9790 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 38 / Friday, February 26, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

processes; avoid disclosure of insider 

threat techniques; protect the identities 

and physical safety of confidential 

informants and law enforcement 

personnel; ensure DHS’ ability to obtain 

information from third parties and other 

sources; protect the privacy of third 

parties; and safeguard classified 

information. Disclosure of information 

to the subject of the inquiry could also 

permit the subject to avoid detection or 

apprehension. 

In appropriate circumstances, where 

compliance would not appear to 

interfere with or adversely affect the law 

enforcement purposes of this system 

and the overall law enforcement 

process, the applicable exemptions may 

be waived on a case by case basis. 

A notice of system of records DHS/

ALL–038 Insider Threat Program 

System of Records is also published in 

this issue of the Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5 

Freedom of information, Privacy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DHS proposes to amend 

chapter I of title 6, Code of Federal 

Regulations, as follows: 

PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS 

AND INFORMATION 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 5 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135; 

(6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.); 5 U.S.C. 301. Subpart 

A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. Subpart B 

also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. 

■ 2. In appendix C to part 5, add 

paragraph 74 to read as follows: 

Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of 

Records Exempt From the Privacy Act 

* * * * * 

74. The DHS/ALL–038 Insider Threat 

Program System of Records consists of 

electronic and paper records and will be used 

by DHS and its components. The DHS/ALL– 

038 Insider Threat Program System of 

Records System of Records is a repository of 

information held by DHS in connection with 

various missions and functions, including, 

but not limited to the enforcement of civil 

and criminal laws; investigations, inquiries, 

and proceedings there under; and national 

security and intelligence activities. The DHS/ 

ALL–038 Insider Threat Program System of 

Records contains information that is 

collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or 

in cooperation with DHS and its components 

and may contain personally identifiable 

information collected by other Federal, State, 

local, tribal, foreign, or international 

government agencies. 

The Secretary of Homeland Security, 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), has exempted 

this system from the following provisions of 

the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (c)(4), 

(d), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), 

(e)(4)(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (e)(12), (f), (g)(1), and 

(h). Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland 

Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1), 

(k)(2), and (k)(5), has exempted this system 

from the following provisions of the Privacy 

Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), 

(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), and (f). 

Where a record received from another 

system has been exempted in that source 

system under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), DHS will 

claim the same exemptions for those records 

that are claimed for the original primary 

systems of records from which they 

originated and claims any additional 

exemptions set forth here. 

Exemptions from these particular 

subsections are justified on a case-by-case 

basis and determined at the time a request is 

made, for the following reasons: 

(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (4) 

(Accounting for Disclosures) because release 

of the accounting of disclosures could alert 

the subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS and the recipient agency. Disclosure 

of the accounting would therefore present a 

serious impediment to law enforcement 

efforts and/or efforts to preserve national 

security. Disclosure of the accounting would 

also permit the subject of a record to impede 

the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension, which would undermine the 

entire investigative process. 

(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) 

because access to the records contained in 

this system of records could inform the 

subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS or another agency. Access to the 

records could permit the subject of a record 

to impede the investigation, to tamper with 

witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection 

or apprehension. Amendment of the records 

could interfere with ongoing investigations 

and law enforcement activities and would 

impose an unreasonable administrative 

burden by requiring investigations to be 

continually reinvestigated. In addition, 

permitting access and amendment to such 

information could disclose security-sensitive 

information that could be detrimental to 

homeland security. 

(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and 

Necessity of Information) because in the 

course of investigations into potential 

violations of Federal law, the accuracy of 

information obtained or introduced 

occasionally may be unclear, or the 

information may not be strictly relevant or 

necessary to a specific investigation. In the 

interests of effective law enforcement, it is 

appropriate to retain all information that may 

aid in establishing patterns of unlawful 

activity. 

(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of 

Information from Individuals) because 

requiring that information be collected from 

the subject of an investigation would alert the 

subject to the nature or existence of the 

investigation, thereby interfering with that 

investigation and related law enforcement 

activities. 

(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to 

Subjects) because providing such detailed 

information could impede law enforcement 

by compromising the existence of a 

confidential investigation or reveal the 

identity of witnesses or confidential 

informants. 

(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), 

and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) 

(Agency Rules), because portions of this 

system are exempt from the individual access 

provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons 

noted above, and therefore DHS is not 

required to establish requirements, rules, or 

procedures with respect to such access. 

Providing notice to individuals with respect 

to existence of records pertaining to them in 

the system of records or otherwise setting up 

procedures pursuant to which individuals 

may access and view records pertaining to 

themselves in the system would undermine 

investigative efforts and reveal the identities 

of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and 

confidential informants. 

(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of 

Information) because with the collection of 

information for law enforcement purposes, it 

is impossible to determine in advance what 

information is accurate, relevant, timely, and 

complete. Compliance with subsection (e)(5) 

would preclude DHS agents from using their 

investigative training and exercise of good 

judgment to both conduct and report on 

investigations. 

(h) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on 

Individuals) because compliance would 

interfere with DHS’s ability to obtain, serve, 

and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law 

enforcement mechanisms that may be filed 

under seal and could result in disclosure of 

investigative techniques, procedures, and 

evidence. 

(i) From subsection (g)(1) (Civil Remedies) 

to the extent that the system is exempt from 

other specific subsections of the Privacy Act. 

Dated: February 18, 2016. 

Karen L. Neuman, 

Chief Privacy Officer, Department of 

Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03923 Filed 2–25–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–3705; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–168–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Textron 

Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate 

Previously Held by Cessna Aircraft 

Company) Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 38 / Friday, February 26, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9791 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Textron Aviation Inc. Model 680 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by Cessna’s report of a 

manufacturing defect which affects the 

durability of the aft canted bulkhead 

metallic structure. The manufacturing 

defect directly affects the bond integrity 

of the vertical and horizontal stiffeners 

on the aft canted bulkhead metallic 

structure. This proposed AD would 

require repetitive inspections of the aft 

canted bulkhead, and repair if 

necessary. This proposed AD would 

also require a modification, which 

would terminate the repetitive 

inspections. We are proposing this AD 

to prevent disbonding of the horizontal 

and vertical stiffeners on the aft canted 

bulkhead. Loss of bond integrity could 

result in a structural failure that could 

lead to separation of the cruciform tail 

and loss of control of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 11, 2016. 

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 NPRM, contact Textron Aviation 

Inc., P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, KS 67277; 

telephone 316–517–6215; fax 316–517– 

5802; email citationpubs@txtav.com; 

Internet https://support.cessna.com/

custsupt/csupport/newlogin.jsp. You 

may review this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

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–2016– 

3705; 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: Paul 

Kalowski, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ACE–118W, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1801 

Airport Road, Room 100, Dwight D. 

Eisenhower Airport, Wichita, KS 67209; 

phone: 316–946–4186; fax: 316–946– 

4107; email: paul.kalowski@faa.gov. 

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– 

2016–3705; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–168–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 

This proposed AD was prompted by 

Cessna’s report of a manufacturing 

defect that affects the durability of the 

aft canted bulkhead metallic structure. 

The manufacturing defect directly 

affects the bond integrity of the vertical 

and horizontal stiffeners on the aft 

canted bulkhead metallic structure. This 

disbonding is caused by a loss of 

durability in the metal-to-metal 

bondline, which resulted from a 

reduced autoclave cure cycle dwell time 

and temperature during manufacturing. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could result in a structural 

failure that could lead to separation of 

the cruciform tail and loss of control of 

the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed the following Cessna 

service information. 

• Cessna Service Letter SL680–53–05, 

Revision 2, dated September 30, 2015. 

The service information describes 

procedures for a general visual 

inspection for disbonding and paint 

cracking around the edges of the 

stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead. 

• Cessna Service Bulletin SB680–53– 

08, dated September 28, 2015. The 

service information describes 

procedures for modifying the airplane 

by installing additional stiffeners to the 

aft canted bulkhead. 

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. 

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 require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Although Cessna Service Letter 

SL680–53–05, Revision 2, dated 

September 30, 2015, specifies reporting 

the inspection results to Cessna, this 

proposed AD would not require those 

actions. 

Although Cessna Service Letter 

SL680–53–05, Revision 2, dated 

September 30, 2015, specifies that 

operators may contact the manufacturer 

for disposition of certain conditions, 

this proposed AD would require 

operators to repair those conditions in 

accordance with a method approved by 

the FAA. 

