Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 63727 

regardless of the licensee’s 

determination with respect to the 

performance requirements. This enables 

the NRC to independently evaluate the 

licensee’s assessment of whether the 

performance requirement was met, on 

the basis of supplemental information as 

it becomes available under 10 CFR 

70.50(c)(1), followed by the written 

report. 

The seventh issue raised by the 

petitioner requested revision of 

paragraph (b)(3) of Appendix A to 10 

CFR part 70 to limit the 24-hour 

reporting requirement for an acute 

chemical exposure to an individual 

inside the controlled area and only if 

the individual required treatment at an 

offsite medical facility. The petitioner 

proposed that this change would ensure 

event reporting at a threshold that the 

NRC would generally want to know 

about. This issue is denied for the same 

reasons as stated in the preceding 

paragraphs and because the current 

regulation requires a report within 24 

hours of discovery of an acute chemical 

exposure described in 10 CFR 

70.61(c)(4) regardless of the location of 

the exposed individual. Section 

70.61(c)(4) specifically refers to both 

workers and individuals outside the 

controlled area. However, the proposed 

change would include reporting an 

acute chemical exposure only for an 

individual located inside the controlled 

area. Additionally, the location where 

the injured person is treated (e.g., an 

offsite medical facility) should not be a 

factor whether to notify the NRC. It is 

the intent of the NRC to ensure the 

safety of individuals inside and outside 

the controlled area and has focused the 

reporting requirements on potential 

impacts on both workers and members 

of the public. To achieve this goal, a 

licensee must notify the NRC of an acute 

chemical exposure that requires medical 

treatment, regardless of where the 

treatment is administered. 

The eighth issue raised by the 

petitioner requested the removal of the 

text ‘‘or may have affected’’ from 

paragraph (b)(4) of Appendix A to 10 

CFR part 70 because the phrase is 

subjective when considering the safety 

function or availability of an item relied 

on for safety. This issue is denied 

because the full impact of natural 

phenomena or other external events 

such as a tornado, earthquake, flood, or 

fire external or internal to the facility 

could prove difficult for a licensee to 

fully assess and determine the status of 

all items relied on for safety. Since these 

events could affect a licensee’s facility, 

the NRC needs to be informed about 

such events to assess a licensee’s 

conclusion of whether any detrimental 

effects did in fact occur, or could have 

occurred in the absence of controls that 

were present but not part of the safety 

basis. To achieve our safety goal to 

ensure adequate protection of health 

and safety of individuals and the 

environment and to implement the 

strategy to effectively respond to certain 

conditions and a licensee’s actions, it 

would be in the best interest of the 

licensee and the surrounding 

community to report to the NRC the 

occurrence of any natural phenomenon 

or external event that is severe enough 

to potentially impact the intended safety 

function or availability or reliability of 

one or more items relied on for safety. 

For the reasons cited in this 

document, the NRC will consider five of 

the nine issues raised in this petition in 

the rulemaking process, and is denying 

the remaining four issues. The NRC will 

consider the five issues in the 

rulemaking process; however, the 

petitioner’s concerns may not be 

addressed exactly as the petitioner has 

requested. During the rulemaking 

process the NRC will solicit comments 

from the public and will consider all 

comments before finalizing the rule. 

Future actions for PRM–70–8 will be 

reported in NUREG–0936, ‘‘NRC 

Regulatory Agenda’’ which is publicly 

available on the NRC Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/ 

regulatory/rulemaking.html. The 

regulatory agenda is a semiannual 

compilation of all rules on which the 

NRC has recently completed action, or 

has proposed action, or is considering 

action, and of all petitions for 

rulemaking that the NRC is working to 

resolve. Further information on the five 

issues raised in this petition may be 

tracked through http:// 

www.Regulations.gov under rulemaking 

docket ID NRC–2010–0271. Existing 

NRC regulations provide the basis for 

reasonable assurance that the common 

defense and security and public health 

and safety are adequately protected. For 

the reasons cited in this document, the 

NRC closes the docket on PRM–70–8. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, September 

30, 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

R.W. Borchardt, 

Executive Director for Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26154 Filed 10–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0162; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NE–19–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

plc (RR) RB211–524 Series Turbofan 

Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: This action revises an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD), 

applicable to certain RR RB211–524 

series turbofan engines. That proposal 

would have required initial and 

repetitive borescope inspections of the 

head section and meterpanel assembly 

of the combustion liner, and 

replacement if necessary with 

serviceable parts. That proposal was 

prompted by an inquiry submitted by an 

operator, which resulted in RR 

performing a complete review of the 

affected front combustion liner part 

numbers (P/Ns). This action revises the 

proposed rule by clarifying the 

applicability paragraph (c) of the 

proposed AD. We are proposing this AD 

to prevent deterioration of the engine 

combustion liner, which can result in 

combustion liner breakup, case burnthrough, engine fire, and damage to the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 17, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

Contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31, 

Derby, DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom; 

telephone: 011–44–1332–242424; fax: 

011–44–1332–249936 for the service 

information identified in this proposed 

AD. 

The Docket Operations office is 

located at Docket Management Facility, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
63728 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian 

Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

e-mail: ian.dargin@faa.gov; telephone 

(781) 238–7178; fax (781) 238–7199. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send us any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposal. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2009–0162; Directorate Identifier 2004– 

NE–19–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 received 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:// 

www.regulations.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 the Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including, if provided, the name of the 

individual who sent the comment (or 

signed the comment on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review the DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19477–78). 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office 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 Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is the 

same as the Mail address provided in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

Discussion 

The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 with a proposed AD. The 

proposed AD applies to certain RB211– 

524 series turbofan engines. We 

published the proposed AD in the 

Federal Register on March 2, 2009 (74 

FR 9050). That action proposed to 

require: 

• Initial and repetitive borescope 

inspections of the combustion liner 

head section and meterpanel assembly 

of the combustion liner and, if 

necessary, replacement. 

• Reduction of the inspection 

intervals of certain RB211–524 engine 

models that have not been repaired to 

RR Field Repair Scheme FRS5367/B, 

and 

• A mandatory terminating action to 

the repetitive inspections. 

Since we issued that NPRM, we 

determined that we need to remove the 

P/Ns of the combustion chamber cases 

from paragraph (c) of the proposed AD. 

Because this proposed AD expands the 

population of engines affected by the 

proposed AD, this supplemental NPRM 

reopens the comment period. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD would affect 

18 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it would 

take about 2 work-hours per engine to 

perform the proposed actions, and that 

the average labor rate is $85 per workhour. No parts are required, so parts 

would cost $0. Based on these figures, 

we estimate the total cost of the AD to 

U.S. operators would be $3,060. 

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 AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

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 this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

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 summary of the costs 

to comply with this AD and placed it in 

the AD Docket. You may get a copy of 

this summary at the address listed 

under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

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 Amendment 39–13917 (70 FR 

680, January 5, 2005), and by adding a 

new airworthiness directive to read as 

follows: 

Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2009– 

0162; Directorate Identifier 2004–NE– 

19–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) action by 

December 17, 2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2004–26–05, 

Amendment 39–13917. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) 

engine models RB211–524B–02, –524B3–02 

engines and RB211–524B2, –524B4, –524C2, 

and –524D4 series engines with a front 

combustion liner assembly that incorporates 

RR Service Bulletin (SB) No. RB.211–72– 

7221 or RR SB No. RB.211–72–7998, but 

doesn’t incorporate RR SB No. RB.211–72– 

9670 or RR SB No. RB.211–72–9764, and 

engine models RB211–524G and –524H 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 63729 

series engines with a front combustion liner 

assembly that doesn’t incorporate RR SB No. 

RB.211–72–9764. These engines are installed 

on, but not limited to, Boeing 747 and 

Lockheed L1011 series airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from an inquiry 

submitted by an operator which resulted in 

RR performing a complete review of the 

affected front combustion liner part numbers. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent 

deterioration of the engine combustion liner, 

which can result in combustion liner 

breakup, case burn-through, engine fire, and 

damage to 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. 

Credit for Previous Inspections 

(f) Engine inspections previously made to 

RR Service Bulletin No. RB.211–72–B482, 

Revision 8, dated November 15, 2001, meet 

the requirements of this AD for the initial or 

repetitive inspections specified in paragraphs 

(g) through (g)(2) and (h) through (h)(4) of 

this AD. 

Inspections of Combustion Liner Head 

Sections—Not Previously Repaired 

(g) Borescope-inspect combustion liner 

head sections that have not been previously 

repaired. Use paragraphs 3.A.(1) through 

3.A.(5) of the Accomplishment Instructions 

of RR Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 

RB.211–72–AB482, Revision 9, dated July 28, 

2003, and the cycles-since-new (CSN), 

cycles-since-last inspection (CSLI), and 

cycles-in-service (CIS) compliance thresholds 

in Table 1 of this AD. 

TABLE 1—COMBUSTION LINER HEAD SECTION—NOT PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(1) RB211–524C2, –524D4, 

–524G, and –524H.

Within 1,400 to 1,600 CSN .......... Within 200 CSLI ........................... Within 100 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(2) RB211–524B–02, –524B2, 

–524B3–02, and –524B4.

Within 3,000 to 3,200 CSN .......... Within 200 CSLI ........................... Within 200 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

Inspections of Combustion Liner Head 

Sections—Previously Repaired Using RR 

Field Repair Scheme FRS5367/B 

(h) If the combustion liner head section 

was previously repaired using RR Field 

Repair Scheme FRS5367/B, do the following: 

(1) Borescope-inspect combustion liner 

head sections. Use paragraphs 3.A.(1) 

through 3.A.(5) of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of RR ASB No. RB.211–72– 

AB482, Revision 9, dated July 28, 2003, and 

the cycles-since-last repair (CSLR), CSLI, and 

CIS compliance thresholds in Table 2 of this 

AD. 

(2) If all 18 struts on a combustion liner 

that is subject to RR ASB No. RB.211–72– 

AB482, Revision 9, dated July 28, 2003, were 

repaired using the nicrobraze repair specified 

in RR Field Repair Scheme FRS5367, that 

repair is equivalent to compliance with RR 

Field Repair Scheme FRS5367/B. Borescopeinspect the combustion liner as specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) of this AD. 

TABLE 2—COMBUSTION LINER HEAD SECTION—PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED USING RR FIELD REPAIR SCHEME FRS5367/B 

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(3) RB211–524C2, –524D4, 

–524G, and –524H.

Within 1,800 to 2,200 CSLR ........ Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 200 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(4) RB211–524B–02, –524B2, 

–524B3–02, and –524B4.

Within 3,000 to 3,200 CSLR ........ Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 200 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

Inspections of Combustion Liner Head 

Sections That Have Been Repaired But Did 

Not Use RR Field Repair Scheme FRS5367/ 

B 

(i) For engines that have a combustion liner 

head section repaired using a method other 

than RR Field Repair Scheme FRS5367/B, do 

the following: 

(1) Borescope-inspect combustion liner 

head section. Use paragraphs 3.A.(1) through 

3.A.(5) of the Accomplishment Instructions 

of RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AB482, Revision 

9, dated July 28, 2003, and the CSLR, CSLI, 

and CIS compliance thresholds in Table 3 of 

this AD. 

TABLE 3—COMBUSTION LINER HEAD SECTION—REPAIRED, BUT DID NOT USE RR FIELD REPAIR SCHEME FRS5367/B 

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(2) RB211–524C2, –524D4, 

–524G, and –524H.

Within 500 to 700 CSLR .............. Within 200 CSLI ........................... Within 100 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(3) RB211–524B–02, –524B2, 

–524B3–02, and –524B4.

Within 2,000 to 2,200 CSLR ........ Within 200 CSLI ........................... Within 200 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(4) Head sections repaired by replacement 

of all 18 struts using RR Field Repair Scheme 

FRS6548 are considered as equivalent to 

fitting a new head section for inspection 

purposes. Borescope-inspect the combustion 

liner as specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this 

AD. 

Inspections of Meterpanel Assemblies—Not 

Repaired 

(j) Borescope-inspect meterpanel 

assemblies that incorporate SB No. RB.211– 

72–7998, that have not been previously 

repaired. Use paragraphs 3.B.(1) through 

3.B.(7) of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AB482, Revision 9, 

dated July 28, 2003, and the CSN, CSLI, and 

CIS compliance thresholds in Table 4 of this 

AD. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
63730 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 4—METERPANEL ASSEMBLY—NOT REPAIRED

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(1) RB211–524D4, –524G, and 

–524H.

Within 1,000 to 1,200 CSN .......... Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 50 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(2) RB211–524D4, –524G, and 

–524H that have not used 

RB211–524H ratings at any time.

Within 1,800 to 2,000 CSN .......... Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 50 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

Inspections of Meterpanel Assemblies— 

Repaired 

(k) For meterpanel assemblies that 

incorporate SB No. RB.211–72–7998, and 

have been repaired previously, do the 

following: 

(1) Borescope-inspect meterpanel 

assemblies that have been previously 

repaired. Use paragraphs 3.B.(1) through 

3.B.(7) of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AB482, Revision 9, 

dated July 28, 2003, and the CSLR, CSLI, and 

CIS compliance thresholds in Table 5 of this 

AD. 

TABLE 5—METERPANEL ASSEMBLY—REPAIRED

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(2) RB211–524D4, –524G, and 

–524H.

Within 500 to 700 CSLR .............. Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 50 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

Reject Parts 

(l) Replace parts that exceed the acceptance 

criteria. Information about the acceptance 

criteria can be found in the Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual, 72–00–00, Inspection/ 

Check. 

Mandatory Terminating Action 

(m) Replace the front combustion liner 

assembly with a front combustion liner not 

affected by this AD at the next shop visit. 

(n) For RB211–524B02, –524B2, –524B3– 

02, –524B4–02, –524C2 and –524D4 engines, 

replacing the front combustion liner 

assembly with a front combustion liner 

assembly that incorporates the modifications 

in RR SB No. RB.211–72–9670, Original 

Issue, dated August 27, 1993; or RR SB No. 

RB.211–72–9764, Revision 3, dated January 

16, 1998, constitutes terminating action to 

the repetitive inspections in paragraphs (g), 

(h), (i), (j), and (k), of this AD. 

(o) For RB211–524G and –524H engines, 

replacing the front combustion liner 

assembly with a front combustion liner 

assembly that incorporates the modifications 

in RR SB No. RB.211–72–9764, Revision 3, 

dated January 16, 1998, constitutes 

terminating action to the repetitive 

inspections in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j), and 

(k) of this AD. 

Definition of Shop Visit 

(p) For the purpose of this AD, a shop visit 

is any time that the 04 module is removed 

for repair or overhaul. 

Related Information 

(q) Contact Ian Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

e-mail: ian.dargin@faa.gov; telephone (781) 

238–7178; fax (781) 238–7199, for more 

information about this AD. 

(r) Rolls-Royce ASB No. RB.211–72– 

AB482, Revision 9, dated July 28, 2003; SB 

No. RB.211–72–9764, Revision 3, dated 

January 16, 1998; and SB No. RB.211–72– 

9670, Original Issue, dated August 27, 1993, 

pertain to the subject of this AD. Contact 

Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31, Derby, DE24 

8BJ, United Kingdom; telephone: 011–44– 

1332–242424; fax: 011–44–1332–249936, for 

a copy of this service information. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 6, 2010. 

Diane S. Romanosky, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26115 Filed 10–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0529; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–ANM–3] 

Proposed Establishment of Class E 

Airspace; Panguitch, UT 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM). 

SUMMARY: This supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking would expand 

controlled Class E airspace to include a 

portion extending upward from 1,200 

feet above the surface at Panguitch 

Municipal Airport, Panguitch, UT. In an 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register June 28, 2010, the FAA 

proposed to establish controlled 

airspace from 700 feet above the surface. 

The FAA has reassessed the proposal to 

include Class E airspace 700 feet and 

1,200 feet above the surface to further 

the safety and management of 

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations 

at the airport. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; 

telephone (202) 366–9826. You must 

identify FAA Docket No. FAA–2010– 

0529; Airspace Docket No. 10–ANM–3, 

at the beginning of your comments. You 

may also submit comments through the 

Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Operations Support 

Group, Western Service Center, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; 

telephone (425) 203–4537. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On June 28, 2010, the FAA published 

a NPRM to establish Class E airspace 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface, at Panguitch 

Municipal Airport, Panguitch, UT (75 

FR 36585). The comment period closed 

August 12, 2010. Two comments were 

received. 

One commenter recommended 

establishing Class E surface airspace at 

Panguitch Municipal Airport. The FAA 

does not agree. There is no ATC 

communications down to the surface at 

the airport; therefore, the airport does 

not meet the requirements of Class E 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS