                           SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR
              EPA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST NUMBER [2650.01]
"GATHERING DATA ON RESULTS OF NEWLY REQUIRED ANNUAL AND TRIENNIAL TESTING TO EVALUATE THE IMPACTS OF U.S. EPA'S 2015 FEDERAL UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REGULATION"

                                AUGUST 28, 2020

                           ICR SUPPORTING STATEMENT

                               TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION..............................3
      1(a)	Title and Number of the Information Collection.........................................3
      1(b)	Abstract.......................................................................................3
2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION.................................................4
      2(a)	Authority and Need for the Collection.....................................................4
      2(b)	Practical Utility and Users of the Data....................................................4
3.	NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA .........5
      3(a)	Nonduplication...............................................................................5
      3(b)	Public Notice.................................................................................5
      3(c)	Consultations.................................................................................5
      3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection.......................................................5
      3(e)	General Guidelines...........................................................................5
      3(f)	Confidentiality...............................................................................6
      3(g)	Sensitive Questions..........................................................................6
4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED.........................7
      4(a)	Respondents and NAICS Codes...........................................................7
      4(b)	Information Requested......................................................................7
5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  -  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT..............................10
      5(a)	Agency Activities...........................................................................10
      5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management.............................................10
      5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility....................................................................10
      5(d)	Collection Schedule........................................................................11
6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION.....................12
      6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden..........................................................12
      6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs............................................................12
      6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost....................................................13
      6(d)	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs..................14
      6(e) 	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost....................................................14
      6(f)	Reasons for Change in Burden...........................................................15
      6(g)	Burden Statement...........................................................................15
Section 1. Identification of the Information Collection
1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection
Information Request for: "Gathering Data on Results of Newly Required Annual and Triennial Testing to Evaluate the Impacts of U.S. E.P.A.'s 2015 Federal Underground Storage Tank Regulation," EPA ICR Number 2650.01.
1(b) Abstract
This information collection request will allow U.S. E.P.A. to employ a contractor to compile data from private companies providing regular servicing and maintenance to owners of federally regulated underground storage tank systems (USTs).
The contractor will collect and assimilate testing data from several UST servicing companies. The contractor's deliverable will be to create a database of the performance results over multiple iterations of newly required UST testing procedures in various states across the country. These new tests were required by the 2015 UST regulation and are performed either annually or triennially. The data gathered will be pass/fail results from several testing measures, taken from facilities in 17 states where regulations went into effect soonest. These facilities were first required to be tested sometime after the 2015 federal regulation passed, with the second round of triennial required testing to be completed by October 2021.
The completed dataset of test results will allow EPA to evaluate the effectiveness of several of the newly required measures to prevent fuel releases that was required in the 2015 federal UST regulation. Data will be compiled from UST servicing companies about tests performed prior to the initial testing deadline, and from tests results for regulatory compliance for the second test required either within one year or three years after the initial test (depending on the test requirements). EPA may use the data to identify if, and by how much, testing required by the regulation impacts pass/fail rates over time. EPA is interested in quantitatively assessing if pass/fail rates improve between initial and subsequent rounds of testing in those states where data is collected.

Section 2. Need for and Use of the Collection
2(a) Authority for the Collection
EPA's Underground Storage Tanks program regulates facilities under 40 CFR 280 and 281 under the authority of sections 2002, 9001, 9002, 9003, 9004, 9005, 9006, 9007, 9010, and 9012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) of 1965, as amended (commonly known as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)) [42 U.S.C. 6912, 6991, 6991(a), 6991(b), 6991(c), 6991(d), 6991(e), 6991(f), 6991(i), and 6991(k)].
2(a) Need for the Collection
EPA updated the federal underground storage tank regulation in 40 CFR 280 and 281 in 2015 for the first time since initially promulgating the rule in 1988. The update imposed new operation and maintenance requirements for owners and operators of underground storage tank systems. This ICR is needed for EPA to collect information on pass and fail rates for new requirements to help EPA understand the effectiveness and impact of the new regulation. It will help EPA, and the communities where regulated facilities are located, identify areas of deficiency in maintaining intended performance standards for UST systems that cannot be identified through the regulatory reporting and documentation requirements.
2(b) Practical Utility and Users of the Data
The practical utility of collecting this data is to measure the efficacy of the requirements in the 2015 UST regulation to help prevent releases of fuel from UST systems into the environment. Data results could help defend the need to maintain the stringency of the requirements and to help identify where future EPA research and compliance assistance efforts for the UST regulated community should be concentrated.

Section 3. Non-Duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria
3(a) Non-Duplication
All information requested from respondents under this ICR is not available from other sources. This collection will be the first opportunity for the government to collect such data because the requirements for testing are being implemented for the first time. EPA has not consulted other databases or directories because we know the specific information we are collecting relates only to these new requirements. Respondents may have collected similar information in the past for other business reasons, but we specifically are looking only for newly collected data driven by the new EPA regulation, so past collected information is irrelevant to this effort.
3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR submission to OMB
This information request is currently undergoing the 60-day period of public review on the Federal Register; for further details see section 6(g) of this document.
3(c) Consultations
EPA consulted with the following national and regional companies during the period leading up to a formal public notice and request for comments to estimate burdens for our public comment request:
                   Table 1: UST Testing Companies Consulted
UST Servicing Company
Name
Phone Number
Tanknology
Brian Derge
1-800-964-1250
Crompco
Ed Kubinsky
800-646-3161
Protanic
Dawn Brooks
800-352-2011
Northwest Tank & Environmental
Bob Wiese
(425) 742-9622
US Tank Alliance
Kathy Pasternak
(614) 923-0154 HQ
7G
Jason Wiles
888.400.3511
Valley Tank Testing
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(813) 671-9065
MVI
Marie Broussard
615-320-7317

EPA then requested much broader public comment prior to the ICR submission to OMB in compliance with the 1995 PRA to determine if these burden estimates were realistic.
3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection
This collection will be the first and only collection of this information. The EPA or public will not be able to gain the benefit of the knowledge derived as a result of this effort without this minimal, one-time data collection process. Regular requirements require evidence only of passing annual and triennial tests. This does not allow EPA to know how often those tests are failed prior to repairs being performed and retests performed to obtain passing results.
3(e) General Guidelines
This collection follows OMB's general guidelines for information collections. While we do not believe any justifications are necessary, we have chosen to include the following explanations.
Requirement: Justify any provision under which respondents would:
 Retain records, other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;
      Justification: The records required to be maintained longer than three years will be stipulated in the contract for collecting the data. The data may need to exist longer than the three-year period because the total timeframe for comparing collected information from different periods is separated by three years.
 Submit proprietary, trade secret, or other confidential information unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.
      Justification: The collection will obtain data on pass/fail rates for testing from servicing companies about sumps at UST facilities. Additionally, the collection will gather facility and unit specific information from each test location where those tests were performed; this information is needed to make an accurate assessment of performance changes between the first and second rounds of triennial testing for each individual tested UST sump for which data is included. Aggregate data cannot be used for this collection; comparison of initial and later tests results must come from the same sample population of sumps at UST systems.
      However, the contract terms specifically require all of the data be blinded in such a way that the tested UST units may be individually identified in the database deliverable, without disclosing identifying information about the facility location, owner, public identification number, or other information to the EPA or to the public.
3(f) Confidentiality
The contract terms specifically require the data be blinded in such a way that the facilities and equipment may be identified without disclosing information about the facility location, owner, public identification number, or other information to the EPA or to the public. A subset of this data will be specific to this level of facility for data specialization purposes. Most will be averaged results of many facilities. The contractor and the EPA will not know any confidential information about the facilities involved in the data collection. Only the facility owners or managers and the petroleum equipment servicing companies performing the work for those companies will have the ability to link specific results to specific units, facilities, or owners. The contract terms for the awardee require they collect only blinded data from servicing companies, and not from site owners themselves. There is therefore an imaginary wall, or intermediary, preventing any accidental disclosure of site-specific test results or identifying information between the servicing company and the EPA.
3(g) Sensitive Questions
Neither the EPA nor the contractor performing the data collection will ask sensitive or private questions.
Section 4. The Respondents and the Information Requested
4(a) Respondents and NAICS Codes
Table 2 lists the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) sectors associated with industries most likely affected by the information collection requirements covered in this information collection: UST testing and compliance companies, and UST facility owners and operators.
Other sectors anticipated to be affected by the information collection requirements not shown in Table 2 include local, state, and federal governments. This ICR does not include the burden on UST facilities owned by the federal government, in keeping with the Paperwork Reduction Act.
                 Table 2: NAICS Sectors of Affected Industries
                                 NAICS Sector
                           NAICS Sector Description
213112
Support Activities for Oil and Gas Operations
4471
Gasoline Stations
561990
All Other Support Services

4(b) Information Requested
The data collected for the deliverable will be gathered from data collected by servicing companies on services performed. Owners and operators of gas stations are responsible for having evidence of passing compliance testing results. Servicing companies are not required to have, keep, or report results, but normally do so as part of their normal operations. These companies provide a significant potential source of information for this study, and EPA anticipates the contractor will work with some companies on a voluntarily basis to gather this data. The deliverable requires the EPA contractor to work with the UST servicing companies to search this existing stored testing data by various parameters.
EPA will collect data from a subset of 17 states and territories:
 ME
 NJ
 PR
 WV
 FL
 NC
 IL
 MI
 OH
 AR
 OK
 UT
 WY
 CA
 NV
 CNMI
 AK
Information subset 1: Most of the streamlined data delivered will be in the form of testing results averaged from a large number of tests, from many companies, within a state. These testing results will help EPA determine the impact of the 2015 UST regulation.
Information subset 2: A subset of this collection will gather facility and unit specific information on passing and failing test results from each UST sump tested; this information is needed to make an accurate assessment of performance changes between the first and second rounds of triennial testing for each individual unit for which data is included. This subset of information will allow EPA to perform advanced statistical evaluations of the data collected.
 Data items
         All data items are reporting items.
         Information subset 1: Averaged data
 The electronic records of passing and failing tests for initial testing and second round testing for each spill containment liquid tightness test, sump liquid tightness test, and overfill equipment inspection driven by triennial testing requirements
 Note: Owners and operators regulated under 40 CFR 280.35 must have evidence of passing test results for spill containment liquid tightness testing, containment sump liquid tightness testing (for containment sumps used for interstitial monitoring of piping if of single-wall construction), and overfill equipment inspections conducted within the last  three years.
 Note: EPA will also attempt to collect average results of passing and failing tests for leak detection equipment tests and inspections when companies have such information available. Owners and operators are generally required to have this equipment tested or inspected annually.
 Note: Failing test results are not required for either of these categories to be stored or reported according to the federal UST regulation; working with servicing companies will allow EPA to gather this information that is otherwise not generally available.

	Information subset 2: Sump testing data
 Facility- and unit-specific information on passing and failing test results from a subset of the containment sumps tested; this information for each individual unit for which data is included would help EPA with assessment of performance changes between the first and second rounds of triennial testing. This data will be separate from the averaged pass/fail data (see above).
 UST owners and operators are already required by the new requirement in 40 CFR 280.35 to have records of a passing test result from within the last three years.
 Respondent activities
         This information collection involves two groups of respondents: UST testing companies, who collect and maintain the data sought by EPA, and UST owners and operators, who represent the data items sought. For this information collection request, each UST testing company surveyed by the EPA research contractor will conduct the following once over the information collection period (this is not a repeat data collection).

         UST Testing Companies:
 Consult with EPA research contractor on a voluntary agreement regarding the voluntary submission of averaged data from their data storage tool and the process by which to submit this data, including format, timeline, and masking identifying information.
 Extract the data from their data storage tool by running the appropriate queries.
 Review the data to mask identifying information and prepare it for submission to the EPA research contractor.
 When complete, submit the data to the research contractor and maintain data records internally for at least three years.
 Keep electronic records of passing and failing test results for three years for information provided in the averaged data, including for initial testing and second round testing for each spill containment liquid tightness test, sump liquid tightness test, and overfill equipment inspection driven by triennial testing requirements and leak detection equipment testing and inspection results from annual or less frequent intervals.
 Keep electronic records of passing and failing tests for each sump liquid tightness test driven by triannual testing regulatory requirements and included in the data collection for three years, including the facility and unit specific information (ensuring that any identifying information be blinded to the EPA) for at least three years.

      Gas station owners and operators:
 There are no additional activities required for UST owners and operators for this information collection beyond those regulatory requirements to have evidence of passing test results; therefore, this group faces no additional burden for this information collection under the 1995 PRA definition of "burden" and burden described in OMB 5 CFR §1320.3(b)(1).

Section 5. The Information Collected  -  Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management
5(a) Agency Activities
Agency activities associated with this information collection consist of the following:
 Manage the contract under which the research contractor to the agency will gather the requested information from private companies, including providing direction and guidance to the contractor during the data collection period.
 Review the data presented in the requested database and any other deliverables.
EPA may share the database and the agency's interpretation of the results of the collection through written or verbal channels.
EPA will employ a research contractor to perform the work needed to collect and organize the data sought. Contractor activities will consist of the following:
 Consult with EPA regarding expectations for the data sought, research methodology, and the format of the database deliverable.
 Participate in ongoing communications with EPA regarding the research progress.
 Contact selected UST testing companies within a group of 17 states to request the testing data sought.
 Compile cleaned and anonymized data into a database deliverable for EPA.
Provide a summary guide for using the deliverable and the research process used to compile the data, including written records of communications with UST testing companies, where applicable.
5(b) Collection Methodology and Management
EPA will task the contractor with collecting testing data unaltered from participating companies. All data will be provided voluntarily by the companies and will be in the form of aggregated testing data. EPA will therefore take an additional step to quality check a subset of the data. EPA will task the contractor with collecting and verifying information from a subset of the data for one of the four categories of tests that will be tied to specific pieces of equipment, and this set of data will  serve as a check for reasonableness against the averaged data results. This subset of information collected will require additional levels of data cleaning and matching testing results with particular testing locations, in order to evaluate those sites specifically over both rounds of testing. These results of the subset compared with the average results should act as a statistical quality check on the averaged results.
The data will be delivered in a database to EPA, which can be accessed through any public records request. All information will be collected by the contractor from servicing companies in a digital format, and EPA will receive a clean database as the deliverable in a database format. No machine or processing technology will be used other than a computer and database programs. Electronic collection and processing is the most efficient use of time for all parties involved.
5(c) Small Entity Flexibility
EPA will not offer different information collection flexibilities under this project because all participation is voluntary. Further, it believes most information collection that will come from facility owners will come directly from servicing companies participating in the voluntary project, and thus is not a burden for owners and operators, not a significant additional burden beyond the work already performed by servicing companies. All businesses involved are likely collecting this information as part of normal business practices. Additional work to respond is IT work related to data management and review.
5(d) Collection Schedule
EPA will direct the research contractor to collect this information in early 2022. EPA anticipates a collection timeline of 180 days, after which the research contractor will submit the database of collected information to the agency for review.

Section 6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection
6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden
To estimate burden hours and rates, EPA conducted informal interviews with 8 UST testing companies (see Table 1). Note that while UST owners and operators are considered to be respondents in this information collection, they were not included in the burden calculations because the information will be sought only from UST testing companies and is collected as part of routine business operations.

                   Table 1: UST Testing Companies Consulted
UST Servicing Company
Name
Phone Number
Tanknology
Brian Derge
1-800-964-1250
Crompco
Ed Kubinsky
800-646-3161
Protanic
Dawn Brooks
800-352-2011
Northwest Tank & Environmental
Bob Wiese
(425) 742-9622
US Tank Alliance
Kathy Pasternak
(614) 923-0154 HQ
7G
Jason Wiles
888.400.3511
Valley Tank Testing
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(813) 671-9065
MVI
Marie Broussard
615-320-7317

Email correspondence with the 8 companies surveyed can be found in Exhibit 4. Based on their feedback, the information collection would require three separate activities: (1) consultation with the EPA research contractor, (2) data mining from a database or other data management tool, and (3) data manipulation, as appropriate, and submission to the research contractor. Based on conversations with testing companies, EPA estimates 8 hours at the managerial level for activity (1); 8.75 hours at the managerial level for activity (2); and 4.5 hours at the technical level for activity (3).

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs
 Estimating Labor Costs
         To estimate hourly rates, EPA used information collected during informal interviews to estimate an average hourly rate (labor plus overhead) of $139.25/hour for managerial staff conducting activities (1) and (2), and an average hourly rate of $75/hour for technical staff conducting activity (3). These hourly rate estimates were taken by averaging the wage rate given by companies surveyed for completing each respective activity. EPA found these estimates to be high in comparison with Labor Department estimates; however, since these rates reflect the estimates of industry experts, EPA believes them to be a reliable representation of the opportunity cost of labor and the compensation rates of professionals in this field.

         Based on conversations with UST testing companies, no legal or clerical staff are expected to be involved in this information collection and are therefore not included in the burden estimate table.

         Based on EPA's estimates of average burden hours per respondent, EPA estimates a labor cost of $2,669.94 per respondent. Since this is a one-time information collection activity, this represents the total cost to the respondent over the three-year information collection period.

         EPA estimates there to be, on average, 40 UST testing companies within each state. For the 17 states considered for this collection request, EPA estimates that the collection will affect 680 total respondents.

         The table below shows the overall respondent burden and costs. Based on these estimates, EPA estimates the overall private cost and burden over the three-year lifetime of the information collection to be $1,815,559.20.

                               Respondent Burden and Cost

 Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs
         Respondents incur no additional capital costs through this Information Collection Request. Operations and management costs are accounted for within the respondent burden hours estimates and are therefore omitted here to avoid double-counting.

 Capital/Start-up Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
         EPA determined that there are no capital/start-up costs associated with this information collection request. UST testing companies surveyed already possess the technology, equipment, and training necessary to respond to the data collection as part of their routine operations. Operation and maintenance costs are accounted for within responded burden calculations as the information collection activities required under activity (3), submission of data to the research contractor. O&M costs are therefore not repeated to avoid double-counting labor hours.

 Annualizing Capital Costs
         Annualized capital costs cannot be included because no capital costs are anticipated.
6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost
EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost of $110 for legal staff (GS-15, Step 1), $79 for managerial staff (GS-13, Step 1), $55 for technical staff (GS-11, Step 1), and $37 for clerical staff (GS-7, Step 1).  To derive these hourly estimates, EPA referred the General Schedule Salary Table for 2020, published by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, for the Washington-Baltimore-Arlington Locality Pay Area. EPA then applied the standard government loading factor of 60 percent, which includes fringe benefits and overhead.

The table below shows the agency burden estimate table, which includes managing the research contract and reviewing deliverables from the research contractor. EPA estimates 8 total hours at the legal level, 18 total hours at the managerial level, and 74 hours at the technical level for this information collection. The total agency burden is estimated to be $1,845.33 annually over a three-year period, and $5,563 over the lifetime of this ICR.

                            Agency Burden Estimate

The table below shows the estimated labor and cost breakdown for the research contractor EPA may employ for this information collection process. EPA derived these cost estimates using hourly rate information available from the most recent contract used by the Office of Underground Storage Tanks. EPA estimates a total cost to the Agency of $41,246.18 to employ a contractor to collect the data sought in this information collection.

                       Research Contractor Cost Estimate

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs
EPA estimates that 680 testing companies within 17 states will be surveyed by a contractor and asked to provide compliance testing results for the time period from 2018 to 2021. EPA conducted preliminary research on 10 states that resulted in an average of 40 UST servicing companies per state. For the 17 states that will be examined in the study, this average indicates an approximate total universe size of 680 testing companies.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables
 Respondent Tally
                  This table displays the bottom-line respondent annual cost and burden estimates.

 The Agency Tally
                  This table displays the bottom-line Agency cost estimates for this information collection. Please note that while costs have been annualized, EPA anticipates that all research contractor activities will occur in 2022 rather than over a three-year collection period.

 Variations in the Annual Bottom Line
                  As stated above, EPA annualized costs for this information collection over a three-year period; however, the contractor costs are expected to occur in 2022.
6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden
No changes have been made to this burden estimate.
6(g) Burden Statement
For respondents, defined in this information collection as UST testing companies and UST owners and operators, annual burden and cost is estimated to be $605,186.40 over a three-year period. Burden and cost over the lifetime of the ICR is estimated to be $1,815,559.20. For the Agency, annual burden is estimated to be $1,854.33 for Agency staff and $5,563 total over a three-year period. The Agency will also incur an additional $41,246.18 in research contractor costs over the three-year period, with the contractor work expected to occur in 2022 only.
 Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
 To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number [EPA-HQ-OLEM-2020-0354], which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Underground Storage Tanks Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the docket "Gathering Data on Results of Newly Required Annual and Triennial Testing to Evaluate the Impacts of U.S. E.P.A.'s 2015 Federal Underground Storage Tank Regulation" is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OLEM-2020-0354 and OMB Control Number XXXX-XXXX in any correspondence.

Exhibits
Exhibit 1. Respondent Burden and Cost

Exhibit 2. Agency Burden and Cost

Exhibit 3. Research Contractor Total Cost Estimate


[Federal Register: December 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 235)]
[Notices]
[Page 69213-69215]
[DOCID:fr07de07-54]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058; FRL-8503-4]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Information Request for National Emission Standards
for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process
Heaters; EPA ICR No. 2286.01

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this action announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request for a new Information Collection Request (ICR) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Before submitting the ICR to OMB
for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 5, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0058, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, U.S. EPA, Room 3334, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2002-0058. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Eddinger, Energy Strategies Group,
Sector Policies and Program Division, (D243-01), Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation

Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-
566-1742.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of

information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified in this
document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested In?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments.
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply To?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) in the industrial,
commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters source
categories. A major source is one that has the potential to emit more
than 10 tons per year (tpy) of any HAP, 25 tpy for the total of all
HAP, or amounts exceeding any lesser quantity cutoff established
pursuant to section 112(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
    Title: Information Collection Effort for Facilities with Boilers
and/or Process Heaters at Major Sources of HAP Emission.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2286.01.
    ICR status: This ICR is for a new information collection activity.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it 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 when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The proposed ICR has two components to the information
collection. To obtain the information necessary to identify and
categorize all boilers and process heaters potentially affected by the
revised standard, the first component of this ICR will solicit
information from all potentially affected units in the format of an
electronic survey under authority of section 114 of the CAA. The survey
will be submitted to all facilities that either submitted an initial
notification, or if initial notification data is not available, all
facilities with Title V permits denoted as a major source of HAP, that
have a boiler or process heater listed in their permit.
    The second component will consist of requiring, if deemed
necessary, again through the issuance of a letter pursuant to the
authority of section 114 of the CAA, the owners/operators of up to a
total of 350 boilers or process heaters selected at random to conduct
in accordance with an EPA-approved protocol stack testing.
    The EPA estimates the cost of the electronic survey component of
the information collection will be 95,832 hours and $7,685,102. The
total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for the stack testing
component of the data gathering effort is estimated to be no more than
29,584 hours and $11,712,769.
    Industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process
heaters were listed as a major source category of HAP on July 16, 1992
(57 FR 31576). Section 112(c)(2) of the CAA requires that we establish
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
control of HAP from both existing and new major sources, based upon the
criteria set out in the CAA section 112(d). The CAA requires the NESHAP
to reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of HAP that is
achievable, taking into consideration the cost of achieving the
emission reduction, any non-air quality health and environmental
impacts, and energy requirements. This level of control is commonly
referred to as the maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The
minimum control level allowed for NESHAP (the minimum level of
stringency for MACT) is the ``MACT floor,'' as defined under section
112(d)(3) of the CAA. The MACT floor for existing sources is the
emission limitation achieved by the average of the best-performing 12
percent of existing sources for categories and subcategories. For new
sources, the MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the emission
control achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar source.
    The NESHAP for boilers and process heaters were promulgated at 40
CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD, on September 2004 (see 69 FR 55218), and
vacated by the Courts on June 8, 2007. The vacature requires the Agency
to revise the standards and the associated MACT floors based on new
estimates of potentially affected units.
    The previous rulemaking was based upon data gathered for the
Industrial Combustion Coordinated Rulemaking, complimented by
additional survey data received from non-fossil boiler and process
heaters. These data sources are over 10 years old. When the Agency
recently compared these data to facilities submitting initial
notifications to comply with the vacated standard, a large disparity
was identified in the number of potentially affected units at major
sources of HAP. Since the last boiler and process heater data gathering
effort, many sources have shut down, others have selected to operate
with a limit on their HAP emissions in order to avoid being subject to
the Boiler and Process Heater NESHAP, and some units have switched out
older solid fuel units for newer equipment due to increased insurance
and maintenance costs. Therefore, the Agency has concluded that
obtaining updated information will be crucial to informing its decision
on the revised NESHAP for boilers and process heaters.

    The information in both components of this ICR will be collected
under authority of section 114 of the CAA. Section 114(a) states, in
pertinent part:

    For the purpose * * * (iii) carrying out any provision of this
Chapter * * * (1) the Administrator may require any person who owns
or operates any emission source * * * to- * * * (D) sample such
emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such
locations, at such intervals, during such periods and in such manner
as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control
equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data
when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical * * * (G) provide
such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require *
* *

    The data collected will be used to revise the population of
potentially affected boilers and process heaters, and update existing
emission test data and fuel analysis information. These data will be
used by the Agency to develop the revised NESHAP for boilers and
process heaters (and potentially incinerators) under sections 112 and
129 of the CAA. Specifically, the data will respond in part to the two
research needs, providing the Agency with updated information on the
number of potentially affected units, available emission test data and
fuel analysis data to address variability. For a subset of units that
may become subject to CAA section 129, and thus be required to conduct
stack tests, the data will be used to complete emission data gaps. All
data collected will be added to existing emission test databases for
boilers, process heaters, and when appropriate, incinerators; it will
also be used to further evaluate the HAP emissions from these sources.
    This collection of information is mandatory under section 114 of
the CAA (42 U.S.C 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant to
this ICR for which a claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded
according to Agency policies in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. An agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are
listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    The EPA would like to solicit comments to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the methodology
and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    Burden Statement: The projected cost and hour burden for this one-
time collection of information is $19,398,000 and 125,400 hours. This
burden is based on an estimated 3,396 likely respondents to the
electronic survey component and an estimated 350 respondents to the
stack testing component. Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here.
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 3,396.
    Frequency of response: One time.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
1.1 (electronic survey component and stack testing component combined)
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 125,400.
    Estimated total annual costs: $19,398,000. This includes an
estimated burden cost of $7,685,100 for the electronic survey component
and an estimated cost of $11,712,800 for the stack testing component.

What is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: November 30, 2007.
Frederick Thompson,
Acting Director, Sector Policies and Programs Division.
[FR Doc. E7-23845 Filed 12-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 154 (Friday, August 13, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44663-44668]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17091]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0663; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01618-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2016-17-12, which applies to all Airbus SAS Model A318 series
airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes;
and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes. AD 2016-17-12 requires inspecting certain trimmable
horizontal stabilizer actuators (THSAs) to determine the number of
total flight cycles the THSA has accumulated, and replacing the THSA if
necessary. Since the FAA issued AD 2016-17-12, the FAA has determined
that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary.
This proposed AD would require revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation
by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by September
27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For EASA material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in
this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Airbus service information identified
in this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EIAS,
Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France;
telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://www.airbus.com. You
may view this IBR material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0663. For the UTC Aerospace Systems material identified in
this proposed AD that will not be incorporated by reference, contact
Collins Aerospace, Product Support Department 13, Avenue de
L'Eguillette--Saint-Ouen L'Aumone, Boite Postale 7186 95056 Cergy
Pontoise Cedex, France; telephone 1-877-808-7575; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://www.collinsaerospace.com/support.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0663; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0663; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-01618-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2016-17-12, Amendment 39-18625 (81 FR 58823,
August 26, 2016) (AD 2016-17-12), for all Airbus SAS Model A318 series
airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes;
and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes. AD 2016-17-12 requires inspecting certain THSAs to determine
the number of total flight cycles the THSA has accumulated, and
replacing the THSA if necessary. The FAA issued AD 2016-17-12 to
address premature wear of the carbon friction disks on the no-back
brake (NBB) of the THSA, which could lead to reduced braking efficiency
in certain load conditions, and, in conjunction with the inability of
the power gear train to keep the ball screw in its last commanded
position, could result in uncommanded movements of the trimmable
horizontal stabilizer and loss of control of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2016-17-12 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2016-17-12, new investigations determined
that the compliance time for removal from service and replacement of
certain THSA NBB disks must be reduced. This task was required by AD
2016-17-12, and the task and newly reduced compliance time have now
been incorporated into Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness
Limitations Section (ALS) Part 4 Variation 7.1, dated October 5, 2020.
The FAA has therefore determined that new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations are necessary.
    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0270, dated December 7, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0270) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes;
Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N,
and -171N airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -
233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes; and Model
A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -251NX, -
252N, -252NX, -253N, -253NX, -271N, -271NX, -272N, and -272NX
airplanes. Model A320-215 airplanes are not certificated by the FAA and
are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this AD
therefore does not include those airplanes in the applicability.
    Airplanes with an original airworthiness certificate or original
export certificate of airworthiness issued after October 5, 2020, must
comply with the airworthiness limitations specified as part of the
approved type design and referenced on the type certificate data sheet.
However, Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section
(ALS) Part 4 Variation 7.1 specifies that replacements can be
accomplished in accordance with certain service information, while this
proposed AD would require accomplishing those replacements in
accordance with certain service information. To ensure all maintenance
or inspection programs incorporate the revised task, including the
revised replacement requirements, this proposed AD would therefore
require all operators to revise their existing maintenance or
inspection program to include either the revised task including the
revised provisions for replacement, or the revised provisions for
replacement, depending on when the original airworthiness certificate
or original export certificate of airworthiness was issued.
    EASA AD 2020-0270 specifies that it requires a task (limitation)
already required by EASA AD 2020-0034, dated February 25, 2020 (which
corresponds to FAA AD 2020-21-10, Amendment 39-21283 (85 FR 65190,
October 15, 2020) (AD 2020-21-10)) and invalidates (terminates) prior
instructions for that task. This proposed AD would terminate the ALS
limitation for task<PHONE_NUMBER>4-1-E for the THSAs, as required by
paragraph (i) of AD 2020-21-10, for Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -
122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -
133, -151N, and -153N airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -
231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N
airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -
232, -251N, -251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253N, -253NX, -271N, -271NX, -272N,
and -272NX airplanes; with an original airworthiness certificate or
original export certificate of airworthiness issued on or before
November 7, 2019, only.

    This proposed AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address premature wear of the carbon friction
disks on the NBB of the THSA, which could lead to reduced braking
efficiency in certain load conditions, and, in conjunction with the
inability of the power gear train to keep the ball screw in its last
commanded position, could result in uncommanded movements of the
trimmable horizontal stabilizer and loss of control of the airplane.
See the MCAI for additional background information.

Model A320-216 Airplanes

    The Airbus SAS Model A320-216 was U.S. type certificated on
December 19, 2016. Before that date, any EASA ADs that affected Model
A320-216 airplanes were included in the U.S. type certificate as part
of the Required Airworthiness Actions List (RAAL). One or more Model
A320-216 airplanes have subsequently been placed on the U.S. Register,
and will now be included in FAA AD actions. For Model A320-216
airplanes, the requirements that correspond to AD 2016-17-12 were
mandated by the MCAI via the RAAL. Although that RAAL requirement is
still in effect, for continuity and clarity the FAA has identified
Model A320-216 airplanes in paragraph (c) of this proposed AD; the MCAI
that is specified in paragraph (l) in this proposed AD includes
restated requirements, which would therefore apply to those airplanes.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0270 describes new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations for airplane structures and safe life limits.
    Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS)
Part 4 Variation 7.1, dated October 5, 2020, describes a task for
removal from service and replacement of certain THSA NBB disks.
    This proposed AD would also require Airbus Service Bulletin A320-
27-1242, Revision 01, dated February 4, 2016, which the Director of the
Federal Register approved for incorporation by reference as of
September 30, 2016 (81 FR 58823, August 26, 2016).
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD
because the FAA has evaluated all pertinent information and determined
an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2016-17-12.
This proposed AD would also require revising the existing maintenance
or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations, which are specified in EASA AD
2020-0270 described previously, as proposed for incorporation by
reference. Any differences with EASA AD 2020-0270 are identified as
exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph
(p)(1) of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use certain civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2020-0270 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2020-0270 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2020-0270 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2020-
0270. Service information required by EASA AD 2020-0270 for compliance
will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0663 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Airworthiness Limitation ADs Using the New Process

    The FAA's process of incorporating by reference MCAI ADs as the
primary source of information for compliance with corresponding FAA ADs
has been limited to certain MCAI ADs (primarily those with service
bulletins as the primary source of information for accomplishing the
actions required by the FAA AD). However, the FAA is now expanding the
process to include MCAI ADs that require a change to airworthiness
limitation documents, such as airworthiness limitation sections.
    For these ADs that incorporate by reference an MCAI AD that changes
airworthiness limitations, the FAA requirements are unchanged.
Operators must revise the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the new
airworthiness limitation document. The airworthiness limitations must
be followed according to 14 CFR 91.403(c) and 91.409(e).
    The previous format of the airworthiness limitation ADs included a
paragraph that specified that no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals
are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in
accordance with the procedures specified in the AMOCs paragraph under
``Other FAA Provisions.'' This new format includes a ``New Provisions
for Alternative Actions and Intervals'' paragraph that does not
specifically refer to AMOCs, but operators may still request an AMOC to
use an alternative actions or intervals.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 1,630 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2016-17-12     1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85         $81,515
 (959 airplanes).                        hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting/revising the existing maintenance or inspection program.

    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection
program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined
that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane
estimate.
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the new proposed
actions to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this on-condition action:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
               Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 work-hours x $85 per hour = $1,785...         $26,500         $28,285
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-17-12, Amendment 39-18625
(81 FR 58823, August 26, 2016); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2021-0663; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-
01618-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by September 27, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    (1) This AD replaces AD 2016-17-12, Amendment 39-18625 (81 FR
58823, August 26, 2016) (AD 2016-17-12).
    (2) This AD affects AD 2020-21-10, Amendment 39-21283 (85 FR
65190, October 15, 2020) (AD 2020-21-10).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (7) of this AD.
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes.
    (5) Model A319-151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes.
    (6) Model A320-251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N
airplanes.
    (7) Model A321-251N, -251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253N, -253NX, -
271N, -271NX, -272N, and -272NX airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks; 27, Flight Controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address premature wear of the carbon friction
disks on the no-back brake (NBB) of the trimmable horizontal
stabilizer actuator (THSA), which could lead to reduced braking
efficiency in certain load conditions, and, in conjunction with the
inability of the power gear train to keep the ball screw in its last
commanded position, could result in uncommanded movements of the
trimmable horizontal stabilizer and loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Inspection To Determine THSA Part Number and Accumulated
Total Flight Cycles, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2016-17-12, with no changes. For airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this AD: No later than each date specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this AD, inspect the THSA to
determine if it has a part number (P/N) 47145-(XXX), and, if any
THSA P/N 47145-(XXX) is found, determine the total number of flight
cycles accumulated since the THSA's first installation on an
airplane, or since the most recent NBB replacement, whichever is
later. A review of airplane delivery or maintenance records is
acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number of the THSA
can be conclusively determined from that review. In case maintenance
records concerning the most recent NBB disk replacement are
unavailable or incomplete, the total flight cycles accumulated since
first installation of the THSA on an airplane apply. Accomplishing
the maintenance or inspection program revision required by paragraph
(l) of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.
    (1) As of September 30, 2016 (the effective date of AD 2016-17-
12): The THSA flight-cycle limit (since first installation on an
airplane, or since the most recent NBB replacement, whichever is
later) is 40,000 total flight cycles.
    (2) As of December 31, 2016: The THSA flight-cycle limit (since
first installation on an airplane, or since the most recent NBB
replacement, whichever is later) is 36,000 total flight cycles.
    (3) As of December 31, 2017: The THSA flight-cycle limit (since
first installation on an airplane, or since the most recent NBB
replacement, whichever is later) is 33,600 total flight cycles.
    (4) As of December 31, 2018: The THSA flight-cycle limit (since
first installation on an airplane, or since the most recent NBB
replacement, whichever is later) is 31,600 total flight cycles.
    (5) As of December 31, 2019: The THSA flight-cycle limit (since
first installation on an airplane, or since the most recent NBB
replacement, whichever is later) is 30,000 total flight cycles.

(h) Retained Replacements, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2016-17-12, with no changes. For airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this AD: For airplanes with any THSA P/N
47145-(XXX), do the replacements required by paragraphs (h)(1) and
(2) of this AD. Accomplishing the maintenance or inspection program
revision required by paragraph (l) of this AD terminates the
requirements of this paragraph.
    (1) No later than each date specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (5) of this AD, replace all THSA that have reached or
exceeded on each date the corresponding number of flight cycles
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this AD. Do the
replacement in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1242, Revision 01, dated February 4,
2016. Affected THSAs must be replaced with serviceable THSAs.
    (2) As of each date specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (5)
of this AD, and before exceeding the flight cycle limit
corresponding to each date, as applicable: Replace each THSA with a
serviceable THSA, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1242, Revision 01, dated February
4, 2016.

(i) Retained Definition of Serviceable THSA, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the definition of paragraph (i) of AD
2016-17-12, with no changes. For airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this AD: For the purposes of this AD, a
serviceable THSA is a THSA that has not exceeded the applicable
flight-cycle limits, as specified paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of
this AD, since first installation of the THSA on an airplane or
since last NBB replacement, whichever is later.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i): Guidance for NBB disk replacement can
be found in UTC Aerospace Systems Service Bulletin 47145-27-17,
Revision 1, dated July 21, 2015.

(j) Retained Parts Installation Limitation, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the provisions of paragraph (j) of AD
2016-17-12, with no changes. For airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this AD: As of each date specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this AD, as applicable, only
installation of a serviceable THSA P/N 47145-(XXX) is allowed on an
airplane. Accomplishing the maintenance or inspection program
revision required by paragraph (l) of this AD terminates the
requirements of this paragraph.

(k) Retained Credit for Previous Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD
2016-17-12, with no changes. For airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this AD: This paragraph provides credit for
actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before September 30, 2016 (the effective date of AD 2016-
17-12), using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1242, dated February
9, 2015.

(l) New Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    (1) For the airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this AD
with an original airworthiness certificate or original export
certificate of airworthiness issued on or before October 5, 2020,
except as specified in paragraph (m) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2020-0270, dated December 7, 2020 (EASA AD 2020-0270). Accomplishing
the maintenance or inspection program revision required by this
paragraph terminates the requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), and
(j) of this AD.
    (2) For the airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this AD
with an original airworthiness certificate or original export
certificate of airworthiness issued after October 5, 2020, revise
the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate the provision specified in paragraph (m)(7) of this AD.

(m) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0270

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0270 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA
AD 2020-0270 do not apply to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0270 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (4) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0270 is at the applicable
``thresholds'' as incorporated by the requirements of paragraph (3)
of EASA AD 2020-0270, or within 90 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (5) The provisions specified in paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2020-
0270 do not apply to this AD.
    (6) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0270 does not apply
to this AD.
    (7) For all airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this AD:
Where Note 1 in the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0270 specifies ``NBB carbon disc replacement can be accomplished in
accordance with SB A320-27-1242 or VSB 47145-27-17,'' for this AD
use ``NBB carbon disk replacement must be accomplished in accordance
with SB A320-27-1242.''

(n) New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (l) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals are allowed unless they are
approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref. Publications''
section of EASA AD 2020-0270.

(o) Terminating Action for Certain Requirements of AD 2020-21-10

    Accomplishing the actions required by this AD terminates the ALS
limitation task<PHONE_NUMBER>4-1-E for the THSA, as required by
paragraph (i) of AD 2020-21-10, for Model A318-111, -112, -121, and
-122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
-133, -151N, and -153N airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216,
-231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N
airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -
232, -251N, -251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253N, -253NX, -271N,

-271NX, -272N, and -272NX airplanes; with an original airworthiness
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness issued
on or before November 7, 2019, only.

(p) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation 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 responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (q)(4) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2016-17-12 are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2020-0270 that are
required by paragraph (l) of this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (p)(2) of this AD, 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.

(q) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2020-0270, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (2) For Airbus service information identified in this proposed
AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, Rond-Point Emile
Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93
36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
internet https://www.airbus.com.
    (3) For UTC Aerospace Systems material identified in this
proposed AD, contact Collins Aerospace, Product Support Department
13, Avenue de L'Eguillette--Saint-Ouen L'Aumone, Boite Postale 7186
95056 Cergy Pontoise Cedex, France; telephone 1-877-808-7575; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://www.collinsaerospace.com/support.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0663.
    (5) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on August 5, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-17091 Filed 8-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56462-56463]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23324]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4019-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

North Carolina; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of North Carolina (FEMA-4019-DR), dated August 31, 2011,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 1, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of North Carolina is hereby amended the following areas
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the
event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of
August 31, 2011.

    Brunswick, Chowan, Columbus, Duplin, Edgecombe, Jones, Martin,
Nash, Onslow, Pender, and Wilson Counties for Public Assistance.
    Beaufort, Carteret, Craven, Dare, Halifax, Hyde, Lenoir,
Pamlico, and Tyrrell Counties

for Public Assistance (already designated for Individual
Assistance).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-23324 Filed 9-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P