Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 53743 

No Reporting Required 

(k) Although the service bulletins 

referenced in this AD specify to submit 

certain information to the manufacturer, 

this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(l) The Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(m) French airworthiness directive F–

2005–084, dated May 25, 2005, also 

addresses the subject of this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

24, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–17980 Filed 9–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22383; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–102–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–

300, 747–400, and 747–400D Series 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 

747–300, 747–400, and 747–400D series 

airplanes; and Model 747–200B series 

airplanes having a stretched upper deck. 

This proposed AD would require 

repetitively inspecting for cracking or 

discrepancies of the fasteners in the 

tension ties, shear webs, and frames at 

body stations 1120 through 1220, and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions if necessary. This proposed AD 

results from new reports of severed 

tension ties, as well as numerous reports 

of cracked tension ties, broken fasteners, 

and cracks in the frame, shear web, and 

shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the 

upper deck. We are proposing this AD 

to detect and correct cracking of the 

tension ties, shear webs, and frames of 

the upper deck, which could result in 

rapid decompression of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 27, 2005. 

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. 

• 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. 

Contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207, for the service 

information identified in this proposed 

AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan 

Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6437; 

fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Include the 

docket number ‘‘FAA–2005–22383; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–102–

AD’’ at the beginning 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:// 

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 may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you may visit http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the Docket 

You may 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 Docket 

Management System receives them. 

Discussion 

We previously issued AD 2005–05–

08, amendment 39–13997 (70 FR 12113, 

March 11, 2005). That AD applies to 

certain Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 

–300, –400, and –400D series airplanes. 

That AD requires a one-time inspection 

for discrepancies of the fuselage frame 

to tension tie joints at body stations (BS) 

1120 through 1220, and to determine if 

steel splice plates are installed on the 

fuselage frames, and related 

investigative and corrective actions. 

That AD was prompted by reports of 

severed tension ties found at the 

fuselage frame joints at BS 1120 and 

1140. These severed tension ties 

resulted from fatigue cracking due to an 

incorrect configuration (installation of 

aluminum splice plates instead of steel 

splice plates during the manufacturing 

process). 

Since we issued AD 2005–05–08, we 

have received additional reports of 

severed tension ties. While these 

severed tension ties were also attributed 

to fatigue, the tension ties in these cases 

were properly configured according to 

the applicable Boeing Engineering 

Drawings. We have also received 

numerous reports of fatigue cracking of 

tension ties, as well as broken fasteners 

and cracks in the frame and shear ties 

adjacent to tension ties for the upper 

deck between BS 1120 and 1220. Also, 

we have received reports of cracking in 

the shear web between the BS 1120 and 

BS 1140 tension ties. Cracking of the 

tension ties, shear webs, and frames of 

the upper deck; if not corrected; could 

result in rapid decompression of the 

airplane. 

Certain Boeing 747–200B series 

airplanes have been modified under a 

certain Boeing-owned supplemental 

type certificate to include a stretched 

upper deck (SUD). These airplanes 

53744 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

would also be subject to the same unsafe 

condition revealed on Boeing Model 

747–100B SUD, –300, –400, and –400D 

series airplanes. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated 

April 21, 2005. The service bulletin 

describes procedures for repetitive 

‘‘Stage 1’’ and ‘‘Stage 2’’ inspections for 

cracking or discrepancies of the 

fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, 

and frames at body stations 1120 

through 1220; and related investigative 

and corrective actions if necessary. 

The procedures for Stage 1 

inspections involve the following 

inspections to detect cracking or broken, 

loose, or missing fasteners: 

• A detailed inspection of the tension 

ties and steel plates from BS 1120 

through BS 1220. 

• A detailed inspection of the shear 

web components that attach to the BS 

1120 and 1140 tension ties. 

• A detailed inspection of each frame 

from two stringers above to two 

stringers below the tension ties from BS 

1120 through BS 1220. 

If no severed tension tie is found 

during a Stage 1 inspection, but a crack 

is found in a tension tie, steel plate, 

shear web component, or frame; or a 

broken, loose, or missing fastener is 

found; the service bulletin specifies 

doing a ‘‘Structure Repair,’’ which 

includes further investigative actions. 

Procedures for the Structure Repair 

include removing fasteners, performing 

open-hole high frequency eddy current 

(HFEC) inspections for cracking, 

repairing any cracking, and installing 

new fasteners, as applicable. For 

repairing certain conditions, the service 

bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for 

instructions. 

If a severed tension tie is found 

during a Stage 1 inspection, the service 

bulletin specifies further investigative 

actions that involve removing certain 

fasteners and steel plates, and doing 

additional open-hole HFEC inspections 

and detailed inspections of certain 

fastener holes, adjacent tension ties, the 

frame web, the frame inner chord, the 

fail-safe chord, shear ties, and fasteners 

to detect cracking or broken, loose, or 

missing fasteners. The service bulletin 

specifies to contact Boeing for 

instructions for repairing the severed 

tension tie, and doing the Structure 

Repair described previously for any 

other cracks or broken, loose, or missing 

fasteners. 

Stage 2 inspections are more intensive 

inspections than Stage 1 inspections 

and are intended for airplanes with a 

higher number of total flight cycles. 

Accomplishing the initial Stage 2 

inspection eliminates the need for the 

Stage 1 inspections. The procedures for 

Stage 2 inspections involve the 

following actions: 

• Removing certain fasteners and 

steel plates and performing open-hole 

HFEC inspections for cracking of the 

fastener holes in the tension ties, 

frames, and steel plates. 

• Performing surface HFEC 

inspections for cracking around other 

fastener locations and in other areas of 

the tension ties. 

• Performing a detailed inspection of 

each entire tension tie and the attaching 

fasteners to detect cracking or broken, 

loose, or missing fasteners. 

• Performing a detailed inspection of 

the shear web components that attach to 

the tension ties to detect cracking or 

broken, loose, or missing fasteners. 

• Performing a detailed inspection of 

each frame from two stringers above to 

two stringers below the tension ties to 

detect cracking or broken, loose, or 

missing fasteners. 

• Performing an open-hole HFEC 

inspection for cracking of any frame at 

which an insulation blanket stud goes 

through a hole in the frame. 

If no tension tie is found severed 

during a Stage 2 inspection, but a crack 

is found in a tension tie, steel plate, 

shear web component, or frame; or a 

broken, loose, or missing fastener is 

found; the service bulletin specifies 

doing the Structure Repair, and 

installing steel plates and new fasteners. 

If a severed tension tie is found 

during a Stage 2 inspection, the service 

bulletin specifies further investigative 

actions that involve removing certain 

fasteners and steel plates, and doing 

additional detailed inspections of the 

frame common to the severed tension 

tie; including the frame web, frame 

inner chord, fail-safe chord, shear ties, 

and fasteners; to detect cracking or 

broken, loose, or missing fasteners. The 

service bulletin specifies to contact 

Boeing for instructions for repairing the 

severed tension tie; and doing the 

Structure Repair for any other crack or 

broken, loose, or missing fasteners. 

As part of the procedures for the 

Structure Repair, the service bulletin 

describes procedures for an ‘‘Oversize 

Hole Repair,’’ which may be used to 

repair a crack found in a fastener hole. 

The procedures for the Oversize Hole 

Repair include oversizing the hole to 

remove the crack, doing an open-hole 

HFEC inspection to make sure the crack 

has been removed, repeating the 

oversizing until the crack is removed, 

and installing new fasteners. The 

service bulletin specifies contacting 

Boeing for instructions if cracking is 

outside specified limits. 

The service bulletin also specifies 

reporting findings from both Stage 1 and 

Stage 2 inspections to Boeing. 

Accomplishing the actions specified 

in the service information is intended to 

adequately address the unsafe 

condition. 

Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of the 

service bulletin specifies a compliance 

time for the initial Stage 1 inspection of 

8,000 total flight cycles, 1,500 flight 

cycles after the original issue date of the 

service bulletin, or 4,000 flight cycles 

after inspection in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2483, 

whichever is later. (AD 2005–05–08, 

described previously, requires 

inspections in accordance with Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53–2483, Revision 

1, dated August 28, 2003.) The 

repetitive interval for Stage 1 

inspections is 4,000 flight cycles. The 

service bulletin specifies that Stage 1 

inspections end when Stage 2 

inspections apply. The service bulletin 

specifies that the initial Stage 2 

inspection should be done before the 

accumulation of 16,000 total flight 

cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after 

the original issue date of the service 

bulletin, whichever is later. The service 

bulletin specifies a repetitive interval of 

3,000 flight cycles for the Stage 2 

inspections. 

Other Relevant Rulemaking 

We have previously issued AD 2004–

07–22, amendment 39–13566 (69 FR 

18250, April 7, 2004). That AD applies 

to all Boeing Model 747 series airplanes, 

and requires revising the FAA-approved 

maintenance or inspection program to 

include repetitive inspections for 

discrepancies of various structural 

significant items (SSIs); as listed in 

Boeing Document No. D6–35022, 

‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection 

Document (SSID),’’ Revision G, dated 

December 2000 (referred to after this as 

‘‘the SSID’’); and repair if necessary. 

The repetitive inspections of the tension 

ties that would be required by this 

proposed AD are approved as an 

alternative method of compliance for 

the inspections of SSI F–19A of the 

SSID, as required by paragraphs (c) and 

(d) of AD 2004–07–22. All other 

provisions of AD 2004–07–22 continue 

to apply. 

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. For this reason, we are 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 53745 

proposing this AD, which would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Bulletin.’’

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and Service Information 

The service bulletin specifies that you 

may contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require you to repair those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• Using a method that we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by an 

Authorized Representative for the 

Boeing Delegation Option Authorization 

Organization whom we have authorized 

to make those findings. 

The Accomplishment Instructions of 

the service bulletin specifies reporting 

inspection findings to Boeing. This 

proposed AD would not require that 

action. We do not need this information 

from operators. 

The service bulletin specifies a grace 

period relative to original issue date of 

the service bulletin; however, this 

proposed AD would require compliance 

before the specified compliance time 

after the effective date of this AD. 

These differences have been 

coordinated with the manufacturer. 

Clarification of Compliance Time for 

Stage 1 Inspections 

As explained previously, the 

referenced service bulletin specifies a 

compliance time for the Stage 1 

inspections of 8,000 total flight cycles, 

1,500 flight cycles after the original 

issue date of the service bulletin, or 

4,000 flight cycles after inspection in 

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53–2483, whichever is later. AD 

2005–05–08, described previously, 

requires accomplishment of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53–2483 for 

airplanes listed in that service bulletin. 

However, we find that this proposed AD 

would apply to certain airplanes not 

subject to AD 2005–05–08. Thus, we 

find that, for airplanes not subject to the 

inspection in Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53–2483, the applicable 

compliance time for the Stage 1 

inspections that would be required by 

this proposed AD is 8,000 total flight 

cycles, or 1,500 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever is 

later. We have added a statement to 

paragraph (f)(1) of this proposed AD to 

clarify this compliance time. 

Interim Action 

We consider this proposed AD 

interim action. The manufacturer is 

currently developing a modification that 

will address the unsafe condition 

identified in this AD. Once this 

modification is developed, approved, 

and available, we may consider 

additional rulemaking. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 622 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

The following table provides the 

estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD. 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work hours 

Average 

labor rate 

per hour 

Cost per airplane 

Number of 

U.S.-registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

Stage 1 Inspection, per inspection cycle *.19 $65 $1,235, per inspection cycle ..... 76 $93,860, per inspection cycle.* 

Stage 2 Inspection, per inspection cycle.83 65 $5,395, per inspection cycle ..... 76 $410,020, per inspection cycle. 

* Completing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the repetitive Stage 1 inspections. 

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); 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 and placed it in the 

AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

53746 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2005–22383; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–102–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by October 27, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) Accomplishing the requirements of 

paragraph (f) of this AD terminates the 

corresponding inspection requirements for 

the upper deck tension tie as required by 

paragraphs (c) and (d) of AD 2004–07–22, 

amendment 39–13566, as those paragraphs 

apply to inspections of SSI F–19A, as 

identified in Boeing Document No. D6–

35022, ‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection 

Document,’’ Revision G, dated December 

2000. All other requirements of AD 2004–07–

22 continue to apply. 

Applicability: (c) This AD applies to 

Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 747–300, 747–

400, and 747–400D series airplanes; and 

Model 747–200 series airplanes having a 

stretched upper deck; certificated in any 

category; as identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated April 

21, 2005. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from new reports of 

severed tension ties, as well as numerous 

reports of cracked tension ties, broken 

fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web, 

and shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the 

upper deck. We are issuing this AD to detect 

and correct cracking of the tension ties, shear 

webs, and frames of the upper deck, which 

could result in rapid decompression of 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. 

Repetitive Inspections and Corrective 

Actions 

(f) Do repetitive detailed and high 

frequency eddy current inspections, as 

applicable, for cracking or discrepancies of 

the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, 

and frames at body stations 1120 through 

1220, and related investigative and corrective 

actions as applicable, by doing all actions in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, except 

as provided by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this 

AD. Do the initial and repetitive Stage 1 and 

Stage 2 inspections at the applicable times 

specified in Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

the service bulletin, except as provided by 

paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD. 

Any applicable investigative and corrective 

actions must be done before further flight. 

Doing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the 

repetitive Stage 1 inspections. 

(1) For any airplane not identified in and 

subject to inspections in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2483: Do the 

initial Stage 1 inspection in accordance with 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507 

before the accumulation of 8,000 total flight 

cycles, or within 1,500 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever is later. 

(2) Where Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

the service bulletin specifies a compliance 

time relative to the original issue date of the 

service bulletin, this AD requires compliance 

before the specified compliance time after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(3) For any airplane that reaches the 

applicable compliance time for the initial 

Stage 2 inspection (as specified in Table 1, 

Compliance Recommendations, under 

paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin) before 

reaching the applicable compliance time for 

the initial Stage 1 inspection: Doing the 

initial Stage 2 inspection eliminates the need 

to do the Stage 1 inspection. 

Exception to Corrective Action Instructions 

(g) If any discrepancy; including but not 

limited to cracking, or broken, loose, or 

missing fasteners; is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated 

April 21, 2005, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action: Before further flight, 

repair the discrepancy using a method 

approved in accordance with paragraph (i) of 

this AD. 

No Reporting Requirement 

(h) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, specifies 

reporting inspection findings to the 

manufacturer, this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make those findings. For a repair method to 

be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

24, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–17979 Filed 9–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007;FRL–7966–6 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; VA; 

Redesignation of the City of 

Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, 

and Stafford County Ozone 

Nonattainment Area to Attainment and 

Approval of the Area’s Maintenance 

Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a redesignation request and a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. Virginia is requesting that the 

city of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania 

County, and Stafford County (the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area) be 

redesignated as attainment for the eighthour ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). The 

Commonwealth’s SIP revision 

establishes a maintenance plan for the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area that 

provides requirements for continued 

attainment of the eight-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the next 10 years. EPA is 

proposing approval of the redesignation 

request and revision to the Virginia SIP 

in accordance with the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Regional Material in 

EDocket (RME) ID Number R03–OAR–

2005–VA–0007 by one of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Agency Web site: http:// 

www.docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME, 

EPA’s electronic public docket and 

comment system, is EPA’s preferred 

method for receiving comments. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov. 

Mail: R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007, 

David Campbell, Chief, Air Quality 

Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

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

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and