[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 49 (Friday, March 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 13457]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05891]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of Global Leadership Institute, Inc.; Order of
Suspension of Trading

March 11, 2015.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') that there is a lack of current and accurate
information concerning the securities of Global Leadership Institute,
Inc., formerly known as Cephas Holding Corp., (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)
(``Global''), because Global is delinquent in its periodic filings,
having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-Q for
the period ended September 30, 2013 on March 21, 2014, which reported a
net loss of $753,092 for the prior nine months. Global is a Delaware
corporation located in Ann Arbor, Michigan with a class of securities
registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''). The company's stock
has experienced a recent substantial increase in both price and trading
volume. The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and
the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of Global.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Exchange
Act, that trading in the securities of Global Leadership Institute,
Inc. is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on March 11, 2015,
through 11:59 p.m. EDT on March 24, 2015.

    By the Commission.
Lynn M. Powalski,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-05891 Filed 3-11-15; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 35 (Friday, February 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10162-10164]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03510]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0073; FRL-10005-61-OAR]

Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From
Hyundai Motor Company and Kia Motors Corporation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is requesting comment on applications from Hyundai Motor
Company (``Hyundai'') and Kia Motors Corporation (``Kia'') for off-
cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA's light-duty
vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission
reductions can be achieved by employing technologies that result in
real-world benefits, but where that benefit is not adequately captured
on the test procedures used by manufacturers to demonstrate compliance
with emission standards. EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
program acknowledges these benefits by giving automobile manufacturers
several options for generating ``off-cycle'' CO2 credits.
Under the regulations, a manufacturer may apply for CO2
credits for off-cycle technologies that result in off-cycle benefits.
In these cases, a manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed
methodology for determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Hyundai
and Kia have submitted applications that describe methodologies for
determining off-cycle credits from technologies described in their
applications. Pursuant to applicable regulations, EPA is making these
off-cycle credit calculation methodologies available for public
comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 23, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2020-0073, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberts French, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Fax:
(734) 214-4869. Email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance
with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a
predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies
that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This pathway allows
manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for
a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In
cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional
laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway
allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as
``5-cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2

credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies
were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and
therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use
these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek
EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-
cycle CO2 credits.\3\ This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the
5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option to
demonstrate reductions that exceed those available via use of the
predetermined list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
    \2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
    \3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-
cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third
pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the
following criteria:
     Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
     Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;
     Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
     Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
    Further, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.
     The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
     The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.
    Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to
EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.\4\ EPA
will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve
or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications

A. Active Climate Control Seats

    Hyundai and Kia are applying for off-cycle GHG credits for the use
of active climate control seat technologies. Climate Control Seats
(CCS) are a seat technology that utilizes motorized blowers,
thermoelectric devices, and seating surfaces designed for high airflow
to move chilled air through the seat and onto the occupant. In Hyundai
and Kia vehicle applications, the CCS contains two thermoelectric
chillers: One in the seat back, one in the seat cushion. The seat
cushion contains one blower motor with air ducts to direct blower air
flow through both the seat cushion and seat back. The technology
provides active cooling, which occurs when the blower motor passes
ambient cabin air across the integrated thermoelectric chillers; the
chilled air then moves through the seating surfaces and onto the
vehicle occupant. The technology allows vehicle occupants to reach
equivalent thermal comfort at a higher cabin ambient temperature
compared to a baseline seat, and therefore has the potential to reduce
A/C system fuel use more than ventilated seats.
    General Motors (GM) previously applied for credits for this
technology, and EPA approved these credits for GM in 2018.\5\ GM's
methodology referenced a 2017 study conducted by the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) in partnership with Gentherm, the manufacturer
of the CCS system.\6\ This study found that the CCS technology reduced
air conditioner loads by 17%, substantially more than the 7.5%
reduction for the older technology tested by NREL in 2005 and used to
derive the menu-based credit in the regulations. Applying this 17%
reduction to the EPA baseline A/C emissions (13.8 for cars and 17.2 for
trucks) results in off-cycle credit for CCS systems of 2.3 grams/mile
for passenger cars and 2.9 grams/mile for trucks (instead of the
default credits of 1.0 and 1.3 grams/mile, respectively). EPA considers
the CCS system to be a thermal control technology that, if approved,
will be subject to the maximum per vehicle limits of 3.0 g/mi for
passenger automobiles and 4.3 g/mi for light trucks specified in the
regulations.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``EPA Decision Document: Off-cycle Credits for General
Motors and Toyota Motor Corporation.'' Compliance Division, Office
of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA-420-R-18-014, June 2018.
    \6\ ``Impact of Active Climate Control Seats on Energy Use, Fuel
Use, and CO2 Emissions: Test and Analysis.'' Cory
Kreutzer, John Rugh, Bidzina Kekelia, Gene Titov, Strategic
Partnership Project Report, Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308, May
2017.
    \7\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b)(1)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hyundai and Kia use the Gentherm seat technology, thus they
similarly referenced the NREL report and have requested credits
identical to those already approved for GM. Their requests are for 2012
and later model year vehicles using this technology. If approved, these
credits would be for vehicles using this technology in both front
seating locations, consistent with the NREL evaluation and the credits
granted to GM.

B. Air Conditioning Compressor With Variable Orifice Valve Technology

    Hyundai and Kia are applying for off-cycle GHG credits for the use
of the Hanon air conditioner compressor with variable orifice valve
technology. The Hanon compressor design improves the internal valve
system to reduce the internal refrigerant flow necessary throughout the
range of displacements that the compressor uses during its operating
cycle. This is achieved through the addition of a variable orifice
valve. Conventional compressors have a fixed orifice, so the flow of
refrigerant exiting the crankcase is fixed. The sizing of the orifice
is a compromise among the conditions when either a high or low rate of
flow would be more ideal. However, variable orifice valve technology
can provide a larger mass flow under maximum capacity and compressor
start-up conditions by opening the valve, when high flow is ideal; it
can then reduce to smaller openings with reduced mass flow in

mid or low capacity conditions. Thus, overall, the refrigerant exiting
the crankcase is optimized across the range of operating conditions,
improving system efficiency and therefore lowering indirect
CO2 emissions due to use of the air conditioning system.
    Hyundai and Kia are applying for credits for the 2021 and later
model years for vehicles sold in the U.S. and equipped with the Hanon
A/C compressor with variable orifice valve technology. The credits
requested range from 1.5 g/mi to 1.8 g/mi, depending on the specifics
of the A/C system. EPA considers this compressor technology to be a
technology that, if approved, will be subject to the maximum limits for
an A/C system of 5.0 g/mi for passenger automobiles and 7.2 g/mi for
light trucks specified in the regulations.\8\ Details of the testing
and analysis can be found in the manufacturer's applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 40 CFR 86.1868-12(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA Decision Process

    EPA has reviewed the applications for completeness and is now
making the applications available for public review and comment as
required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit applications
submitted by the manufacturers (with confidential business information
redacted) have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section
above) and on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards.
    EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications for
off-cycle credits described in this document, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of
comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in
response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any
rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests. EPA will make its decision
available to the public by placing a decision document (or multiple
decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's website at the same
manufacturer-specific pages shown above. While the broad methodologies
used by these manufacturers could potentially be used for other
vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle specific data needed
to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions would likely be
different. In such cases, a new application would be required,
including an opportunity for public comment.

    Dated: February 11, 2020.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2020-03510 Filed 2-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 140 (Thursday, July 22, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42672-42676]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17949]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2010-0310, FRL-9178-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey; 8-
hour Ozone Control Measures

