[Federal Register: October 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 207)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 65987-65994]
[DOCID:fr27oc10-8]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9 and 721

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918; FRL-8846-8]
RIN 2070-AB27

1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-; Significant New Use Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a significant new use rule (SNUR) under section
5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for the chemical
substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (CAS No. 754-
12-1) which was the subject of premanufacture notice (PMN) P-07-601.
This action requires persons who intend to manufacture, import, or
process the chemical substance for a use that is designated as a
significant new use by this final rule to notify EPA at least 90 days
before commencing that activity. EPA believes that this action is
necessary because the chemical substance may be hazardous to human
health. The required notification would provide EPA with the
opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit
or limit that activity before it occurs.

DATES: This final rule is effective November 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation
are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566-0280. Docket visitors are required to show photographic
identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign the EPA visitor
log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and
subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must
be visible at all times in the building and returned upon departure.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-9232; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422

South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-
1404; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
import, process, or use the chemical substance contained in this final
rule: 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1).
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
    Manufacturers, importers, or processors of the subject chemical
substance (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing
and petroleum refineries.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Sec.  721.5. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing
import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical
importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import
certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127;
see also 19 CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the
shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules
and orders under TSCA. For importers of the chemical substance subject
to this SNUR those requirements include the SNUR. The EPA policy in
support of import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B.
In addition, any persons who export or intend to export the chemical
substance that is the subject of this final rule on or after November
26, 2010 are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA
section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see Sec.  [emsp14]721.20) and must
comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707,
subpart D.

II. Background

A. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is finalizing a SNUR under TSCA section 5(a)(2) for the
chemical substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN
P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; aka HFO-1234yf). This action requires
persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process the chemical
substance for an activity that is designated as a significant new use
by this final rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing
that activity.
    Previously, in the Federal Register of February 1, 2010 (75 FR
4983) (FRL-8438-4), EPA issued a direct final SNUR for the chemical
substance. However, EPA received notices of intent to submit adverse
comments on this SNUR. Therefore, as required by Sec.
721.170(d)(4)(i), in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16670) (FRL-8816-9), EPA withdrew the direct final SNUR on this
chemical substance and subsequently proposed a SNUR using notice and
comment procedures in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16706) (FRL-8818-2). More information on the chemical substance subject
to this final rule can be found in the direct final or proposed SNUR.
The record for the direct final and proposed SNUR on this chemical
substance was established in the docket under docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2008-0918. That docket includes information considered by the
Agency in developing the direct final rule and this final rule,
including comments on the proposed rule. The chemical substance
addressed under this final SNUR is also being reviewed under the Clean
Air Act (CAA) to determine whether it may be listed as an acceptable
substitute for CFC-12 in motor vehicle air conditioning systems. See
``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: New Substitute in the Motor
Vehicle Air Conditioning Sector under the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) Program'' (74 FR 53445, October 19, 2009) (FRL-8969-7).
    EPA received six comments on the proposed SNUR and two comments on
the original direct final SNUR. A full discussion of EPA's response to
these comments is included in Unit V. of this document. After
consideration of these comments, EPA is issuing a modified final rule
on the chemical substance that:
    1. Clarifies the significant new use provisions by organizing them
under the following paragraphs of Sec.  721.80:
     Section 721.80(j) (use other than as a refrigerant in
motor vehicle air conditioning systems in new passenger cars and
vehicles).
     Section 721.80(m) (commercial use other than in new
passenger cars and vehicles in which the charging of motor vehicle air
conditioning systems with the PMN substance was done by the motor
vehicle original equipment manufacturer (OEM)).
     Section 721.80(o) (distribution in commerce of products
intended for use by a consumer for the purpose of servicing,
maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN substance).
    2. Removes the following significant new use provisions:
     All servicing, maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN
substance will be done only by CAA section 609 certified technicians
using CAA section 609 certified refrigerant handling equipment.
     Uses in which the chemical substance will be sold or
distributed in other than 20-pound (net weight) containers or larger
(this significant new use is now encompassed by Sec.  721.80(o)).
    Furthermore, EPA has provided in the docket to this rule additional
human health information to supplement EPA's findings under Sec.
721.170(d)(3)(i) and EPA's findings in the proposed rule. See Unit IV.
of the proposed rule in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16706) for a discussion of EPA's findings.

B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to
determine that a use of a chemical substance is a ``significant new
use.'' EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all
relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA section 5(a)(2). Once
EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new
use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) requires persons to submit a significant
new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture,
import, or process the chemical substance for that use. Persons who
must report are described in Sec.  721.5.

C. Applicability of General Provisions

    General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping
requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability
of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the final
rule. Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700.
According to Sec.  721.1(c), persons subject to this SNUR must comply
with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as
submitters of PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In

particular, these requirements include the information submission
requirements of TSCA section 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the exemptions
authorized by TSCA section 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5), and the
regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA may take
regulatory action under TSCA section 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control the
activities for which it has received the SNUN. If EPA does not take
action, EPA is required under TSCA section 5(g) to explain in the
Federal Register its reasons for not taking action.
    Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C.
2612) import certification requirements promulgated in Customs and
Border Patrol regulations at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127; see also 19
CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the shipment of the
chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and orders under
TSCA. For importers of the chemical substance subject to this final
SNUR those requirements include the SNUR. The EPA policy in support of
import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In
addition, any persons who export or intend to export the chemical
substance identified in this final SNUR are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611 (b)) (see
Sec.  721.20) and must comply with the export notification requirements
in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

III. Rationale and Objectives of the Rule

A. Rationale

    During the review of the chemical substance PMN P-07-601--as
discussed in the proposed rule--based on test data on the PMN
substance, EPA identified health concerns for developmental toxicity
and lethality to workers and consumers if they were exposed to a
significant amount of the PMN substance via inhalation. EPA determined
that one or more of the criteria of concern established at Sec.
721.170 were met. EPA did not find that the use scenarios described in
the PMN triggered the determination set forth under section 5(e) of
TSCA. EPA did, however, determine that certain changes from the use
scenario described in the PMN could result in increased exposures,
thereby constituting a ``significant new use.'' EPA has determined that
activities proposed as a ``significant new use'' satisfy the two
requirements stipulated in Sec.  721.170(c)(2), i.e., these significant
new use activities: ``(i) Are different from those described in the
premanufacture notice for the substance, including any amendments,
deletions, and additions of activities to the premanufacture notice,
and (ii) may be accompanied by changes in exposure or release levels
that are significant in relation to the health or environmental
concerns identified'' for the PMN substance.

B. Objectives

    EPA is issuing this final SNUR for a chemical substance that has
undergone premanufacture review because the Agency wants to achieve the
following objectives with regard to the significant new uses designated
in this final rule:
     EPA will receive notice of any person's intent to
manufacture, import, or process a listed chemical substance for the
described significant new use before that activity begins.
     EPA will have an opportunity to review and evaluate data
submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing,
importing, or processing a listed chemical substance for the described
significant new use.
     EPA will be able to regulate prospective manufacturers,
importers, or processors of a listed chemical substance before the
described significant new use of that chemical substance occurs,
provided that regulation is warranted pursuant to TSCA sections 5(e),
5(f), 6, or 7.
    Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that
the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how
to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is
available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/
invntory.htm.

IV. Significant New Use Determination

    Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that EPA's determination that a use
of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after
consideration of all relevant factors, including:
     The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.
     The extent to which a use changes the type or form of
exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
     The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and
duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical
substance.
     The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of
manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a
chemical substance.
    In addition to these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2),
the statute authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
    To determine what would constitute a significant new use for HFO-
1234yf, EPA considered relevant information--in the docket and
discussed further in Unit V. of this document--about the toxicity of
the chemical substance, likely human exposures and environmental
releases associated with possible uses, taking into consideration the
four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in this unit, and the
regulations at Sec.  721.170 for issuing a SNUR after receipt of a PMN.

V. Response to Comments on Proposed SNUR on 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro-

    EPA received comments from a number of submitters on the proposed
rule for the chemical substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; aka HFO-1234yf). These
comments, many of which covered similar issues, have been grouped under
general headings. Many of the comments stated that EPA's risk
assessment for the PMN substance overstates both the potential hazards
of the chemical substance and the potential exposures from ``do-it-
yourself'' (DIY) consumer use, and uses a health effects endpoint from
a toxicity study that is inappropriate given the duration of exposure
that could result from DIY consumer use. These commenters evaluated
EPA's risk assessment and conducted their own quantitative risk
assessments for single, short-term exposure scenarios, using where
possible the same information and approach used in EPA's Risk
Assessment for the PMN Substance (Ref. 4). A discussion of the comments
received and the Agency's responses follows.

A. Risk Assessment: Toxicity

    Commenters stated that adverse health impacts from use of HFO-
1234yf under the conditions specified would not be expected for car
occupants, servicing personnel, or DIY consumers. The comments relate
to the choice of the point of departure (POD) for the Agency's risk
assessment of single-exposure (DIY consumers) use scenarios and to the
Agency's use of a Margin of Exposure (MOE), as opposed to Hazard Index
(HI), approach to evaluate the chemical substance.
    Comment: Why didn't the Agency use the 200,000 parts per million
(ppm) effect level from a 4-hour rat study on HFO-1234yf to select the
POD for the risk assessment?
    Response: This acute 4-hour exposure study in rats showed some lung
effects at approximately 200,000 ppm, the lowest exposure level in the
study.

Thus, EPA considers 200,000 ppm to be a LOAEL (low observed adverse
effect level). If a LOAEL were used in the risk assessment instead of a
NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level), EPA would use an uncertainty
factor to estimate a NOAEL, which would result in a lower POD than what
was used. Instead, EPA used the NOAEL for a subacute 14-day study on
the chemical substance as the endpoint, because the LOAEL from the
acute 4-hour study is an effect endpoint which is inappropriate for
developing safe exposure levels for humans. Some of the animals in the
4-hour acute study had grey, discolored lungs at both exposure levels
in the study, and EPA considered this an adverse effect. Therefore, EPA
could not determine a NOAEL from the acute 4-hour study. It is Agency
policy to use the NOAEL where available, because of greater assurance
of a ``safe'' level. Where only the LOAEL is available, that will be
used along with any necessary additional uncertainty factors. For
example, if EPA had started with the LOAEL of 200,000 ppm, it would
have required an additional MOE of 10 to estimate a NOAEL from a LOAEL,
for a total MOE of 300 instead of 30. This would have resulted in a
more conservative risk assessment than using the NOAEL from the 14-day
subacute study.
    Comment: Why didn't the Agency use the cardiac sensitization study
in dogs as the POD?
    Response: Cardiac sensitization studies are for very short
durations--on the order of 10 minutes--and they only address cardiac
sensitization. The PMN chemical does not induce cardiac sensitization.
EPA selected the acute POD from a multiple-exposure, two-week rat
inhalation study on the PMN substance, reasoning that if no effects
were seen in the duration of the study, then no effects would be seen
from a single exposure.
    Comment: Why did EPA use the MOE rather than HI approach for risk
assessment of HFO-1234yf?
    Response: Where available, it is EPA policy to use a NOAEL for the
POD. This is the highest exposure level that did not cause an adverse
health effect in a study. In this case, EPA selected the POD from an
animal (rat 2-week inhalation) study. Because animals may respond to
different exposure levels than humans, there is some uncertainty when
extrapolating from animals to humans. For this reason, an Uncertainty
Factor (UF) is applied when extrapolating from animals to humans--
typically a factor of 10 is used but, in this case, since there was a
reasonable estimate of the pharmacokinetic component of the
uncertainty, this UF was reduced to 3. An additional UF is applied to
account for variation in the human population response to a chemical
exposure--in this case, a UF of 10 was used. The two UFs give a
resultant UF of 30 to yield an acceptable level of health risk. EPA's
policy for review of new chemicals under TSCA is to divide the POD by
the exposure level to obtain the MOE. For this PMN substance, the
``acceptable level of health risk'' would be an MOE of 30 or greater.
    One commenter proposed dividing the estimated exposure to the PMN
chemical by the POD levels to obtain a HI. If the exposure is less than
the POD, the HI is <1 and this would be considered an ``acceptable
level of health risk.'' This HI approach, however, does not factor in
uncertainties about extrapolating from animal to human responses, nor
does it address variability within the human population with regard to
thresholds of response to chemical exposures. EPA has consistently
applied the MOE approach to PMN evaluations (and for other risk
assessments) in order to account for these uncertainties. This is the
rationale for EPA continuing to use the MOE approach for this chemical
substance.
    Perhaps most important to EPA's position on this final SNUR is that
EPA has uncertainties about using available single-exposure studies on
HFO-1234yf to determine the MOEs for different exposure scenarios. As a
result of concerns with these studies, EPA calculated single exposure
MOEs from the NOAEL in the 2-week inhalation toxicity study of the PMN
chemical in rats. There are some additional uncertainties in the single
exposure (acute) assessments because of the observation of lethality in
rabbit dams after multiple exposures in a developmental study to the
PMN substance. For these reasons, as mentioned in Unit IV. of the
proposed SNUR, EPA recommends a rabbit acute inhalation toxicity study
to address the question of whether pregnant rabbits would die from a
single exposure. Rabbits should be exposed for one hour, using the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 403 test
guideline. Pregnant rabbits should be exposed on gestational day 12
(this is within the time-frame that pregnant rabbits started dieing in
the developmental study).

B. Risk Assessment: Exposure

    Comment: Commenter stated that EPA's assessment, using the Gradient
Report (Ref. 6), overstates the potential exposures from consumer DIY
use of HFO-1234yf to refill MVAC systems. The commenter asserted that
EPA's methodology to estimate the exposure levels associated with the
DIY use greatly exaggerates the exposure that could be experienced in
actual use conditions. The specific exposure parameters that the
commenters questioned were assumptions regarding:
     Garage volume.
     Time the user spent under the hood during recharging
operations.
     The size of the space where any leaking gas would
disperse.
     The air exchange rate in a service area that should be
well-ventilated when the engine is running.
     Use of the refrigerant in a closed garage with no
ventilation.
     The amount of refrigerant used during recharge operations.
    During the comment period for the proposed SNUR, the PMN submitter
conducted a simulated vehicle service leak testing, using HFC-134a as a
surrogate, indicating that exposures from use of a 12-oz can during
consumer DIY use are below the Agency's level of concern for HFO-1234yf
(Ref. 7).
    Response: After reviewing the submitted consumer DIY use exposure
study, EPA responded with a list of clarifying questions (Ref. 5), to
which the PMN submitter subsequently responded (Ref. 8). Although the
PMN submitter's responses were helpful, EPA still has concerns about
potential exposures to consumers during DIY use and the inherent
toxicity of HFO-1234yf. Therefore, the Agency has decided to retain
requirements in the final rule for notification to the Agency prior to
distribution in commerce of products intended for use by DIY consumers,
while waiting for data from the acute inhalation toxicity study in
rabbits described in Unit V.A. With regards to exposure, the peak
concentration values from the submitted study are as high as 3% by
volume, equivalent to 30,000 ppm. These peaks appeared to occur in the
first one or two minutes of each emission. Accordingly, EPA would need
exposure data presented and averaged out over shorter Time Weighted
Averages (TWAs) than the 30 minutes currently in the study, because it
would appear that a number of these early exposure peaks could result
in TWA values that would result in MOEs less than the acceptable Agency
level of 30 (see Unit V.A.). This is important because the data on HFO-
1234yf are insufficient to differentiate whether the toxicity is due to
blood level alone from an acute exposure, is due to accumulated
exposure over time (area under the curve), or is due to some

combination of both. Since blood equilibrium levels are reached within
minutes, a high level of exposure in a short duration could result in
blood levels exceeding a threshold if the mode of action is due to
blood levels. Additional TWAs of 3, 5, and 10 minutes are recommended.
    The Agency's chief concern during its analysis of the submitted
exposure study, and generally when estimating potential consumer
exposure to HFO-1234yf, is that even if there is a low likelihood of
the types of exposure scenarios assessed in this study occurring, there
are estimates of 11 million DIY consumer recharging events per year in
the United States (Ref. 1) (this is not necessarily 11 million people
as some individuals recharge more than once). The Clodic survey
commissioned by the California Air Resources Board (Ref. 3) indicated
that 10% of DIY consumers released 100 g or more of refrigerant during
servicing, including 2% releasing more than 500 g, and another 15% of
DIY consumers released 50 to 100 g during servicing, due to faulty
recharging equipment and poor technique. Both these percentages and the
overall number of DIY consumer recharging events indicate that a
substantial number of events could have significant leaks. The Agency
recognizes that commenters have suggested, as an alternative to the
container size limitation contained in the proposed SNUR, that the
reductions in emissions and exposures can be accomplished by
restricting sales and use of all refrigerants to qualified technicians,
or by using DIY consumer containers and charging equipment that
minimize the potential for releases (e.g., having a resealable/leak
control device on all containers and using charging connection
equipment that has a quick coupler with a moving rod to open the low
pressure refrigerant valve on the vehicle). For example, CARB's
``Certification Procedures for Small Containers of Automotive
Refrigerant,'' effective March 10, 2010 (Ref. 2), mandates a self-
sealing valve with leakage rate in storage of <=3.0 g/yr, container
labeling requirements, and education materials requirements. However,
commenters provided insufficient information on these approaches for
EPA to assess whether, for HFO-1234yf, they would reduce exposures
during DIY consumer use and thus eliminate the potential toxicity risk.
Consequently, the Agency has removed the specific container size
limitation proposed as a significant new use, and replaced it with a
description that directly addresses the issue of potential exposure to
DIY consumers by clarifying that significant new use, found at 40 CFR
721.80(o) (``use in a consumer product''), as ``distribution in
commerce of products intended for use by a consumer for the purpose of
servicing, maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN substance.''
    Information on such techniques or equipment to minimize potential
exposures to DIY consumers should accompany any SNUN submitted in
response to this final SNUR that requests use of HFO-1234yf in DIY
consumer products. Other information submitted with such a SNUN should
include data that quantifies exposures for durations shorter than the
30-minute TWA presented in the exposure study submitted by the PMN
submitter, in particular, TWAs for 3 minutes, 5 minutes, and 10
minutes, in addition to 30 minutes.

C. CAA Section 609 Certification

    Comment: One commenter stated that the training and equipment
requirements currently in CAA section 609 relative to other
refrigerants would not be necessary for environmentally safe usage of
HFO-1234yf during initial charging in an automobile assembly plant. The
commenter stated that a CAA section 609 certification is not currently
required for automobile assembly plants workers or equipment;
manufacturers perform their own training programs; and Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements for handling
flammable substances already fully address the flammability-related
HFO-1234yf worker safety issues in automobile assembly facilities.
    Response: EPA recognizes that the requirements for certification
contained in CAA section 609 are reserved only for the MVAC servicing
sector, i.e., ``service for consideration,'' which includes technicians
or mechanics being paid either with cash, credit, goods, or services
when they perform a service in a vehicle involving a refrigerant in an
air conditioning system (40 CFR 82.32 (g)).
    The following scenarios are not covered under CAA section 609:
     Initial charge of an MVAC by OEMs.
     The action of disposing or disassembling an MVAC in a
disposal facility in accordance with 40 CFR 82.152 and 40 CFR 82.156
(f). The action of extracting or recovering refrigerant from an MVAC at
a disposal facility does not require CAA section 608 or 609
certification (40 CFR 82.34 (d)); however, such processing does require
the use of an approved refrigerant handling equipment meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 82.36 (i.e., CAA section 609 equipment).
     Servicing on gratitude (service done for free). For
example, a DIY individual if not being paid with cash, credits, goods,
or service would not be covered under CAA section 609 requirements.
    Furthermore, intentionally venting any refrigerant is prohibited
under section 608 of the CAA and under 40 CFR 82.154 (a)(1).
    EPA expects, in accordance with 40 CFR 82.34, that all servicing
and maintenance of the MVAC involving the PMN substance will be done
only by CAA section 609-certified technicians using CAA section 609-
certified refrigerant handling equipment, and that extraction or
recovery of the PMN substance from MVAC bound for disposal and located
at a motor vehicle disposal facility will be done with CAA section 609-
approved refrigerant recovery equipment. In 2011, EPA expects to
propose regulations under CAA section 609 that specifically address
requirements for servicing using HFO-1234yf (e.g., certification of
refrigerant handling equipment). EPA also expects that during initial
charging by OEM, general industry requirements under OSHA 29 CFR 1910
for personal protective equipment, training and other measures for
working with chemicals that may pose risks to their health and safety,
are already applicable and any further restrictions under this final
SNUR would be redundant and unnecessary.
    Therefore, EPA agrees with the commenter and has modified the
relevant language in the regulatory text of the proposed rule to remove
specific references to the CAA section 609 certification.

D. Use of HFO-1234yf as a Delivery Agent

    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that HFC-134a refrigerant
has been used to deliver chemicals into MVAC systems for the advertised
purpose of increasing system-cooling performance and/or injecting oil,
trace dyes, sealants to stop refrigerant system leakage, etc. The
commenter requests that EPA not allow use of HFO-1234yf as transfer/
delivery agent for such purposes. Another commenter requested that HFO-
1234yf not be allowed for this use due to health concerns.
    Response: Prior to marketing HFO-1234yf as a delivery agent, a
person would need to submit notices to EPA under both the CAA SNAP
program and under TSCA. If a person plans to market HFO-1234yf as a
``delivery agent'' in cans, rather than as a refrigerant for MVAC, then
they must submit a SNAP

information notice to EPA for use of HFO-1234yf as an aerosol
propellant. Under the SNAP program, the person would be allowed to
market HFO-1234yf as an aerosol propellant 90 days after submission of
a complete notice. Similarly, under the SNUR, that person would also
need to submit a SNUN 90 days before engaging in a use other than as a
refrigerant in MVAC, such as a delivery agent. In many cases, EPA
responds to a SNUN by amending the SNUR to allow companies other than
the SNUN submitter (such as the submitter's processor customers) to
engage in the newly approved use(s).

VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses Occurring Before Effective Date of
the Final Rule

    As discussed in the Federal Register of April 24, 1990 (55 FR
17376), EPA has decided that the intent of TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is
best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the
date of publication of the proposed SNUR rather than as of the
effective date of the final rule. If uses begun after publication were
considered ongoing, rather than new, it would be difficult for EPA to
establish SNUR notice requirements because a person could defeat the
SNUR by initiating the proposed significant new use before the rule
became effective, and then argue that the use was ongoing as of the
effective date of the final rule.
    Any person who began commercial manufacture, import, or processing
of 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; aka
HFO-1234yf) for any of the significant new uses designated in the
proposed SNUR after the date of publication of the proposed SNUR must
stop that activity before the effective date of this final rule.
Persons who ceased those activities will have to meet all SNUR notice
requirements and wait until the end of the notification review period,
including all extensions, before engaging in any activities designated
as significant new uses. If, however, persons who began manufacture,
import, or processing of the chemical substance between the date of
publication of the proposed SNUR and the effective date of this final
SNUR meet the conditions of advance compliance as codified at Sec.
721.45(h), those persons would be considered to have met the final SNUR
requirements for those activities.

VII. Test Data and Other Information

    EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require the development
of any particular test data before submission of a SNUN. There are two
exceptions:
    1. Development of test data is required where the chemical
substance subject to the SNUR is also subject to a test rule under TSCA
section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)).
    2. Development of test data may be necessary where the chemical
substance has been listed under TSCA section 5(b)(4) (see TSCA section
5(b)(2)).
    In the absence of a section 4 test rule or a section 5(b)(4)
listing covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to
submit test data in their possession or control and to describe any
other data known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see 40 CFR
720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the
authority to require appropriate testing. In this case, EPA recommends
a rabbit acute inhalation toxicity study to address human health
concerns. EPA strongly encourages persons, before performing any
testing, to consult with the Agency pertaining to protocol selection.
The OECD test guidelines are available from the OECD Bookshop at http:/
/www.oecdbookshop.org or SourceOECD at http://www.sourceoecd.org.
    The recommended tests may not be the only means of addressing the
potential risks of the chemical substance. However, SNUNs submitted
without any test data may increase the likelihood that EPA will respond
by taking action under TSCA section 5(e), particularly if satisfactory
test results have not been obtained from a prior PMN or SNUN submitter.
EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough
so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate tests.
    SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to
evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:
     Human exposure and environmental release that may result
from the significant new use of the chemical substance.
     Potential benefits of the chemical substance.
     Information on risks posed by the chemical substance
compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.

VIII. SNUN Submissions

    As stated in Unit II.C. of this document, according to Sec.
[emsp14]721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same
notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting
a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental
effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs must be submitted to EPA
on EPA Form No. 7710-25 in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Sec.  [emsp14]721.25 and Sec.  [emsp14]720.40. This form is available
from the Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. Forms and information are also
available on-line at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.

IX. Economic Analysis

    EPA evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN requirements
for potential manufacturers, importers, and processors of the chemical
substance during the development of the direct final rule. The Agency's
complete Economic Analysis is available in the docket under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918.

X. References

    The following is a listing of those documents used to prepare the
preamble to this final rule. Additional information for this final rule
can be located under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918, which is
available for inspection as specified under ADDRESSES.
    1. CARB 2008. Technical Support Document Staff Analysis on
Emissions and Economic Impact of Proposed Regulation for Small
Containers of Automotive Refrigerant. Appendix G to CARB, 2010 (Ref.
2).
    2. CARB 2010. Certification Procedures for Small Containers of
Automotive Refrigerant. California Air Resources Board, effective March
10, 2010. Document incorporated by reference in California Code of
Regulations (CCR), title 17, sections 95360 through 9537. Available on-
line at http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/hfc09/hfc09.htm.
    3. Clodic et al. 2008. Clodic, D, Tremoulet, A, Riachi, Y, et al.
Evaluation of the Potential Impact of Emissions of HFC-134a from Non
Professional Servicing of Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Systems.
Prepared under CARB Agreement No. 06-341. December 2008.
    4. EPA 2009. Risk Assessment: PMN 07-0601; Reflecting Deliberations
and Decisions From the 03/04/09 RAD Dispo. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2008-0918-0034.
    5. EPA 2010. EPA Questions to Honeywell on Submitted Exposure
Study. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918.
    6. Gradient 2009. Risk Assessment for Alternative Refrigerant HFO-
1234yf. Gradient Corporation, Seattle, Washington. April 3, 2009.
Prepared for SAE International, Cooperative Research Program 1234.

    7. Honeywell 2010a. Comment on EPA Proposed Rule. Simulated Vehicle
Service Leak Testing and Exposure Study. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2008-0918-0088.
    8. Honeywell 2010b. Honeywell Response to EPA Questions on
Submitted Exposure Study. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918.

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

    This final rule establishes a SNUR for a chemical substance that
was the subject of a PMN. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. EPA is amending the table
in 40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB approval number for the information
collection requirements contained in this final rule. This listing of
the OMB control numbers and their subsequent codification in the CFR
satisfies the display requirements of PRA and OMB's implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. This Information Collection Request
(ICR) was previously subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB
approval, and given the technical nature of the table, EPA finds that
further notice and comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA
finds that there is ``good cause'' under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), to amend this
table without further notice and comment.
    The information collection requirements related to this action have
already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number
2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action does not impose any burden
requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN
to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and
170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed
to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and
maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required
SNUN.
    Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including
through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director,
Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information
(2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control
number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to
this address.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that promulgation
of this SNUR will not have a significant adverse economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The rationale supporting this
conclusion is discussed in this unit. The requirement to submit a SNUN
applies to any person (including small or large entities) who intends
to engage in any activity described in the final rule as a
``significant new use.'' Because these uses are ``new,'' based on all
information currently available to EPA, it appears that no small or
large entities presently engage in such activities. A SNUR requires
that any person who intends to engage in such activity in the future
must first notify EPA by submitting a SNUN. Although some small
entities may decide to pursue a significant new use in the future, EPA
cannot presently determine how many, if any, there may be. However,
EPA's experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of
over 1,400 SNURs, the Agency receives on average only 5 notices per
year. Of those SNUNs submitted from 2006-2008, only one appears to be
from a small entity. In addition, the estimated reporting cost for
submission of a SNUN (see Unit IX.) is minimal regardless of the size
of the firm. Therefore, EPA believes that the potential economic
impacts of complying with these SNURs are not expected to be
significant or adversely impact a substantial number of small entities.
In a SNUR that published in the Federal Register of June 2, 1997 (62 FR
29684) (FRL-5597-1), the Agency presented its general determination
that final SNURs are not expected to have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, which was provided to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs,
State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these
rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any
State, local, or Tribal government will be impacted by this final rule.
As such, EPA has determined that this rule does not impose any
enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any
affect on small governments subject to the requirements of sections
202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).

E. Executive Order 13132

    This action will not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

F. Executive Order 13175

    This final rule does not have Tribal implications because it is not
expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This does
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal
governments, nor does it involve or impose any requirements that affect
Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this final rule.

G. Executive Order 13045

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
this action does not address environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.

H. Executive Order 13211

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action
is not expected to affect energy supply,

distribution, or use and because this action is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    In addition, since this action does not involve any technical
standards, section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.

J. Executive Order 12898

    This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled
Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

XII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 9

    Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 721

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 14, 2010.
Wendy C. Hamnett,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR parts 9 and 721 are amended as follows:

PART 9--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330,
1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g,
300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2,
300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542,
9601-9657, 11023, 11048.

0
2. The table in Sec.  [emsp14]9.1 is amended by adding the following
section in numerical order under the undesignated center heading
``Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances'' to read as follows:

Sec.  [emsp14]9.1  OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   40 CFR Citation                      OMB Control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
721.10182............................................          2070-0012

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 721--[AMENDED]

0
3. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).

0
4. Add Sec.  [emsp14]721.10182 to subpart E to read as follows:

Sec.  721.10182  1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-.

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as 1-propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; also known as HFO-1234yf)
is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (2) The significant new uses are:
    (i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements
as specified in Sec.  721.80(j) (use other than as a refrigerant in
motor vehicle air conditioning systems in new passenger cars and
vehicles (i.e., as defined in 40 CFR 82.32 (c) and (d)); Sec.  721.80
(m) (commercial use other than in new passenger cars and vehicles in
which the charging of motor vehicle air conditioning systems with the
PMN substance was done by the motor vehicle original equipment
manufacturer (OEM)); and Sec.  721.80(o) (distribution in commerce of
products intended for use by a consumer for the purpose of servicing,
maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN substance).
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph.
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125 (a), (b), (c), and (i) are applicable to manufacturers,
importers, and processors of this chemical substance.
    (2) Limitations or revocation of certain notification requirements.
The provisions of Sec.  721.185 apply to this section.

[FR Doc. 2010-27166 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 83073]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28093]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP21-308-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate--CNG Amended
NRA 510796 to be effective 12/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20201214-5065.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/28/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 15, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28093 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 143 (Thursday, July 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 44946]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17900]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1078-000.
    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.
    Description: 2013 Cash Out Refund Report for Dauphin Island
Gathering Partners.
    Filed Date: 7/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130717-5005.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1079-000.
    Applicants: Energy West Development, Inc.
    Description: FT and IT rates to be effective 10/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 7/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130717-5101.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1081-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: NJR Energy Negotiated Rate to be effective 7/17/2013.
    Filed Date: 7/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130717-5193.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1082-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Termination of Rate Schedules X-62 and X-121 to be
effective 10/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 7/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130717-5239.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1083-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits
tariff filing per 154.204: Renaissance Trading Negotiated Rate to be
effective 7/17/2013.
    Filed Date: 7/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130717-5256.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1084-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits
tariff filing per 154.204: Macquarie Negotiated Rate to be effective 7/
17/2013.
    Filed Date: 7/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130717-5295.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 18, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-17900 Filed 7-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


including 29 CFR 1910, subpart L,
                                                                                sections 1910.160 and 1910.162.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-25167 Filed 11-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6554-6555]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02303]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-31440]

Notice of Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940

January 30, 2015.
    The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under
section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of
January 2015. A copy of each application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. An order granting each
application will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing on any application by writing to the
SEC's Secretary at the address below and serving the relevant applicant
with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests
should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on February 24, 2015, and
should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of
an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to
Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: The Commission: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane L. Titus at<PHONE_NUMBER>, SEC,
Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-8010.

BlackRock Real Asset Equity Trust [File No. 811-21931]

BlackRock EcoSolutions Investment Trust [File No. 811-22082]

    Summary: Each applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased
to be an investment company. Applicants transferred their assets to
BlackRock Resources & Commodities Strategy Trust, and on December 8,
2014, made distributions to their shareholders based on net asset
value. Expenses of approximately $514,070 and $302,964, respectively,
incurred in connection with the reorganizations were paid by
applicants.
    Filing Date: The applications were filed on December 29, 2014.
    Applicants' Address: 100 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809.

BlackRock Dividend Income Trust [File No. 811-21522]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant
transferred its assets to BlackRock Enhanced Equity Dividend Trust, and
on December 8, 2014, made distributions to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of approximately $236,695 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on December 29, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: 1000 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809.

American Municipal Income Portfolio Inc. [File No. 811-7678]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant
transferred its assets to Nuveen Investment Quality Municipal Fund,
Inc., and on October 22, 2014, made distributions to its shareholders
based on net asset value. Expenses of $356,054 incurred in connection
with the reorganization were paid by the investment advisers of
applicant and the acquiring fund, or their affiliates.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on December 22, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: 800 Nicollet Mall, BC-MN-H04N, Minneapolis, MN
55402.

American Strategic Income Portfolio Inc. III [File No. 811-7444]

American Select Portfolio Inc. [File No. 811-7838]

    Summary: Each applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an
order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Each
applicant transferred its assets to Diversified Real Asset Income Fund,
and on October 1, 2014, made distributions to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of $839,979 and $609,018, respectively,
incurred in connection with the reorganizations were paid by applicants
and the investment advisers

of applicants and the acquiring fund, or their affiliates.
    Filing Date: The applications were filed on December 22, 2014.
    Applicants' Address: 800 Nicollet Mall, BC-MN-H04N, Minneapolis, MN
55402.

Minnesota Municipal Income Portfolio Inc. [File No. 811-7680]

First American Minnesota Municipal Income Fund II Inc. [File No. 811-
21193]

    Summary: Each applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an
order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company.
Applicants transferred their assets to Nuveen Minnesota Municipal
Income Fund, and on October 22, 2014, made distributions to their
shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $259,711 and
$88,537, respectively, incurred in connection with the reorganizations
were paid by the investment advisers of applicants and the acquiring
fund, or their affiliates.
    Filing Date: The applications were filed on December 22, 2014.
    Applicants' Address: 800 Nicollet Mall, BC-MN-H04N, Minneapolis, MN
55402.

BlackRock Fixed Income Value Opportunities [File No. 811-22252]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On December
17, 2014, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its
shareholders, based on net asset value. Applicant has retained $58,600
in cash in a liquidating trust to pay contingent liabilities, and any
remaining assets will be distributed to shareholders. Expenses of
approximately $30,500 incurred in connection with the liquidation were
paid by applicant.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on December 22, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: 100 Bellevue Pkwy., Wilmington, DE 19809.

Williams Capital Management Trust [File No. 811-21186]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On September 22, 2014, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value.
Expenses of $30,000 incurred in connection with the liquidation were
paid by applicant.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on November 25, 2014, and
amended on December 22, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: 650 Fifth Ave., 9th Floor, New York, NY 10019.

Pacific Corporate Group Private Equity Fund [File No. 811-8637]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On December
30, 2014, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its
shareholders, based on net asset value. Applicant has retained $188,657
to pay its outstanding expenses. Additional expenses of $109,555
incurred in connection with reorganization were previously paid by
applicant.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on January 16, 2015.
    Applicant's Address: 1015 Ocean Blvd., Coronado, CA 92118.

Salient MLP & Energy Infrastructure Fund [File No. 811-22530]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant
transferred its assets to Salient Midstream & MLP Fund, and on November
17, 2014, made distributions to its shareholders based on net asset
value. Expenses of $89,525 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by applicant and the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on December 15, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: 4265 San Felipe, 8th Floor, Houston, TX 77027.

Nomura Partners Funds, Inc. [File No. 811-1090]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. Applicant transferred the assets of its
remaining series to Nomura High Yield Fund, a series of The Advisors'
Inner Circle Fund III, and on December 8, 2014, made distributions to
its shareholders based on net asset value. Applicant did not incur any
expenses in connection with the reorganization.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on December 16, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: 4 Copley Place, 5th Floor, CPH-0326, Boston,
MA 02116.

American Fidelity Dual Strategy Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-8873]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On December 2, 2014, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value.
Expenses $18,530 incurred in connection with the liquidation were paid
by American Fidelity Assurance Company, applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 1, 2014, and
amended on January 8, 2015.
    Applicant's Address: 2000 N Classen Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73106.

Clipper Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-3931]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. Applicant transferred its assets to Clipper
Fund, a series of Clipper Funds Trust, and on December 17, 2014, made
distributions to shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of
approximately $361,841 incurred in connection with the reorganization
were paid by applicant and Davis Selected Advisors, L.P., applicant's
investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on December 29, 2014.
    Applicant's Address: c/o Davis Advisors--Legal Department, 2949 E.
Elvira Rd., Ste. 101, Tucson, AZ 85756.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-02303 Filed 2-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 11, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47091-47094]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21369]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0515; Product Identifier 2016-NM-171-AD; Amendment
39-19061; AD 2017-20-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, Model
A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600
series airplanes), and Model A310 series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of unreliable airspeed indications that were caused
by pitot heater resistance shorted to ground. This AD requires
replacement of certain parts. We are issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective November 15, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 15,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2017-0515.

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-2017-
0515; 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 (telephone:
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 425-
227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus Model A300
B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, Model A300 C4-605R
Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series
airplanes), and Model A310 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on June 9, 2017 (82 FR 26758) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM
was prompted by reports of unreliable airspeed indications that were
caused by pitot heater resistance shorted to ground. The NPRM proposed
to require replacement of certain parts. We are issuing this AD to
ensure proper flight crew awareness of unreliable airspeed indications.
This condition, if not recognized by the flight crew, could possibly
result in reduced control of the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2016-0195, dated September 30, 2016 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-
600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, Model A300 C4-605R Variant F
airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes), and
Model A310 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    An operator recently reported two events of unreliable airspeed
indications. Investigations revealed that in both events, a Pitot
heater resistance was shorted to ground.
    Pitot probes are heated to prevent ice accretion. De-icing
performance of the Pitot probe might be reduced if Pitot probe
heater

degrades over time. The magnitude of deicing performance reduction
will depend on how much the heater is degraded. The Pitot probe de-
icing reduction will be hidden to the crew (the heater current
detector will not trigger a ``Heat Fault'' because in case of short-
to-case failure the resulting current variation will be limited).
    In severe icing conditions, if de-icing performances are
significantly reduced, it may cause unreliable airspeed events, with
no cockpit effects except erroneous airspeed indication(s) displayed
on the Primary Flight Display (PFD) or the standby airspeed
indicators.
    Unreliable airspeed indications, if not recognized by the crew,
could possibly result in reduced control of the aeroplane.
    To ensure proper crew awareness of unreliable airspeed
indication(s) situation, Airbus introduced a dedicated Electronic
Centralised Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM) Warning (Indicated Airspeed
Discrepancy Warning).
    The following configuration is required to enable this ECAM
Warning:

--The Flight Warning Computer (FWC) standard S17 has to be installed
by accomplishing Service Bulletins (SB) A310-31-2144 or A300-31-
6140: This requirement was already rendered mandatory by EASA AD
2015-0174 [which does not have a corresponding FAA AD. EASA AD 2015-
0174 superseded EASA AD 2012-0088 (EASA AD 2012-0088 corresponds to
FAA AD 2012-21-15, Amendment 39-17231 (77 FR 67256, November 9,
2012))];
--The ECAM Symbol Generator Unit (SGU), standard W32, Part Number
(P/N)<PHONE_NUMBER> has to be installed, by accomplishing Service
Bulletins (SB) A310-31-2123, A300-31-6124 or SB A300-31-6113.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires a
software standard upgrade of the ECAM SGU.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0515.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    The Air Line Pilots Association, International and FedEx expressed
support for the NPRM.

Request To Include Historical Information

    Airbus requested that we include historical information regarding
EASA AD 2015-0174, which is included in the quoted MCAI material in the
NPRM. Airbus explained that EASA AD 2015-0174, dated August 24, 2015,
superseded EASA AD 2012-0088, dated June 25, 2012, which specified
accomplishment of certain Airbus Service Bulletins. Airbus stated that
any corresponding FAA ADs should also be identified.
    We agree that additional historical information regarding EASA AD
2015-0174 and any corresponding FAA ADs would be helpful. We have added
the requested historical information to the quoted MCAI material
regarding EASA AD 2015-0174, which superseded EASA AD 2012-0088, and
the corresponding FAA AD.

Requests To Allow Use of a Later ECAM SGU Software Standard and Related
Service Information

    Airbus and FedEx requested that we revise the NPRM to allow use of
ECAM SGU software standard W33, which includes the corrections found in
ECAM SGU software standard W32.
    FedEx also requested that we update the NPRM to include new service
information that provides procedures for the upgrade to ECAM SGU
software standard W33. FedEx mentioned that it is preparing to upgrade
its fleet to ECAM SGU software standard W33.
    We agree with the requests to allow use of ECAM SGU software
standard W33, because ECAM SGU software standard W33 includes all of
the necessary changes from ECAM SGU software standard W32. We have
revised the preamble and regulatory text of this final rule, where
applicable, to include the additional ECAM SGU software standard and
part number.
    We also agree to add Airbus Service Bulletins A300-31-6142,
Revision 01, dated November 21, 2013, and A310-31-2145, Revision 01,
dated November 13, 2013, for accomplishment of the installation of ECAM
SGU software standard W33. We have revised this final rule accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6113, Revision 03,
including Appendix 01, dated July 5, 2016 (for Model A300-600 series
airplanes).
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6124, Revision 01, dated
July 4, 2016 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes).
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6142, Revision 01, dated
November 21, 2013 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes).
     Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2123, Revision 01,
including Appendix 01, dated July 1, 2016 (for Model A310 series
airplanes).
     Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2145, Revision 01, dated
November 13, 2013 (for Model A310 series airplanes).
    The service information describes procedures for replacement of the
ECAM SGU software standard W32 or W33. These documents are distinct
since they apply to different airplane configurations or apply to
different ECAM SGU software standards (W32, part number<PHONE_NUMBER>, and
W33, part number<PHONE_NUMBER>). 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 139 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                    Labor cost            Parts cost     Cost per  product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement....................  Up to 4 work-hours x    Up to $2,360.....  Up to $2,700.....  Up to $375,300.
                                  $85 per hour = $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We 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 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2017-20-04 Airbus: Amendment 39-19061; Docket No. FAA-2017-0515;
Product Identifier 2016-NM-171-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 15, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5) of this AD, certificated
in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers, except those on
which Airbus modification 12691 or 13665 has been embodied in
production.
    (1) Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622
airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
    (4) Airbus Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
    (5) Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324,
and -325 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 31, Instruments.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of unreliable airspeed
indications that were caused by pitot heater resistance shorted to
ground. We are issuing this AD to ensure proper flight crew
awareness of unreliable airspeed indications. This condition, if not
recognized by the flight crew, could possibly result in reduced
control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Replacement of the Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitoring
(ECAM) Symbol Generator Unit (SGU)

    Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, replace
the ECAM SGU with a new ECAM SGU (software standard W32 or W33), in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
information identified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of
this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622
airplanes; Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; and Model A300
C4-605R Variant F airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6113,
Revision 03, including Appendix 01, dated July 5, 2016; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-31-6142, Revision 01, dated November 21, 2013.
    (2) For Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes: Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-31-6124, Revision 01, dated July 4, 2016.
    (3) For Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -
324, and -325 airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2123,
Revision 01, including Appendix 01, dated July 1, 2016; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A310-31-2145, Revision 01, dated November 13, 2013.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    (1) As of the effective date of this AD, for any airplane that
has ECAM SGU software standard W32, part number<PHONE_NUMBER>, or ECAM
SGU software standard W33, part number<PHONE_NUMBER>, installed, no
person may install an ECAM SGU software standard prior to W32.
    (2) For any airplane that has an ECAM SGU software standard
prior to W32, after modification of that airplane, no person may
install an ECAM SGU software standard prior to W32.

(i) 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 specified in paragraph
(i)(1), (i)(2), (i)(3), (i)(4), or (i)(5) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6113, Revision 02, including
Appendix 01, dated September 4, 2014.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6124, Revision 00, dated
October 13, 2005.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6142, Revision 00, dated
August 13, 2013.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2123, Revision 00, dated
January 4, 2006.
    (5) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2145, Revision 00, dated
August 13, 2013.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, 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 International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2016-0195, dated September 30, 2016, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2017-0515.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone:
425-227-2125; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6113, Revision 03, including
Appendix 01, dated July 5, 2016.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6124, Revision 01, dated
July 4, 2016.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-31-6142, Revision 01, dated
November 21, 2013.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2123, Revision 01,
including Appendix 01, dated July 1, 2016.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-31-2145, Revision 01, dated
November 13, 2013.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 18, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-21369 Filed 10-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P