26216 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

The NRC application fee for an access authorization of 

type . . . 

Is the sum of the current OPM investigation billing rate 

charged for an investigation of type . . . 

Plus the NRC’s processing 

fee (rounded to the nearest 

dollar), which is equal to the 

OPM investigation billing rate 

for the type of investigation 

referenced multiplied by . . . 

Renewal of ‘‘L’’ access authorization 1 ........................... NACLC—Access National Agency Check with Law and 

Credit (Standard Service, Code C).

55.8% 

Initial ‘‘Q’’ access authorization ...................................... SSBI—Single Scope Background Investigation (Standard Service, Code C).55.8% 

Initial ‘‘Q’’ access authorization (expedited processing) SSBI—Single Scope Background Investigation (Priority 

Handling, Code A).

55.8% 

Reinstatement of ‘‘Q’’ access authorization 2 ................. No fee assessed for most applications .......................... ................................................

Renewal of ‘‘Q’’ access authorization 1 .......................... SSBI–PR—Periodic Reinvestigation for SSBI (Standard Service, Code C).55.8% 

1 If the NRC determines, based on its review of available data, that a single scope investigation is necessary, the appropriate fee for an Initial 

‘‘Q’’ access authorization will be assessed before the conduct of investigation. 2Full fee will only be charged if an investigation is required. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day 

of April 2012. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

R.W. Borchardt, 

Executive Director for Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10710 Filed 5–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0821; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NE–30–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

plc Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to all Rolls-Royce plc (RR) 

RB211–Trent 875–17, RB211–Trent 

877–17, RB211–Trent 884–17, RB211– 

Trent 884B–17, RB211–Trent 892–17, 

RB211–Trent 892B–17, and RB211– 

Trent 895–17 turbofan engines. The 

existing AD currently requires initial 

and repetitive ultrasonic inspections 

(UIs) of certain low-pressure (LP) 

compressor blades identified by serial 

number (S/N). This proposed AD would 

require the same actions but expands 

the population of blades. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent LP 

compressor blades from failing due to 

blade root cracks, which could lead to 

uncontained engine failure and damage 

to the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 2, 2012. 

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: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, 

Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 

31, Derby, England, DE248BJ, telephone: 

011–44–1332–242424; fax: 011–44– 

1332–245418, or email: http:// 

www.rolls-royce.com/contact/ 

civil_team.jsp. You may review copies 

of the referenced service information at 

the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 781–238–7125. 

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 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7143; fax: 781–238– 

7199; email: alan.strom@faa.gov. 

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–2010–0821; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NE–30–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On March 20, 2012, we issued AD 

2012–06–23, Amendment 39–17004 (77 

FR 20508, April 5, 2012), for all RR 

RB211–Trent 875–17, RB211–Trent 

877–17, RB211–Trent 884–17, RB211– 

Trent 884B–17, RB211–Trent 892–17, 

RB211–Trent 892B–17, and RB211– 

Trent 895–17 turbofan engines. That AD 

requires initial and repetitive UIs of 

certain LP compressor blades identified 

by S/N. That AD superseded AD 2011– 

08–07, Amendment 39–16657 (76 FR 

24798, May 3, 2011) and resulted from 

RR concluding that additional blades 

affected must be inspected. We issued 

that AD to prevent LP compressor 

blades from failing due to blade root 

cracks, which could lead to uncontained 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2012 / Proposed Rules 26217 

engine failure and damage to the 

airplane. 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

We issued AD 2012–06–23, 

Amendment 39–17004 (77 FR 20508, 

April 5, 2012), to ensure timely 

inspection of the listed blades in 

Appendices 3A through 3G of RollsRoyce plc Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 

No. RB.211–72–AG244, Revision 4, 

dated December 22, 2011. We now need 

AD action to add the inspection of the 

blades listed in Appendices 3H through 

3L of that ASB. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Rolls-Royce plc ASB No. 

RB.211–72–AG244, Revision 4, dated 

December 22, 2011. The service 

information describes procedures for 

performing UIs of the LP compressor 

blades listed in Appendices 3A through 

3L of that ASB. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would retain all of 

the requirements of AD 2012–06–23 (77 

FR 20508, April 5, 2012). This proposed 

AD would require adding inspections of 

the blades listed in Appendices 3H 

through 3L of ASB No. RB.211–72– 

AG244, Revision 4, dated December 22, 

2011. This proposed AD would also 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

described previously. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 158 engines installed on 

airplanes of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it would take about 3 

hours per engine inspection, and six 

inspections per year. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. We estimate 

that one LP compressor blade per year 

would need replacement, at a cost of 

about $82,000. Based on these figures, 

we estimate the annual cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$323,740. Our cost estimate is exclusive 

of possible warranty coverage. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

Section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(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 

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 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2012–06–23, Amendment 39–17004 (77 

FR 20508, April 5, 2012), and adding 

the following new AD: 

Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2010– 

0821; Directorate Identifier 2010–NE– 

30–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by July 2, 2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2012–06–23, 

Amendment 39–17004 (77 FR 20508, April 5, 

2012). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) 

RB211–Trent 875–17, RB211–Trent 877–17, 

RB211–Trent 884–17, RB211–Trent 884B–17, 

RB211–Trent 892–17, RB211–Trent 892B–17, 

and RB211–Trent 895–17 turbofan engines. 

(d) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by the need to add 

the inspections of the low-pressure (LP) 

compressor blades listed by serial number (S/ 

N) in Appendices 3H through 3L of RollsRoyce plc Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 

RB.211–72–AG244, Revision 4, dated 

December 22, 2011. We are issuing this AD 

to prevent LP compressor blades from failing 

due to blade root cracks, which could lead 

to uncontained engine failure and damage to 

the airplane. 

(e) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(1) Perform an initial ultrasonic inspection 

(UI) of the affected LP compressor blades 

identified by S/N in Appendices 3A through 

3L of RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AG244, 

Revision 4, dated December 22, 2011. Use 

Table 1 of this AD to determine your initial 

inspection threshold. 

TABLE 1—INITIAL INSPECTION THRESHOLDS

Appendix number of RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AG244, revision 4, that 

identifies affected LP compressor blades by S/N Initial inspection threshold 

3A and 3B ...................................................................................................... Within 70 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. 

3C .................................................................................................................. Within 10 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3D .................................................................................................................. Within 22 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3E .................................................................................................................. Within 34 months after the effective date of this AD. 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
26218 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—INITIAL INSPECTION THRESHOLDS—Continued 

Appendix number of RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AG244, revision 4, that 

identifies affected LP compressor blades by S/N Initial inspection threshold 

3F ................................................................................................................... Within 46 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3G .................................................................................................................. Within 58 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3H .................................................................................................................. Within 70 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3I .................................................................................................................... Within 82 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3J ................................................................................................................... Within 94 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3K .................................................................................................................. Within 106 months after the effective date of this AD. 

3L ................................................................................................................... Within 118 months after the effective date of this AD. 

(2) Thereafter, perform repetitive UIs of the 

affected LP compressor blades within every 

100 flight cycles. 

(3) Use paragraph 3.A.(2) of 

Accomplishment Instructions of RR ASB No. 

RB.211–72–AG244, Revision 4, dated 

December 22, 2011, and paragraphs 1. 

through 3.B. of Appendix 1 of that ASB, or 

paragraphs 3.B.(1) through 3.B.(3) of 

Accomplishment Instructions of RR ASB No. 

RB.211–72–AG244, Revision 4, dated 

December 22, 2011, and paragraphs 1. 

through 3.C. of Appendix 2 of that ASB, to 

perform the UIs. 

(4) Do not return to service any engine with 

blades that failed the inspection required by 

this AD. 

(5) For blades that are removed from the 

engine and pass inspection, re-apply dry film 

lubricant before re-installing the blades. 

(6) After the effective date of this AD, do 

not install any affected LP compressor blade 

that has reached the initial inspection 

threshold in Table 1, unless it has passed the 

initial and repetitive UIs required by this AD. 

(f) Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

You may take credit for the initial 

inspection that is required by paragraph 

(e)(1) of this AD if you performed the initial 

inspection before the effective date of this AD 

using RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AG244, dated 

August 7, 2009; ASB No. RB.211–72–AG244, 

Revision 1, dated January 26, 2010; ASB No. 

RB.211–72–AG244, Revision 2, dated August 

18, 2011; or ASB No. RB.211–72–AG244, 

Revision 3, dated December 13, 2011. 

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

The Manager, Engine Certification Office, 

FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use 

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to 

make your request. 

(h) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7143; fax: 781–238–7199; 

email: alan.strom@faa.gov. 

(2) Refer to European Aviation Safety 

Agency AD 2012–0025, dated February 8, 

2012, for related information. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate 

Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby, 

England, DE248BJ, telephone: 011–44–1332– 

242424; fax: 011–44–1332–245418, or email: 

http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/ 

civil_team.jsp. You may review copies of the 

referenced service information at the FAA, 

Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

April 27, 2012. 

Colleen M. D’Alessandro, 

Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10693 Filed 5–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

24 CFR Parts 5, 200, 207, and 232 

[Docket No. FR–5465 P–01] 

RIN–2502–AJ05 

Federal Housing Administration (FHA): 

Section 232 Healthcare Facility 

Insurance Program-Strengthening 

Accountability and Regulatory 

Revisions Update 

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing 

Commissioner, HUD. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In 2010 through 2011, HUD 

commenced and completed the process 

of revising regulations applicable to, 

and closing documents used in, FHA 

insurance of multifamily rental projects, 

to reflect current policy and practices in 

the multifamily mortgage market. The 

multifamily rental project regulations 

and closing documents had not been 

updated in more than 20 years. Through 

this proposed rule, HUD commences a 

similar process for its regulations 

governing insurance of healthcare 

facilities under section 232 of the 

National Housing Act, and the closing 

documents used in such transactions. 

HUD’s Section 232 program insures 

mortgage loans to facilitate the 

construction, substantial rehabilitation, 

purchase, and refinancing of nursing 

homes, intermediate care facilities, 

board and care homes, and assistedliving facilities. This rule proposes 

amendments to update HUD’s Section 

232 regulations, to reflect current policy 

and practices, and to improve 

accountability and strengthen risk 

management. 

DATES: Comment Due Date: July 2, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit comments regarding 

this proposed rule to the Regulations 

Division, Office of General Counsel, 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 

10276, Washington, DC 20410–0500. 

Communications must refer to the above 

docket number and title. There are two 

methods for submitting public 

comments. All submissions must refer 

to the above docket number and title. 

1. Submission of Comments by Mail. 

Comments may be submitted by mail to 

the Regulations Division, Office of 

General Counsel, Department of 

Housing and Urban Development, 451 

7th Street SW., Room 10276, 

Washington, DC 20410–0500. 

2. Electronic Submission of 

Comments. Interested persons may 

submit comments electronically through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly 

encourages commenters to submit 

comments electronically. Electronic 

submission of comments allows the 

commenter maximum time to prepare 

and submit a comment, ensures timely 

receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to 

make them immediately available to the 

public. Comments submitted 

electronically through the 

www.regulations.gov Web site can be 

viewed by other commenters and 

interested members of the public. 

Commenters should follow the 

instructions provided on that site to 

submit comments electronically. 

Note: To receive consideration as public 

comments, comments must be submitted 

through one of the two methods specified 

above. Again, all submissions must refer to 

the docket number and title of the rule. No 

Facsimile Comments. Facsimile (FAX) 

comments are not acceptable. 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS