room 

5168–S, Washington, DC 20250–1522.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen Saulnier, Loan Specialist, 

Water Programs Division, Rural Utilities 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 

2235–S, Stop 1570, Washington, DC 

20250–1570. Telephone (202) 690–2526. 

E-Mail: stephen.saulnier@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION provided 

in the direct final rule located in the 

final rule section of this Federal 

Register for the applicable 

supplementary information on this 

action.

Dated: September 2, 2004. 

Curtis M. Anderson, 

Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.

[FR Doc. 04–22445 Filed 10–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19262; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–54–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell 

Douglas Model MD–11 and MD–11F 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD–

11 and MD–11F airplanes. This 

proposed AD would require inspecting 

the power feeder cables of the auxiliary 

power unit (APU) for chafing damage, 

and accomplishing any related 

corrective action. This proposed AD 

also would require modifying the drain 

line of the fuel feed shroud of the 

horizontal stabilizer. This proposed AD 

is prompted by a report of the drain line 

of the fuel feed shroud riding on the 

power feeder cables of the APU. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent chafing of 

the power feeder cables of the APU, 

which could result in electrical arcing to 

adjacent structure and consequent fire 

in the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 22, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• By fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach 

Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, 

Long Beach, California 90846, 

Attention: Data and Service 

Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800–

0024). 

You can examine the contents of this 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of 

the Nassif Building, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Technical information: Samuel Lee, 

Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, 

ANM–140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount 

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 

90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5262; 

fax (562) 627–5210. 

Plain language information: Marcia 

Walters, marcia.walters@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Docket Management System (DMS) 

The FAA has implemented new 

procedures for maintaining AD dockets 

electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new 

AD actions are posted on DMS and 

assigned a docket number. We track 

each action and assign a corresponding 

directorate identifier. The DMS AD 

docket number is in the form ‘‘Docket 

No. FAA–2004–99999.’’ The Transport 

Airplane Directorate identifier is in the 

form ‘‘Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–

999–AD.’’ Each DMS AD docket also 

lists the directorate identifier (‘‘Old 

Docket Number’’) as a cross-reference 

for searching purposes. 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2004–19262; Directorate Identifier 

2004–NM–54–AD’’ in the subject line of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of the proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments submitted by the 

closing date and may amend the 

proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of that Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You can 

59838 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you can visit http://

dms.dot.gov.

We are reviewing the writing style we 

currently use in regulatory documents. 

We are interested in your comments on 

whether the style of this document is 

clear, and your suggestions to improve 

the clarity of our communications that 

affect you. You can get more 

information about plain language at 

http://www.faa.gov/language and http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

Examining the Docket 

You can examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

Discussion 

We have received a report indicating 

that, during a scheduled maintenance 

period, an operator found the drain line 

of the fuel feed shroud riding on the 

power feeder cables of the auxiliary 

power unit (APU) on a Model MD–11 

airplane. Inspections of the operator’s 

fleet revealed that the majority of the 

airplanes had the same condition. 

Further investigation revealed that 

many of the clamps, brackets, and fuel 

feed drain lines were distorted and bent 

from the original delivered condition, 

causing chafing damage to the power 

feeder cables of the APU. This chafing 

could result in electrical arcing to 

adjacent structure and consequent fire 

in the airplane. 

Similar Airplanes 

The subject area on certain 

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11F 

airplanes is identical to that on the 

affected McDonnell Douglas Model MD–

11 airplanes. Therefore, all of these 

airplanes may be subject to the same 

unsafe condition. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin MD11–28A119, 

including Appendix A, dated June 3, 

2003. The service bulletin describes 

procedures for inspecting the power 

feeder cables of the APU for chafing 

damage, and related corrective action. 

The related corrective action includes 

repairing or replacing the power feeder 

cables if any damage is found that is 

outside the limits specified in the 

service bulletin. 

The service bulletin also describes 

procedures for modifying the drain line 

of the fuel feed shroud of the horizontal 

stabilizer.

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. Therefore, we are 

proposing this AD, which would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously. 

Clarification of Inspection Terminology 

In this proposed AD, the ‘‘inspection’’

specified in the referenced service 

bulletin is referred to as a ‘‘general 

visual inspection.’’ We have included 

the definition for a general visual 

inspection in a note in the proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

This proposed AD would affect about 

195 airplanes worldwide and 85 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The proposed inspection would take 

about 1 work hour per airplane, at an 

average labor rate of $65 per work hour. 

Based on these figures, the estimated 

cost of the proposed AD for U.S. 

operators is $5,525, or $65 per airplane. 

The proposed modification would 

take about 3 work hours per airplane 

(including the functional test), at an 

average labor rate of $65 per work hour. 

Parts cost would be minimal. Based on 

these figures, the estimated cost of the 

proposed AD for U.S. operators is 

$16,575, or $195 per airplane. 

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. 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.

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2004–

19262; Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–

54–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this AD 

action by November 22, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas 

Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes, 

certificated in any category; as listed in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–28A119, 

dated June 3, 2003. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by a report of 

the drain line of the fuel feed shroud riding 

on the power feeder cables of the auxiliary 

power unit (APU). We are issuing this AD to 

prevent chafing of the power feeder cables of 

the APU, which could result in electrical 

arcing to adjacent structure and consequent 

fire in the airplane. 

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. 

Inspection/Related Corrective Action/

Modification 

(f) Within 18 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Do the actions required by 

paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD by 

doing all the actions specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2004 / Proposed Rules 59839

Service Bulletin MD11–28A119, including 

Appendix A, dated June 3, 2003. 

(1) Accomplish a general visual inspection 

of the power feeder cables of the APU for 

chafing damage. Do any related corrective 

action before further flight. 

(2) Modify the drain line of the fuel feed 

shroud of the horizontal stabilizer (including 

a functional test after accomplishing the 

modification).

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual 

examination of an interior or exterior area, 

installation, or assembly to detect obvious 

damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of 

inspection is made from within touching 

distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror 

may be necessary to ensure visual access to 

all surfaces in the inspection area. This level 

of inspection is made under normally 

available lighting conditions such as 

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or 

droplight and may require removal or 

opening of access panels or doors. Stands, 

ladders, or platforms may be required to gain 

proximity to the area being checked.’’

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g) The Manager, Los Angeles 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 29, 2004. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–22471 Filed 10–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[VA156–5084b; FRL–7824–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia: 

NOX RACT Determinations for 

Washington Gas Company

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Virginia for the 

purpose of determining the reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) for 

the control of nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

from Washington Gas Company, 

Ravensworth Station, located in Fairfax 

County, Virginia. In the Final Rules 

section of this Federal Register, EPA is 

approving the Commonwealth’s SIP 

submittal as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by November 5, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by VA156–5084 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.

C. Mail: Makeba Morris, Chief, Air 

Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 

3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. VA156–5084. EPA’s 

policy is that all comments received 

will be included in the public docket 

without change, including any personal 

information provided, unless the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through regulations.gov or email. The Federal regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. Copies of the documents 

relevant to this action are available for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; and 

Virginia Department of Environmental 

Quality, 629 East Main Street, 

Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Betty Harris, (215) 814–2168, or by email at harris.betty@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, Virginia’s Approval of NOX

RACT Determinations for Washington 

Gas Company, that is located in the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this 

Federal Register publication.

Dated: September 28, 2004. 

Thomas Voltaggio, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 04–22359 Filed 10–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[Region 2 Docket No. R02–OAR–2004–NY–

0001, FRL–7824–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New York State 

Implementation Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes approval of a 

request from New York to revise its 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 

ozone to incorporate revisions to 

Subpart 227–2 ‘‘Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for Oxides 

of Nitrogen (NOX)’’ of Part 227 

‘‘Stationary Combustion Installations’’

of Title 6 of the Official Compilation of 

Codes, Rules and Regulations of the 

State of New York (6NYCRR). The 

revision relates to the control of oxides 

of nitrogen emissions from stationary 

industrial sources. This SIP revision 

consists of a control measure needed to 

meet the shortfall in emissions 

reduction identified by EPA in New