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a request by New Jersey to revise the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) for ozone involving the control of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). The proposed SIP revision consists of two new rules,
``Subchapter 26, Prevention of Air Pollution From Adhesives, Sealants,
Adhesive Primers and Sealant Primers,'' and ``Subchapter 34, TBAC
Emissions Reporting,'' (TBAC means tertiary butyl acetate or t-butyl
acetate) and revisions to ``Subchapter 23, Prevention of Air Pollution
From Architectural Coatings,'' ``Subchapter 24, Prevention of Air
Pollution From Consumer Products,'' and ``Subchapter 25, Control and
Prohibition of Air Pollution by Vehicular Fuels,'' of the New Jersey
Administrative Codes. The intended effect of this action is to approve
control strategies that will result in VOC emission reductions that
will help achieve attainment of the national ambient air quality
standard for ozone.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 23, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-
R02-OAR-2010-0310, 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: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
     Hand Delivery: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to
4:30 excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-
2010-0310. 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.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York,

New York 10007-1866. EPA requests, if at all possible, that you contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the
docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Truchan, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The following table of contents describes the format of this
rulemaking:

I. What was included in New Jersey's submittal?
II. What is EPA's evaluation of ``Subchapter 24, Prevention of Air
Pollution From Consumer Products?''
III. What is EPA's evaluation of ``Subchapter 26, Prevention of Air
Pollution From Adhesives, Sealants, Adhesive Primers and Sealant
Primers?''
IV. What is EPA's evaluation of ``Subchapter 34, TBAC Emissions
Reporting?''
V. What other rules are affected by the VOC definition change and
EPA's evaluation?
VI. What action is EPA proposing?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    For detailed information on New Jersey's proposed SIP revision and
EPA's evaluation see the Technical Support Document (TSD), prepared in
support of today's action. The TSD can be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov.

I. What was included in New Jersey's submittal?

    On April 9, 2009, Mark N. Mauriello, Commissioner, New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), submitted to EPA a
revision to the New Jersey State Implementation Plan (SIP) that
included:

--``Subchapter 24, Prevention of Air Pollution From Consumer
Products,''
--``Subchapter 26, Prevention of Air Pollution From Adhesives,
Sealants, Adhesive Primers and Sealant Primers,''
--``Subchapter 34, TBAC Emissions Reporting,'' and
--Amending the definition of VOC throughout Title 7, Chapter 27 of the
New Jersey Administrative Codes (N.J.A.C.) and Chapter 27A, and Chapter
27B.

    The State adopted these rules on October 30, 2008 and published the
adoption in the New Jersey Register on December 1, 2008 (40 New Jersey
Register 6769). These rules became operative on December 29, 2008. Also
published in the New Jersey Register was a summary of the comments
received, the State response to the comments and any changes to the
proposed rule resulting from the comments. This SIP revision will
provide statewide volatile organic compound (VOC) emission reductions
that New Jersey used in the SIP to address reasonable further progress
goals and for attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard.
    This proposed SIP revision completes the commitment New Jersey made
as part of its RACT analysis and 8-hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration
that EPA conditionally approved. See 74 FR 22837 (May 15, 2009). If EPA
approves this proposed SIP revision, the RACT analysis will be fully
approved in its entirety and EPA will replace the conditionally
approved RACT in the SIP with a full approval.

II. What is EPA's evaluation of ``Subchapter 24, Prevention of Air
Pollution From Consumer Products?''

A. Was Subchapter 24 previously approved by EPA?

    The most recent approval of Subchapter 24 occurred on January 25,
2006 (71 FR 4045). EPA had previously approved Subchapter 24 provisions
for accepting innovative products exemptions (IPEs), alternative
compliance plans (ACPs), and variances that have been approved by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) or other states with adopted
consumer product regulations based on the Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) ``Model Rule for Consumer Products.'' These provisions were fully
discussed in previous rulemakings. As part of a previous SIP revision,
New Jersey committed to forwarding all innovative product exemptions,
alternative compliance plans and variances that the State accepts to
EPA Region 2, in order for EPA to be able to determine what the
compliance requirements are for all sources regulated by the New Jersey
SIP. There have been no changes to these provisions in the current
rulemaking and EPA's previous findings still stand.

B. How was ``Subchapter 24, Prevention of Air Pollution From Consumer
Products'' revised?

1. Chemically Formulated Consumer Products
    New Jersey revised Subchapter 24's provisions consistent with the
OTC's 2007 model rules that were in turn based on the 2005 CARB rules.
The revisions to Subchapter 24 add eleven new categories of consumer
products not previously regulated and revise one existing category.
Other revisions adopted by New Jersey include adding/clarifying
definitions, requiring notifications for products sold toward the end
of a sell-through period, prohibiting solid air fresheners or toilet/
urinal care products from containing para-dichlorobenzene (a toxic air
contaminant/hazardous air pollutant). In addition, any contact
adhesive, electronic cleaner, footwear or leather care product, general
purpose degreaser, adhesive remover, electrical cleaner, graffiti
remover or automotive consumer product manufactured on and after
January 1, 2009 is prohibited from containing chlorinated toxic air
contaminants. Products manufactured before this date that do not meet
the new standards can be sold until December 31, 2011 provided the
product or packaging displays the date on which the product was
manufactured.
    All requirements apply statewide. Subchapter 24 requires that, on
or after January 1, 2009, no person shall sell, supply, offer for sale,
or manufacture consumer products that contain VOCs in excess of the VOC
content limits specified by New Jersey for those products sold in New
Jersey. Subchapter 24 includes specific exemptions, as well as
registration and product labeling requirements, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements, and test methods and procedures. Consumer
products that are sold in New Jersey for shipment and use outside of
the State of New Jersey are exempt from the VOC content limits. This
exemption reflects the intent to regulate only the manufacture and
distribution of consumer products that actually emit VOCs into New
Jersey's air and not to interfere in the transportation of goods that
are destined for use outside of the State.
2. Portable Fuel Containers
    Subchapter 24 regulates portable fuel containers and/or spouts. New
Jersey revised Subchapter 24's provisions consistent with the OTC's
2007 model rule that was in turn based on the 2006 CARB regulation. The
revised rule requires that portable fuel containers and/or spouts must
now be certified for use and sale by the manufacturer through CARB or
the EPA as meeting performance standards or specifically exempted by
either CARB or EPA. The revised rule also applies to containers labeled
for kerosene use. Other revisions incorporated into Subchapter 24
include: modifying the existing spout regulations in order to improve
spillage control; elimination of the fuel flow rate and fill level
performance standards; elimination of the automatic shutoff performance
standard; and new portable

fuel container testing procedures to streamline testing. Portable fuel
containers or spouts or both portable fuel containers and spouts, that
do not meet the new specifications, manufactured before January 28,
2009 may continue to be sold until December 29, 2009 provided it is
labeled or designated for use solely with kerosene and the date of
manufacture or a date-code representing the date of manufacture is
clearly displayed on the product. Subchapter 24 includes administrative
requirements, such as labeling, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements.

C. What is EPA's evaluation?

    The revisions to Subchapter 24 expand the number of consumer
product categories that are regulated and revised and improved the
portable fuel container requirements consistent with the OTC Model
rules and CARB rules. These changes will result in additional VOC
emission reductions.
    EPA has evaluated New Jersey's revisions to Subchapter 24 for
consistency with the Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. EPA has
determined that the revisions to Subchapter 24 meet the section 110 SIP
revision requirements of the Act. EPA is proposing to approve this
rule.

III. What is EPA's evaluation of ``Subchapter 26, Prevention of Air
Pollution From Adhesives, Sealants, Adhesive Primers and Sealant
Primers?''

A. Background

    The OTC States developed a Model Rule entitled ``OTC Model Rule For
Adhesives and Sealants'' dated 2006 which was based on the 1998 CARB
reasonably available control technology determination. This RACT
determination applied to both the manufacture and use of adhesives,
sealants, adhesive primers or sealant primers, in both industrial/
manufacturing facilities and in the field. California air districts
used this determination to develop regulations for this category. The
EPA addressed this source category with a Control Techniques Guideline
(CTG) document for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives dated September
2008. This CTG was developed in response to the Section 183(e)
requirement for EPA to study and regulate consumer and commercial
products included in EPA's Report to Congress, ``Study of Volatile
Organic Compound Emissions from Consumer and Commercial Products--
Comprehensive Emissions Inventory.'' The section 183(e) miscellaneous
industrial adhesives category was limited to adhesives and adhesive
primers used in industrial/manufacturing operations and did not include
products applied in the field. Therefore, the OTC Model Rule and state
efforts in developing individual regulations preceded EPA's CTG for
this source category and were broader in applicability.

B. What Does Subchapter 26 Require?

    Subchapter 26 is a new rule based on the OTC model rule that in
turn was based on the CARB model rule. Subchapter 26 addresses
adhesive, sealants, adhesive primers and sealant primers that are sold
in larger containers and used primarily in commercial/industrial
applications, but includes residential applications of these products,
such as carpet and flooring installations, roofing installations, etc.
Small container household adhesives are regulated by ``Subchapter 24,
Prevention of Air Pollution from Consumer Products.''
    Subchapter 26 is applicable to those who sell, supply, offer for
sale or manufacture for sale, in New Jersey, any adhesives, sealants,
adhesive primer or sealant primer, for use in New Jersey. It is also
applicable to any person who uses or applies any adhesive, sealant,
adhesive primer or sealant primer for compensation within New Jersey.
This rule will not apply to homeowners who may be using these products
for home repair and renovations. The VOC limits apply to those products
manufactured for sale and use in New Jersey on and after January 1,
2009 and allows for the unlimited sell-through and use of non-compliant
products manufactured before January 1, 2009 provided they contain a
date or date code when they were manufactured. These limits are
identical to those in the OTC and CARB model rules. The limits also
apply to all products manufactured after January 1, 2009 in New Jersey
for sale and use in New Jersey.
    As an alternative to the VOC limits established in Table 1 of
Subchapter 26, operators of stationary sources that use or apply
adhesives, sealants, or adhesive or sealant primers have the option of
using add-on pollution control equipment rather than complying with the
Table 1 limits. Requirements applying to air pollution control
equipment include: an overall capture and control efficiency of at
least 85 percent, by weight; the continuous monitoring of combustion
temperature, inlet and exhaust gas temperatures and control device
efficiency, depending upon the type of add-on controls used; and the
maintenance of operation records to demonstrate compliance.
    Subchapter 26 contains requirements for work practices, surface
preparation and cleanup solvent composition. Subchapter 26 also
includes specific exemptions, as well as registration and product
labeling requirements, recordkeeping requirements, and test methods and
compliance procedures.

C. What is EPA's evaluation?

    Subchapter 26 contains the required elements for a federally
enforceable rule: emission limitations, compliance procedures and test
methods, compliance dates and record keeping provisions.
    In comparison to the CTG, Subchapter 26 is applicable to all
stationary sources including those applications that occur outside of
the factory setting, that is, applied in the field. In addition there
are provisions that apply to the selling, supplying, offering for sale
or manufacture for sale in New Jersey of adhesives, sealants, adhesive
primers and sealant primers along with container labeling requirements
and product registrations. The VOC content restrictions for these
products apply to both their manufacture and application. Stationary
sources also have the option of using add-on control equipment that
achieves 85 percent control. Subchapter 26 also regulates the VOC
content/vapor pressure of surface-preparation and clean-up solvents for
which the CTG did not make recommendations for other than including
work practices.
    EPA recommends that when the states evaluate RACT, as required by
section 182(b) when implementing a revised 8-hour ozone standard,\1\
that they review the VOC content limits for wood adhesives and evaluate
the benefit of requiring improved methods for applying coatings
regulated by Subchapter 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 75 FR 2938 (January 19, 2010). In this proposed rule,
based upon reconsideration of the primary and secondary ozone
standards, EPA proposed to set different primary and secondary
standards than those promulgated in March 2008 to provide requisite
protection of public health and welfare, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Overall, Subchapter 26: (1) Regulates the same adhesives and
adhesive primers as the CTG with the addition of regulating sealants
and sealant primers, (2) applies to additional stationary sources, and
(3) provides for similar exemptions as the CTG recommends.
    EPA has evaluated New Jersey's submittal for consistency with the
Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. EPA has determined that
Subchapter 26 is as effective in regulating this source category as the
CTG and proposes to

approve it as part of the SIP and as meeting the requirement to adopt a
RACT rule for the Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives CTG category.

IV. What is EPA's evaluation of ``Subchapter 34, TBAC Emissions
Reporting?''

A. What does EPA require?

    The EPA revised the definition of VOC to exclude tertiary butyl
acetate or t-butyl acetate (TBAC) from VOC emissions limitations or VOC
content requirements, but requires that TBAC be considered a VOC for
purposes of recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical
dispersion modeling and inventory requirements. See 69 FR 69298
(November 29, 2004). While TBAC is now considered ``negligibly
reactive,'' EPA is concerned that should TBAC usage substantially
increase it may contribute significantly to ozone formation even with
its lower reactivity. For this reason it is necessary to track and
account for TBAC emissions.

B. What does Subchapter 34 require?

    New Jersey proposed and adopted a new rule, Subchapter 34, to meet
these requirements along with a revised definition of VOC that is
consistent with EPA's definition in 40 CFR 51.100(s). It requires
manufacturers located in New Jersey who manufacture TBAC or a product
containing TBAC, or manufacturers who produce a product containing TBAC
that is sold in New Jersey, to report the estimated amount of actual
emissions in pounds per ozone-season day and pounds per year that is
emitted in New Jersey. The rule also contains methods for calculating
the amount of TBAC and recordkeeping requirements.

C. What is EPA's evaluation?

    Generally the rule satisfies EPA requirements and guidance with one
exception. The rule requires the reporting of ``pounds per ozone-season
day,'' but only contains a definition for ``ozone season.'' In the
``Background'' section of the proposed rulemaking (39 New Jersey
Register 4492, November 5, 2007), New Jersey states that in developing
the TBAC rule, it based its requirements on the Department of
Environment Protection's other air pollution control rules with similar
reporting requirements, such as the Subchapter 21 ``Emission
Statements'' rule. EPA suggests that the next time Subchapter 34 is
revised, that the definition for ``ozone-season'' be clarified to refer
to peak ozone season as used in Subchapter 21. In the meantime, should
there be any confusion with the term ozone-season, users should use the
definition in Subchapter 21 ``Emission Statements'' and as used
specifically in Subchapter 21.5(f). With this clarification, Subchapter
34 addresses all EPA requirements necessary to account for TBAC
emissions. EPA is proposing to approve this rule.

V. What other rules are affected by the VOC definition change and EPA's
evaluation?

A. What other rules include the VOC definition change?

    The term VOC is used in several other New Jersey regulations:

``Subchapter 8, Permits and Certificates for Minor Facilities (and
Major Facilities without an Operating Permit);''
``Subchapter 16, Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution by Volatile
Organic Compounds;''
``Subchapter 17, Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution By Toxic
Substances;''
``Subchapter 18, Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution from New or
Altered Sources Affecting Ambient Air Quality (Emission Offset Rule);''
``Subchapter 19, Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution From Oxides
of Nitrogen;''
``Subchapter 21, Emission Statements;''
``Subchapter 22, Operating Permits;''
``Subchapter 23, Prevention of Air Pollution From Architectural
Coatings;'' and
``Subchapter 25, Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution by Vehicular
Fuels.''

    These rules have been amended to include the revised definition of
VOC that addresses the TBAC requirements.

B. What is EPA's evaluation?

    EPA has evaluated New Jersey's revised VOC definition for
consistency with the Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. The revised
definition of VOC as used in the above rules is consistent with EPA's
definition in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
    At this time EPA is only proposing to approve as part of the SIP
``Subchapter 23, Prevention of Air Pollution From Architectural
Coatings,'' and ``Subchapter 25, Control and Prohibition of Air
Pollution by Vehicular Fuels.'' Subchapters 16, 19, and 21 were
proposed for approval as part of the SIP on April 23, 2010 (78 FR
21197). Subchapter 22 is not part of the SIP. EPA will act on the other
rules in a separate Federal Register at a later date.

VI. What action is EPA proposing?

    These new and revised rules will strengthen the SIP by providing
additional VOC emission reductions and fulfilling commitments New
Jersey made in its 8-hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP (1997
standard) to adopt these rules. EPA is proposing to approve
``Subchapter 23, Prevention of Air Pollution From Architectural
Coatings,'' ``Subchapter 24, Prevention of Air Pollution From Consumer
Products,'' ``Subchapter 25, Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution
by Vehicular Fuels,'' ``Subchapter 26, Prevention of Air Pollution From
Adhesives, Sealants, Adhesive Primers and Sealant Primers,'' and
``Subchapter 34, TBAC Emissions Reporting,'' of title 7, chapter 27 of
the New Jersey Administrative Codes. While the changes made to the VOC
definition in the other rules included in this SIP revision are also
acceptable, EPA will act on those rules in separate Federal Register at
a later date.
    EPA is also proposing to fully approve New Jersey's RACT analysis
as New Jersey has fulfilled its commitment to adopt the identified RACT
rules, the last of which are being proposed for approval in this
action. These revisions meet the requirements of the Act and EPA's
regulations, and are consistent with EPA's guidance and policy. EPA is
taking this action pursuant to section 110 and part D of the Act and
EPA's regulations.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: July 12, 2010.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2010-17949 Filed 7-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 170 (Friday, September 2, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54183-54186]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18993]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1066; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00622-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)
2020-21-11, which applies to certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series
airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -
151N, and -153N airplanes; and Model A320 and A321 series airplanes. AD
2020-21-11 requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations. Since the FAA issued AD 2020-21-11, the FAA
has determined that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations
are necessary. This proposed AD would continue to require the actions
in AD 2020-21-11 and require revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate additional 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 October 17,
2022.

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 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 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 protected]; website
easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
ad.easa.europa.eu. 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>. It is also available in the AD docket at
regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-1066.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-1066; 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, the mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments

received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

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-2022-1066; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-00622-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
this 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
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

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 Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. 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 2020-21-11, Amendment 39-21284 (85 FR 65674,
October 16, 2020) (AD 2020-21-11), which applies to certain Airbus SAS
Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -
131, -132, -133, -151N, and -153N airplanes; and Model A320 and A321
series airplanes. AD 2020-21-11 requires revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA issued AD 2020-21-
11 to address the failure of certain life-limited parts, which could
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2020-21-11 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-21-11, the FAA has 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 2022-0082, dated May 10, 2022 (EASA
AD 2022-0082) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe
condition for all 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, -215, -216, -231, -232, -
233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes; and Model
A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -252N, -
253N, -271N, -272N, -251NX, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX, 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 February 2, 2022 must
comply with the airworthiness limitations specified as part of the
approved type design and referenced on the type certificate data sheet;
this AD therefore does not include those airplanes in the
applicability.
    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 failure of certain life-limited parts,
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. See
the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2022-0082 describes new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations for airplane structures and safe life limits.
    This AD would also require EASA AD 2020-0080, dated April 1, 2020,
which the Director of the Federal Register approved for incorporation
by reference as of November 20, 2020 (85 FR 65674, October 16, 2020).
    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

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design
Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after
determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to
exist or develop in other products of these same type designs.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2020-21-11.
This proposed AD would also require revising the existing maintenance
or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate additional new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations, which are specified in EASA
AD 2022-0082 described previously, as proposed for incorporation by
reference. Revising the existing maintenance or inspection program
would terminate the retained requirements from AD 2020-21-11. Any
differences with EASA AD 2022-0082 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 (AMOC)

according to paragraph (m)(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 some 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 2022-0082 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2022-0082 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 2022-0082 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 2022-
0082. Service information required by EASA AD 2022-0082 for compliance
will be available at regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-1066 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 and intervals
are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in
the AMOCs paragraph under ``Additional 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 action or
interval.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 1,857 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the retained
actions from AD 2020-21-11 to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-
hour).
    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).

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) 2020-21-11, Amendment 39-21284
(85 FR 65674, October 16, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2022-1066; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-
00622-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by October 17, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2020-21-11, Amendment 39-21284 (85 FR 65674,
October 16, 2020) (AD 2020-21-11).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category, with an original airworthiness certificate or original
export certificate of airworthiness issued on or before February 2,
2022.
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.

    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -
151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -
252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -
251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, -251NX, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX,
and -272NX airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address failure of certain life-limited parts,
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection
Program, With a New Terminating Action

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2020-21-11, with a new terminating action. For all airplanes with an
original airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of
airworthiness issued on or before November 13, 2019, except for
Model A319-171N airplanes: Except as specified in paragraph (h) of
this AD, comply with all required actions and compliance times
specified in, and in accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0080, dated April 1, 2020 (EASA AD 2020-0080).
Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance or inspection
program required by paragraph (j) of this AD terminates the
requirements of this paragraph.

(h) Retained Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0080, With No Changes

    (1) The requirements specified in paragraph (1), (3), and (4) of
EASA AD 2020-0080 do not apply to this AD.
    (2) Paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2020-0080 specifies revising ``the
AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this AD
requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate the ``limitations'' specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0080 within 90 days after November 20,
2020 (the effective date of AD 2020-21-11).
    (3) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2020-0080 is at the applicable compliance
times specified in paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2020-0080, or within 90
days after November 20, 2020 (the effective date of AD 2020-21-11),
whichever occurs later.
    (4) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0080 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Retained Restrictions on Alternative Actions and Intervals, With a
New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD
2020-21-11, with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph
(j) of this AD, after the maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals are allowed except as
specified in the provisions of the ``Ref. Publications'' section of
EASA AD 2020-0080.

(j) New Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Except as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2022-0082, dated May 10, 2022 (EASA AD
2022-0082). Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance
or inspection program required by this paragraph terminates the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

(k) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0082

    (1) Where EASA AD 2022-0082 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The requirements specified in paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2022-
0082 do not apply to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2022-0082 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 (2) of EASA AD 2022-0082 is at the applicable
``limitations'' as incorporated by the requirements of paragraph (2)
of EASA AD 2022-0082, or within 90 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (5) The provisions specified in paragraphs (3) and (4) of EASA
AD 2022-0082 do not apply to this AD.
    (6) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2022-0082 does not apply
to this AD.

(l) New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (j) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) and intervals are allowed unless they
are approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref.
Publications'' section of EASA AD 2022-0082.

(m) Additional FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
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 International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (n)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (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 2020-21-11 are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2022-0082 that are
required by paragraph (j) 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, 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.

(n) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2020-0080 and EASA AD 2022-0082, contact EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may
find this EASA AD on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu. 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
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket at
regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-
1066.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

    Issued on August 29, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-18993 Filed 9-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 14 (Monday, January 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3049-3050]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01054]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2017-0131]

Notice of Application for Approval To Discontinue or Modify a
Railroad Signal System

    Under part 235 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
and 49 U.S.C. 20502(a), this provides the public notice that on
December 11, 2017, Union Pacific Railroad (UP) petitioned the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) seeking approval to discontinue or modify
a signal system. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-2017-0131.
    Applicant: Union Pacific Railroad, Mr. Kevin D. Hicks, AVP
Engineering--Design, 1400 Douglas Street, MS 0910, Omaha, NE 68179.
    Union Pacific seeks to retire the traffic control system (TCS) on
the #3 track between control point (CP) K005 and CP K006, between
mileposts (MP) 5.00 and MP 6.10, on the KC Metro (Kansas) subdivision.
    The reason for this retirement is to accommodate a proposed Remote
Controlled Locomotive (RCL) zone expansion project for the 181st Street
Yard and to facilitate switching operations. RCL trains will move in
the block per General Code of Operating Rules pertaining to RCL
locomotives. Other trains will enter the block at either end on a
restricting signal indication and move at restricted speed.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is open
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested parties
desire an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by March 8, 2018 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/

privacyNotice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018-01054 Filed 1-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P