Although Cessna Service Letter 

SL680–53–05, Revision 2, dated 

September 30, 2015; and Service 

Bulletin SB680–53–08, dated September 

28, 2015; use the term ‘‘debond’’ to 

describe full or partial separation of a 

stiffener from the aft canted bulkhead 

structure, this proposed AD instead uses 

the term ‘‘disbond.’’ 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 123 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9792 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 38 / Friday, February 26, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators 

Inspection ...................... 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 per inspection cycle.$0 $85 per inspection 

cycle.

$10,455 per inspection 

cycle. 

Modification ................... 180 work-hours × $85 per hour = $15,300 ........ 3,190 $18,490 ........................ $2,274,270. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this proposed AD may be 

covered under warranty, thereby 

reducing the cost impact on affected 

individuals. We do not control warranty 

coverage for affected individuals. As a 

result, we have included all costs in our 

cost estimate. 

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), 

(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 adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Textron Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate 

Previously Held by Cessna Aircraft 

Company): Docket No. FAA–2016–3705; 

Directorate Identifier 2015–NM–168– 

AD.–– 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 11, 

2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Textron Aviation Inc. 

(Type Certificate Previously Held by Cessna 

Aircraft Company), Model 680 airplanes, 

certificated in any category, as identified in 

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD. 

(1) Model 680 Sovereign airplanes 

(commonly known as Citation Sovereign 

airplanes), having serial numbers: 680–0001, 

–0002, –0006, –0025, –0030, –0031, –0032, 

–0046, –0051, –0057, –0064, –0066, –0067, 

–0082, –0104, –0108, –0112, –0118, –0120, 

–0125, –0132, –0139, –0140, –0141, –0144, 

–0147, –0148, –0149, –0153, –0157, –0160, 

–0162, –0163, –0164, –0166, –0167, –0169, 

–0170, –0171, –0173, –0174, –0175, –0176, 

–0177, –0178, –0179, –0180, –0182, –0183, 

–0185, –0186, –0192, –0193, –0196, –0200, 

–0202, –0204, –0205, –0206, –0208, –0211, 

–0216, –0220, –0221, –0222, –0227, –0229, 

–0230, –0231, –0234, –0235, –0236, –0238, 

–0241, –0242, –0243, –0245, –0246, –0249, 

–0252, –0253, –0255, –0256, –0257, –0258, 

–0260, –0262, –0268, –0270, –0271, –0280, 

–0282, –0283, –0284, –0285, –0289, –0291, 

–0292, –0296, –0297, –0300, –0301, –0302, 

–0303, –0304, –0306, –0307, –0313, –0315, 

–0317, –0318, –0322, –0323, –0324, –0327, 

–0328, –0329, –0333, –0334, –0336, –0337, 

–0339, –0340, –0342, –0344, –0346, –0347, 

–0348, and –0349. 

(2) Model 680 Sovereign airplanes 

(commonly known as Citation Sovereign+ 

airplanes) having serial numbers: 680–0501, 

–0504, –0505, –0509, –0510, –0511, –0512, 

–0513, –0514, –0515, –0516, –0517, –0519, 

–0520, –0522, –0524, –0525, –0526, –0527, 

and –0531. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by Cessna’s report 

of a manufacturing defect which affects the 

durability of the aft canted bulkhead metallic 

structure. The manufacturing defect directly 

affects the bond integrity of the vertical and 

horizontal stiffeners on the aft canted 

bulkhead metallic structure. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent disbonding of the 

horizontal and vertical stiffeners on the aft 

canted bulkhead. Loss of bond integrity 

could result in a structural failure that may 

lead to separation of the cruciform tail and 

loss of control of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections 

Before the accumulation of 7,000 total 

flight hours, or within 100 flight hours after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later, perform a general visual 

inspection for disbonding and paint cracking 

around the edges of the stiffeners on the aft 

canted bulkhead, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Cessna 

Service Letter SL680–53–05, Revision 2, 

dated September 30, 2015. Repeat the general 

visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 100 flight hours, until the 

modification required by paragraph (i) of this 

AD is accomplished. 

(h) Repair 

If, during any inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD, any disbonding or 

cracked paint is found, before further flight, 

repair in accordance with a method approved 

by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), ACE–118W, FAA. 

(i) Modification 

At the applicable compliance time 

specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 38 / Friday, February 26, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9793 

AD, modify the airplane by installing 

additional stiffeners on the aft canted 

bulkhead, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Cessna 

Service Bulletin SB680–53–08, dated 

September 28, 2015. Doing this modification 

terminates the repetitive inspections required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(1) For airplanes that have accumulated 

7,000 or more total flight hours as of the 

effective date of this AD: Within 1,800 flight 

hours or 24 months, whichever occurs first, 

after the effective date of this AD. 

(2) For airplanes that have accumulated 

less than 7,000 total flight hours as of the 

effective date of this AD: Within 3,600 flight 

hours or 48 months, whichever occurs first, 

after the effective date of this AD. 

(j) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using the service information 

identified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this 

AD, which is not incorporated by reference 

in this AD. 

(1) Cessna Service Letter SL680–53–05, 

dated December 22, 2014. 

(2) Cessna Service Letter SL680–53–05, 

Revision 1, dated March 12, 2015. 

(k) No Reporting Requirement 

Although Cessna Service Bulletin SB680– 

53–08, dated September 28, 2015; and Cessna 

Service Letter SL680–53–05 Revision 2, 

dated September 30, 2015; specify to submit 

certain information to the manufacturer, this 

AD does not include that requirement. 

(l) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), are not allowed. 

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Wichita ACO, ACE– 

118W, 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 ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (n)(1) of this AD. 

(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. 

(n) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Paul Kalowski, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ACE–118W, FAA, Wichita 

ACO, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Dwight 

D. Eisenhower Airport, Wichita, KS 67209; 

phone: 316–946–4186; fax: 316–946–4107; 

email: paul.kalowski@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Textron Aviation Inc., P.O. 

Box 7706, Wichita, KS 67277; telephone: 

316–517–6215; fax: 316–517–5802; email: 

citationpubs@txtav.com; Internet: https://

support.cessna.com/custsupt/csupport/

newlogin.jsp. You may view this service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA. For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

18, 2016. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04136 Filed 2–25–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2016–0003; FRL–9942–85– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Spokane, 

Washington: Second 10-Year PM10

Limited Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

the limited maintenance plan submitted 

on January 4, 2016, by the State of 

Washington for the Spokane area, which 

includes the cities of Spokane, Spokane 

Valley, Millwood and surrounding 

unincorporated areas in Spokane 

County, Washington. This plan 

addresses the second 10-year 

maintenance period for particulate 

matter with an aerodynamic diameter 

less than or equal to a nominal 10 

micrometers (PM10). A limited 

maintenance plan is used to meet Clean 

Air Act requirements for formerly 

designated nonattainment areas that 

meet certain qualification criteria. The 

EPA is proposing to determine 

Washington’s submittal meets the 

limited maintenance plan criteria. The 

Spokane area currently has monitored 

PM10 levels well below the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and levels have not increased 

since the area was redesignated to 

attainment in 2005. The EPA is also 

proposing to approve minor updates to 

the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency 

(SRCAA) regulations controlling PM10

related to the maintenance plan. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 28, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2016–0003 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Hunt at (206) 553–0256, hunt.jeff@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. The Limited Maintenance Plan Option for 

PM10 Areas 

A. Requirements for the Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option 

B. Conformity Under the Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option 

III. Review of the State’s Submittal 

A. Has the State demonstrated that the 

maintenance area qualifies for the 

limited maintenance plan option? 

B. Does the State have an approved 

attainment emissions inventory? 

C. Does the limited maintenance plan 

include an assurance of continued 

operation of an appropriate EPAapproved air quality monitoring 

network, in accordance with 40 CFR part 

58? 

D. Does the plan meet the Clean Air Act 

requirements for contingency 

provisions? 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

The Spokane area was designated as 

nonattainment for PM10 by operation of 

law upon enactment of the Clean Air 

Act Amendments in 1990 (56 FR 56694, 

November 6, 1991). The Washington 

Department of Ecology (Ecology) and 

SRCAA worked with the community to 

establish PM10 pollution control 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS