58470 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1To view the interim rule and the comments we 

received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#

!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0004. 

1To view the final rule and related documents, 

go to http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2009-0100. 

2 International Standard for Phytosanitary 

Measures (ISPM) Number 1. To view this and other 

ISPMS on the Internet, go to http://www.ippc.int/ 

IPP/En/default.jsp and click on the ‘‘Adopted 

Standards’’ link under the ‘‘Core Activities’’ 

heading. 

the payment of compensation to eligible 

owners of commercial stone fruit 

orchards, including direct marketers, 

and fruit tree nurseries. In an interim 

rule 1 effective and published in the 

Federal Register on February 3, 2012 

(77 FR 5381–5385, Docket No. APHIS– 

2011–0004), we amended the plum pox 

regulations to provide for the payment 

of compensation to eligible owners of 

non-fruit-bearing ornamental tree 

nurseries and to increase the amount of 

compensation that may be paid to 

eligible owners of commercial stone 

fruit orchards and fruit tree nurseries 

whose trees are required to be destroyed 

in order to prevent the spread of plum 

pox. We also provided updated 

instructions for the submission of 

claims for compensation. 

Comments on the interim rule were 

required to be received on or before 

April 3, 2012. We received three 

comments by that date. The comments 

were from a State agricultural agency, a 

fruit grower, and an organization of 

State plant regulatory agencies. Two 

commenters fully supported the action, 

with one of these commenters 

encouraging the expanded use of 

compensation for producers who 

sustain losses due to quarantine plant 

pests and regulatory actions associated 

with these pests. 

The third commenter said that the 

interim rule makes reference to 

‘‘commercial stone fruit orchards and 

fruit tree nurseries’’ without defining 

fruit tree nursery. The commenter also 

expressed concern that his fruit tree 

nursery does not qualify for 

compensation. 

In § 301.74–5, paragraph (a)(2) 

describes the eligibility criteria for 

compensation for owners of fruit tree 

nurseries. Those eligibility criteria and 

the considerations in paragraph (b) that 

determine payment amounts specify 

that the plants affected by an emergency 

action notification are plants that have 

been produced for commercial sale, 

which is not the case in the situation 

described by the commenter. 

Therefore, for the reasons given in the 

interim rule and in this document, we 

are adopting the interim rule as a final 

rule without change. 

This action also affirms the 

information contained in the interim 

rule concerning Executive Order 12866 

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

Executive Orders 12372 and 12988, and 

the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Further, this action has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, 

therefore, has not been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301 

Agricultural commodities, Plant 

diseases and pests, Quarantine, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Transportation. 

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE 

NOTICES 

■ Accordingly, we are adopting as a 

final rule, without change, the interim 

rule that amended 7 CFR part 301 and 

that was published at 77 FR 5381–5385 

on February 3, 2012. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of 

September 2012. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–23356 Filed 9–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

7 CFR Part 319 

[Docket No. APHIS–2009–0100] 

RIN 0579–AD35 

Irradiation Treatment; Location of 

Facilities in the Southern United 

States; Technical Amendment 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule; technical 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: In a final rule that was 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 20, 2012, and effective on August 

20, 2012, we amended the phytosanitary 

treatment regulations to, among other 

things, allow for irradiation treatment of 

mangoes from India upon arrival in the 

mainland United States rather than just 

at the point of origin. In the final rule, 

we neglected to amend the inspection 

requirements to address shipments that 

are treated upon arrival in the United 

States and not at the point of origin. 

This document corrects that error. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 21, 

2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Inder P. S. Gadh, Senior Risk Manager– 

Treatments, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River 

Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737– 

1236; (301) 851–2018. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

phytosanitary treatment regulations 

contained in 7 CFR part 305 (referred to 

below as the regulations) set out the 

general requirements for performing 

treatments and certifying or approving 

treatment facilities for fruits, vegetables, 

and other articles to prevent the 

introduction or dissemination of plant 

pests or noxious weeds into or through 

the United States. The Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

administers these regulations. 

In a final rule 1 published in the 

Federal Register on July 20, 2012 (77 FR 

4261–4265, Docket No. APHIS–2009– 

0100), with an effective date of August 

20, 2012, we amended the regulations in 

§ 319.56–46 to allow for irradiation 

treatment of mangoes from India upon 

arrival in the mainland United States 

rather than just at the point of origin. 

Paragraph (c) of § 319.56–46 indicates 

that each consignment of mangoes must 

be inspected jointly by APHIS and the 

national plant protection organization 

(NPPO) of India as part of the required 

preclearance inspection activities. 

Paragraph (e) of § 319.56–46 also 

indicates that joint inspection by APHIS 

and the NPPO of India is required. 

While joint inspection and preclearance 

are practical when irradiation treatment 

is applied in the country of origin, it is 

more useful and cost effective for the 

NPPO of India to inspect the fruit in 

India and for APHIS to inspect the fruit 

upon arrival in the United States when 

irradiation treatment is applied in the 

United States. This also ensures 

compliance with the standard 2 of the 

International Plant Protection 

Convention, of which the United States 

is a contracting party, of applying the 

least restrictive measures resulting in 

the minimal impact to trade while 

effectively managing plant pest risks. 

We are therefore removing the words 

‘‘jointly’’ and ‘‘preclearance’’ from 

§ 319.56–46(c) and the word ‘‘jointly’’ 

from § 319.56–46(e) to allow inspections 

to occur separately in India and the 

United States when appropriate. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319 

Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, 

Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests, 

Quarantine, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Rice, 

Vegetables. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 184 / Friday, September 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 58471 

Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR 

part 319 as follows: 

PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE 

NOTICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 319 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701–7772, and 

7781–7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 

2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. 

§ 319.56–46 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section § 319.56–46 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (c), by removing the 

words ‘‘jointly’’ and ‘‘preclearance’’. 

■ b. In paragraph (e), by removing the 

word ‘‘jointly’’. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of 

September 2012. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–23346 Filed 9–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1017; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NE–30–AD; Amendment 39– 

17203; AD 2012–19–08] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; General 

Electric Company Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for General 

Electric Company GEnx-1B54, GEnx1B58, GEnx-1B64, GEnx-1B67, GEnx1B70, GEnx-1B54/P1, GEnx-1B58/P1, 

GEnx-1B64/P1, GEnx-1B67/P1, GEnx1B70/P1, GEnx-1B70/72/P1, GEnx1B70/75/P1, GEnx-1B74/75/P1, GEnx1B75/P1, GEnx-2B67, and GEnx-2B67B 

turbofan engines. This AD requires 

initial and repetitive ultrasonic 

inspections (UI) of certain part number 

(P/N) fan mid shafts (FMS) for cracks. 

This AD was prompted by a report of an 

FMS failure and a report of a crack 

found in another FMS. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent failure of the FMS 

resulting in one or more engine 

failure(s) and possible loss of the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective September 

21, 2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in the AD 

as of September 21, 2012. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by October 22, 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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact General Electric 

Company, GE-Aviation, Room 285, 1 

Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH 45215, 

phone: (513) 552–3272; email: 

geae.aoc@ge.com. You may view this 

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 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: 

James Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7742; fax: 781–238– 

7199; email: james.e.gray@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

On July 28, 2012, we received a report 

of a GEnx-1B engine failure installed on 

a Boeing 787 (B787) airplane. Boeing 

was conducting routine ground testing 

of the B787, before aircraft delivery. 

During a taxi test, one engine’s FMS 

fractured just aft of the coupling nut. 

The low-pressure turbine (LPT) rotor 

shifted axially backwards, resulting in 

LPT blade and vane clashing. The LPT 

case contained the failure and debris 

was released out the tailpipe. There was 

no engine overspeed as the LPT rotor 

remained coupled to the fan rotor at the 

FMS spline. On August 14, 2012, we 

received a second report concerning the 

GEnx engine, this time about an FMS, 

installed in a GEnx-1B engine, that was 

found cracked during an on-wing UI. 

This condition, if not corrected, could 

result in failure of the FMS resulting in 

one or more engine failure(s) and 

possible loss of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed GE Service Bulletin (SB) 

No. GEnx-1B S/B 72–0107, Revision 2, 

dated September 14, 2012, and SB No. 

GEnx-2B S/B 72–0091, Revision 1, dated 

September 14, 2012. The SBs describe 

procedures for performing UI 

inspections of FMS P/N 2331M20G02, 

P/N 2332M81G01, and P/N 

2332M33G01. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are issuing 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. 

AD Requirements 

This AD requires accomplishing the 

actions specified in the service 

information described previously, 

except as discussed under ‘‘Differences 

Between the AD and the Service 

Information.’’ 

Differences Between the AD and the 

Service Information 

The SBs require an initial FMS 

inspection within 30 days of the SB 

date. This AD requires an initial FMS 

inspection before further flight. 

Interim Action 

We consider this AD interim action. 

Root cause is still under investigation, 

but the failure of the FMS is likely due 

to environmentally assisted cracking; a 

type of corrosive cracking that is timedependent. 

FAA’s Justification and Determination 

of the Effective Date 

An unsafe condition exists that 

requires the immediate adoption of this 

AD. The FAA has found that the risk to 

the flying public justifies waiving notice 

and comment prior to adoption of this 

rule based on the reported engine 

failure, the crack find, and that the root 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES