[Federal Register: August 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 157)]
[Notices]
[Page 49918-49921]
[DOCID:fr16au10-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

August 6, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER01-615-018; ER09-746-003; ER96-1551-022.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico; Optim Energy
Marketing, LLC.
    Description: Supplemental Information of Public Service Company of
New Mexico, et al.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5091.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1502-002; ER08-213-002.
    Applicants: Round Rock Energy, LLC, Round Rock Energy, LP.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change In Status for Round Rock
Energy, LLC.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-1259-004.
    Applicants: San Joaquin Cogen, LLC.
    Description: San Joaquin Cogen, LLC submits Substitute Original
Sheet 1 et al. to its FERC Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-0204.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1114-003; ER09-1110-002.
    Applicants: RRI Energy Services, Inc.; RRI Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to Notice of Change in Status filed on
February 1, 2010 of RRI Energy Florida, LLC and RRI Energy Services,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5084.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-308-002.
    Applicants: Kleen Energy Systems, LLC.
    Description: Kleen Energy Systems, LLC submits captioned public
utility's conformed market-based rate tariff.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-0203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2097-001.
    Applicants: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company.

    Description: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company submits
tariff filing per 35: KCP&L-GMO Baseline Compliance Filing to be
effective 8/2/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2110-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC submits materials in support of their
request for authorization to use updated depreciation rates in the
calculation of charges for transmission services provided under ER10-
2110.
    Filed Date: 08/02/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100802-0237.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, August 16, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2116-000.
    Applicants: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company.
    Description: KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company submits
tariff filing per 35.12: KCP&L-GMO OATT Volume 24 BASELINE to be
effective 8/4/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100804-5124.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2117-000.
    Applicants: Boralex Livermore Falls LP.
    Description: Boralex Livermore Falls LP submits tariff filing per
35.12: Boralex Livermore Falls LP Baseline Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100804-5131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2118-000.
    Applicants: Boralex Stratton Energy LP.
    Description: Boralex Stratton Energy LP submits tariff filing per
35.12: Boralex Stratton Energy LP Baseline Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100804-5132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2119-000.
    Applicants: Boralex Fort Fairfield LP.
    Description: Boralex Fort Fairfield LP submits tariff filing per
35.12: Boralex Fort Fairfield LP Baseline Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100804-5135.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2120-000.
    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company.
    Description: Virginia Electric and Power Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii) Revised Tariff Sheets to be effective 8/3/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100804-5137.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2121-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii) Letter Agreement Iberdrola Manzana Wind N
080510 to be effective 7/22/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5000.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2122-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii) 2010-08-05 CAISO Service
Agreement 1562, LGIA for CPC East to be effective 7/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5003.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2123-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii) 1903 Novus Wind II, LLC LGIA to be effective 7/30/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2124-000.
    Applicants: Spring Canyon Energy LLC.
    Description: Spring Canyon Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2125-000.
    Applicants: Judith Gap Energy LLC.
    Description: Judith Gap Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5038.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2126-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Idaho Power Baseline Tariffs to be effective 8/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5039.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2127-000.
    Applicants: Invenergy TN LLC.
    Description: Invenergy TN LLC submits tariff filing per 35: Refile
Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5040.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2128-000.
    Applicants: Wolverine Creek Energy LLC.
    Description: Wolverine Creek Energy LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/
5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2129-000.
    Applicants: Grays Harbor Energy LLC.
    Description: Grays Harbor Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5042.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2130-000.
    Applicants: Forward Energy LLC.
    Description: Forward Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2131-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy LLC.
    Description: Grand Ridge Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5044.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2132-000.
    Applicants: Willow Creek Energy LLC.
    Description: Willow Creek Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.

    Accession Number: 20100805-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2133-000.
    Applicants: Sheldon Energy LLC.
    Description: Sheldon Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2134-000.
    Applicants: Hardee Power Partners Limited.
    Description: Hardee Power Partners Limited submits tariff filing
per 35: Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective
8/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2135-000.
    Applicants: Spindle Hill Energy LLC.
    Description: Spindle Hill Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5048.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2136-000.
    Applicants: Invenergy Cannon Falls LLC.
    Description: Invenergy Cannon Falls LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/
5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5049.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2137-000.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy LLC.
    Description: Beech Ridge Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2138-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy II LLC.
    Description: Grand Ridge Energy II LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/
5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2139-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy III LLC.
    Description: Grand Ridge Energy III LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/
5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2140-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy IV LLC.
    Description: Grand Ridge Energy IV LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/
5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2141-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy V LLC.
    Description: Grand Ridge Energy V LLC submits tariff filing per 35:
Refile Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 8/5/
2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2142-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC et al. submits transmittal letter and
Operations Service Agreement for 34.5 kv transmission facilities etc.
    Filed Date: 08/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-0206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2143-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Ohio, Inc.
    Description: Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. Notice of Cancellation.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5066.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2144-000.
    Applicants: RRI Energy West, Inc.
    Description: RRI Energy West, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Baseline Filing to be effective 9/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5102.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2145-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.12: Baseline Electronic Governing Documents Tariff Filing to be
effective 8/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2146-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: CAISO Service Agreement
1631, LGIA for CPC West to be effective 7/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5126.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2147-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: CAISO Service 1643, LGIA for
Solar Partners II) to be effective 8/3/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5127.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2148-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: CAISO Service Agreement
1645, LGIA for Solar Partners VIII) to be effective 8/3/2010.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5128.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 26, 2010.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electronic
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES10-51-000.
    Applicants: AEP Appalachian Transmission Company, Inc, AEP Indiana
Michigan Transmission Company, AEP Kentucky Transmission Company, Inc,
AEP Oklahoma Transmission Company, Inc., AEP Southwestern Transmission
Company, Inc, AEP West Virginia Transmission Company, Inc.
    Description: Second Supplemental Application of AEP Appalachian
Transmission Company, Inc., et al. under Section 204 of the Federal
Power Act.
    Filed Date: 08/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100805-5077.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, August 16, 2010.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern

time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately
intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you
have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings
initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or
before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than
the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-20135 Filed 8-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 174 (Friday, September 7, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55175-55179]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22043]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 578

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0131; Notice 1]
RIN 2127-AL16

Civil Penalties

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to increase the maximum civil penalty
amounts for violations of motor vehicle safety requirements for the
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended, and
violations of bumper standards and consumer information provisions.
Specifically, this proposes increases in maximum civil penalty amounts
for single violations of motor vehicle safety requirements, a series of
related violations of school bus and equipment safety requirements, a
series of related violations of bumper standards, and a series of
related violations of consumer information regarding crashworthiness
and damage susceptibility requirements. This action would be taken
pursuant to the Federal Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment Act
of 1990, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996,
which requires us to review and, as warranted, adjust penalties based
on inflation at least every four years.

DATES: Comments on the proposal are due October 9, 2012.
    Proposed effective date: 30 days after date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001
     Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Regardless of how you submit your comments, please note the docket
number of this document.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the ``Privacy Act'' heading below.
    Privacy Act: Please see the Privacy Act heading under Rulemaking
Analyses.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Weisman, Office of Chief
Counsel, NHTSA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>,
1200 New Jersey Ave, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In order to preserve the remedial impact of civil penalties and to
foster compliance with the law, the Federal Civil Monetary Penalty
Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461 Notes, Pub. L. 101-
410), as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (Pub.
L. 104-134) (referred to collectively as the ``Adjustment Act'' or,

in context, the ``Act''), requires us and other Federal agencies to
adjust civil penalties for inflation. Under the Adjustment Act,
following an initial adjustment that was capped by the Act, these
agencies must make further adjustments, as warranted, to the amounts of
penalties in statutes they administer at least once every four years.
    NHTSA's initial adjustment of civil penalties under the Adjustment
Act was published on February 4, 1997. 62 FR 5167. At that time, we
codified the penalties under statutes administered by NHTSA, as
adjusted, in 49 CFR part 578, Civil Penalties. Thereafter, we adjusted
certain penalties based on the Adjustment Act and codified others based
on other laws including the Transportation Recall Enhancement,
Accountability, and Documentation Act.
    On May 16, 2006, NHTSA last adjusted the maximum civil penalty for
a single violation of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, sections 30112,
30115, 30117 through 30122, 30123, 30125(c), 30127, or 30141 through
30147 of Title 49 of the United States Code or a regulation thereunder,
as specified in 49 CFR 578.6(a)(1) from $5,000 to $6,000. 71 FR 28279.
At the same time, the agency adjusted the maximum civil penalty for a
single violation of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, section 30166 of
Title 49 of the United States Code or a regulation thereunder, to
$6,000.
    On February 10, 2010, NHTSA last adjusted the maximum civil penalty
for a related series of violations of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act as
amended involving school buses and school bus equipment, section
30112(a)(1) as it involves school buses and school bus equipment and
section 30112(a)(2) of Title 49 of the United States Code, as specified
in 49 CFR 578.6(a)(2) from $15,000,000 to $16,650,000. 75 FR 5246.
    Also on February 10, 2010, NHTSA last adjusted the maximum civil
penalty for a related series of violations of bumper standards, section
32506 of Title 49 of the United States Code, as specified in 49 CFR
578.6(c)(2) from $1,025,000 to $1,175,000. 75 FR 5246. In addition, on
February 10, 2010, NHTSA last adjusted the maximum civil penalty for a
related series of violations of consumer information requirements
regarding crashworthiness and damage susceptibility, section 32308 of
Title 49 of the United States Code, as specified in 49 CFR 578.6(d)(1)
from $500,000 to $575,000. 75 FR 5246.
    We have reviewed the civil penalty amounts in 49 CFR part 578 and
propose in this notice to adjust certain penalties under the Adjustment
Act.

Method of Calculation--Proposed Adjustments

    Under the Adjustment Act, we determine the inflation adjustment for
each applicable civil penalty by increasing the maximum civil penalty
amount per violation by a cost-of-living adjustment, and then applying
a rounding factor. Section 5(b) of the Adjustment Act defines the
``cost-of-living'' adjustment as:
    The percentage (if any) for each civil monetary penalty by which--
    (1) The Consumer Price Index for the month of June of the calendar
year preceding the adjustment exceeds
    (2) The Consumer Price Index for the month of June of the calendar
year in which the amount of such civil monetary penalty was last set or
adjusted pursuant to law.
    Since the proposed adjustment is intended to be effective before
December 31, 2012, the ``Consumer Price Index [CPI] for the month of
June of the calendar year preceding the adjustment'' would be the CPI
for June 2011. This figure, based on the Adjustment Act's requirement
of using the CPI ``for all-urban consumers published by the Department
of Labor'' is 676.162.\1\ The penalty amounts that NHTSA proposes to
adjust based on the Adjustment Act's requirements were last set in 2006
for a single violation of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and in 2010 for
a series of related violations of school bus safety requirements, a
series of related violations of bumper standards, and a series of
related violations of consumer information requirements regarding
crashworthiness and damage susceptibility. The CPI figure for June of
2006 is 607.8 and June of 2010 is 652.926
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Individuals interested in deriving the CPI figures used by
the agency may visit the Department of Labor's Consumer Price Index
Home Page at http://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm. Scroll down to ``CPI
Databases'', ``All Urban Consumers (Current Series)'', and click on
``Top Picks''. Next, select the ``U.S. ALL ITEMS 1967=100--
CUUR0000AA0'' box, and click on the ``Retrieve Data'' button.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the factors that we are using in calculating the
proposed increases are 1.11 (676.162/607.8) for a single Motor Vehicle
Safety Act violation and 1.04 (676.162/652.926) for a related series of
Motor Vehicle Safety Act violations pertaining to school buses or
school bus equipment, as well as for a series of related violations of
bumper standards, and a series of related violations of consumer
information requirements. Using these inflation factors, calculated
increases under these adjustments are then subject to a specific
rounding formula set forth in Section 5(a) of the Adjustment Act. 28
U.S.C. 2461, Notes. Under that formula:
    Any increase shall be rounded to the nearest:
    (1) Multiple of $10 in the case of penalties less than or equal to
$100;
    (2) Multiple of $100 in the case of penalties greater than $100 but
less than or equal to $1,000;
    (3) Multiple of $1,000 in the case of penalties greater than $1,000
but less than or equal to $10,000;
    (4) Multiple of $5,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$10,000 but less than or equal to $100,000;
    (5) Multiple of $10,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$100,000 but less than or equal to $200,000; and
    (6) Multiple of $25,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$200,000.

Proposed Change to Maximum Penalties Under the Motor Vehicle Safety
Act, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301

Proposed Changes to 49 CFR 578.6(a)(1), (a)(3)

    The maximum civil penalty for a violation of any of sections 30112,
30115, 30117 through 30122, 30123(a), 30125(c), 30127, or 30141 through
30147 of Title 49 of the United States Code or a regulation prescribed
under any of those sections is $6,000, as specified in 49 CFR
578.6(a)(1). The underlying statutory civil penalty provision is 49
U.S.C. 30165(a)(1). Applying the appropriate inflation factor (1.11) to
the Adjustment Act calculation raises the $6,000 figure to $6,679, an
increase of $679. Under the rounding formula, any increase in a
penalty's amount shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $1,000. In
this case, the increase would be $1,000. Accordingly, NHTSA proposes
that Section 578.6(a)(1) be amended to increase the maximum civil
penalty from $6,000 to $7,000 for each violation.
    The maximum civil penalty for a violation of section 30166 of Title
49 of the United States Code or a regulation prescribed under that
section is $6,000, as specified in 49 CFR 578.6(a)(3). The underlying
statutory civil penalty provision is 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(3). Applying
the appropriate inflation factor (1.11) to the Adjustment Act
calculation raises the $6,000 figure to $6,679, an increase of $679.
Under the rounding formula, any increase in a penalty's amount shall be
rounded to the nearest multiple of $1,000. In this case, the increase
would be $1,000. Accordingly, NHTSA proposes that Section 578.6(a)(3)
be amended to increase the maximum civil penalty from $6,000 to $7,000
per violation per day.

Proposed Change to 49 CFR 578.6(a)(2)

    The maximum civil penalty for a series of related violations of
section 30112(a)(1) of Title 49 of the United States Code involving
school buses or school bus equipment, or of the prohibition on school
system purchases and leases of 15 passenger vans as specified in
30112(a)(2) of Title 49 of the United States Code is $16,650,000, as
codified in 49 CFR 578.6(a)(2). The underlying statutory civil penalty
provision is 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(2). Applying the appropriate inflation
factor (1.04) to the Adjustment Act calculation raises the $16,650,000
figure to $17,242,531, an increase of $592,531. Applying the rounding
rules, which instruct that increases be rounded to the closest $25,000,
produces an increase of $600,000. Accordingly, NHTSA proposes that the
maximum penalty under Section 578.6(a)(2) be increased to $17,250,000.

Proposed Change to Maximum Penalty Under 49 U.S.C. 32506(a) (49 CFR
578.6(c))

    The maximum civil penalty for a series of related violations of
bumper prohibitions, section 32506(a) of Title 49 of the United States
Code, is $1,175,000 as specified in 49 CFR 578.6(c).
    The underlying statutory civil penalty provision is 49 U.S.C.
32507. Applying the appropriate inflation factor (1.04) to the
Adjustment Act calculation raises the $1,175,000 figure to $1,216,815,
an increase of $41,815. Applying the rounding rules, which instruct
that increases be rounded to the closest $25,000, produces an increase
of $50,000. Accordingly, NHTSA proposes that the maximum penalty under
Section 578.6(c)(2) be increased to $1,225,000.

Proposed Change to Maximum Penalty Under the Consumer Information
Provisions (49 CFR 578.6(d)(1))

    The maximum civil penalty for a series of related violations of
consumer information provisions regarding crashworthiness and damage
susceptibility, section 32308(a) of Title 49 of the United States Code,
is $575,000 as specified in 49 CFR 578.6(d)(1). Applying the
appropriate inflation factor (1.04) to the Adjustment Act calculation
raises the $575,000 figure to $595,462, an increase of $20,462.
Applying the rounding rules, which instruct that increases be rounded
to the closest $25,000, produces an increase of $25,000. Accordingly,
NHTSA proposes that the maximum penalty under Section 578.6(a)(d)(1) be
increased to $600,000.

Codification of Penalty in the Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle Fuel
Efficiency Program

    The Agency's regulations provide that the maximum penalty is
$37,500 per vehicle or engine. 49 CFR 535.9(b)(3). Consistent with the
approach of codifying the penalties under statutes administered by
NHTSA in Part 578, NHTSA will codify this amount in a new subsection
(i) of 49 CFR 578.6.

Effective Date

    The amendments would be effective 30 days after publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register. The adjusted penalties would apply
to violations occurring on and after the effective date.

Request for Comments

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
NHTSA established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
    Please submit your comments to the docket electronically by logging
onto http://www.regulations.gov or by the means given in the ADDRESSES
section at the beginning of this document.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit the following to the Chief Counsel
(NCC-110) at the address given at the beginning of this document under
the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) A complete copy of the
submission; (2) a redacted copy of the submission with the confidential
information removed; and (3) either a second complete copy or those
portions of the submission containing the material for which
confidential treatment is claimed and any additional information that
you deem important to the Chief Counsel's consideration of your
confidentiality claim. A request for confidential treatment that
complies with 49 CFR part 512 must accompany the complete submission
provided to the Chief Counsel. For further information, submitters who
plan to request confidential treatment for any portion of their
submissions are advised to review 49 CFR part 512, particularly those
sections relating to document submission requirements. Failure to
adhere to the requirements of Part 512 may result in the release of
confidential information to the public docket. In addition, you should
submit two copies from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given at the
beginning of this document under ADDRESSES.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated at
the beginning of this notice under DATES. In accordance with our
policies, to the extent possible, we will also consider comments that
Docket Management receives after the specified comment closing date. If
Docket Management receives a comment too late for us to consider in
developing the proposed rule, we will consider that comment as an
informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address and times given near the beginning of this document under
ADDRESSES.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments
on the Internet, take the following steps:
    (1) Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the
Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov/).
    (2) On that page, click on ``search.''
    (3) On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the
four-digit docket number shown at the heading of this document.
Example: if the docket number were ``NHTSA-2006-1234,'' you would type
``1234.''
    (4) After typing the docket number, click on ``search.''
    (5) The next page contains docket summary information for the
docket you selected. Click on the comments you wish to see.
    You may download the comments. The comments are imaged documents,
in either TIFF or PDF format. Please note that even after the comment
closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in the
Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late
comments. Accordingly, we

recommend that you periodically search the Docket for new material.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed
under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This
action is limited to the proposed adoption of adjustments of civil
penalties under statutes that the agency enforces, and has been
determined to be not ``significant'' under the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures and the policies of
the Office of Management and Budget.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We have also considered the impacts of this notice under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that a final rule based on this
proposal will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The following provides the factual basis for
this certification under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The proposed amendments
almost entirely potentially affect manufacturers of motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment.
    The Small Business Administration's regulations define a small
business in part as a business entity ``which operates primarily within
the United States.'' 13 CFR 121.105(a). SBA's size standards were
previously organized according to Standard Industrial Classification
(``SIC'') Codes. SIC Code 336211 ``Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing''
applied a small business size standard of 1,000 employees or fewer. SBA
now uses size standards based on the North American Industry
Classification System (``NAICS''), Subsector 336--Transportation
Equipment Manufacturing, which provides a small business size standard
of 1,000 employees or fewer for automobile manufacturing businesses.
Other motor vehicle-related industries have lower size requirements
that range between 500 and 750 employees.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For example, according to the SBA coding system, businesses
that manufacture truck trailers, travel trailers/campers,
carburetors, pistons, piston rings, valves, vehicular lighting
equipment, motor vehicle seating/interior trim, and motor vehicle
stamping qualify as small businesses if they employ 500 or fewer
employees. Similarly, businesses that manufacture gasoline engines,
engine parts, electrical and electronic equipment (non-vehicle
lighting), motor vehicle steering/suspension components (excluding
springs), motor vehicle brake systems, transmissions/power train
parts, motor vehicle air-conditioning, and all other motor vehicle
parts qualify as small businesses if they employ 750 or fewer
employees. See http://www.sba.gov/size/sizetable.pdf for further
details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many small businesses are subject to the penalty provisions of 49
U.S.C. Chapter 301 (Motor Vehicle Safety Act) and therefore may be
affected by the adjustments that this NPRM proposes to make. For
example, based on comprehensive reporting pursuant to the early warning
reporting (EWR) rule under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 CFR part
579, of the more than 60 light vehicle manufacturers reporting, over
half are small businesses. Also, there are other, relatively low
production vehicle manufacturers that are not subject to comprehensive
EWR reporting. Furthermore, there are about 70 registered importers.
Equipment manufacturers (including importers), entities selling motor
vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, and motor vehicle repair
businesses are also subject to penalties under 49 U.S.C. 30165.
    As noted throughout this preamble, this proposed rule would only
increase the maximum penalty amounts that the agency could obtain for a
single violation and a related series of violations of various
provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as well as for a series of
related violations of bumper standards, and a series of related
violations of consumer information requirements for violations. Under
the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the penalty provision requires the agency
to take into account the size of a business when determining the
appropriate penalty in an individual case. See 49 U.S.C. 30165(b). The
agency would also consider the size of a business under its civil
penalty policy when determining the appropriate civil penalty amount.
See 62 FR 37115 (July 10, 1997) (NHTSA's civil penalty policy under the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (``SBREFA'')). The
penalty adjustments that are being proposed would not affect our civil
penalty policy under SBREFA.
    Since this regulation would not establish penalty amounts, this
proposal will not have a significant economic impact on small
businesses.
    Small organizations and governmental jurisdictions would not be
significantly affected as the price of motor vehicles and equipment
ought not change as the result of this proposed rule. As explained
above, this action is limited to the proposed adoption of a statutory
directive, and has been determined to be not ``significant'' under the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a
regulation with Federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, the agency
consults with State and local governments, or the agency consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation.
    This proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
The reason is that this proposed rule would generally apply to motor
vehicle and motor vehicle equipment manufacturers (including
importers), entities that sell motor vehicles and equipment and motor
vehicle repair businesses. It would have very limited applicability to
States or local governments, as where they purchase or lease 15
passenger vans used for certain school purposes or activities, which
vans do not comply with federal motor vehicle safety standards for
school buses and multifunction school activity buses. Thus, the
requirements of Section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104-4,
requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the cost, benefits
and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal
mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually. Because this rule will not have a $100 million
effect, no

Unfunded Mandates assessment will be prepared.

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule does not have a retroactive or preemptive
effect. Judicial review of a rule based on this proposal may be
obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not require that a
petition for reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial review.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, we state
that there are no requirements for information collection associated
with this rulemaking action.

Privacy Act

    Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of
all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78), or
you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 578

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and Rubber
Products, Tires, Penalties.
    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 578 would be amended
as set forth below.
    1. The authority citation for 49 CFR Part 578 is revised to read as
follows:

    Authority:  Pub. L. 101-410, Pub. L. 104-134, Pub. L. 109-59, 49
U.S.C. 30165, 30170, 30505, 32308, 32309, 32507, 32709, 32710,
32902, 32912, and 33115; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.81,
1.95.

    2. Section 578.6 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2),
(a)(3), (c)(2), and (d)(1) and adding a new paragraph (i) to read as
follows:

PART 578--CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES

Sec.  578.6  Civil penalties for violations of specified provisions of
Title 49 of the United States Code.

    (a) Motor vehicle safety--(1) In general. A person who violates any
of sections 30112, 30115, 30117 through 30122, 30123(a), 30125(c),
30127, or 30141 through 30147 of Title 49 of the United States Code or
a regulation prescribed under any of those sections is liable to the
United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $7,000
for each violation. A separate violation occurs for each motor vehicle
or item of motor vehicle equipment and for each failure or refusal to
allow or perform an act required by any of those sections. The maximum
civil penalty under this paragraph for a related series of violations
is $17,350,000.
    (2) School buses. (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, a person who:
    (i) Violates section 30112(a)(1) of Title 49 United States Code by
the manufacture, sale, offer for sale, introduction or delivery for
introduction into interstate commerce, or importation of a school bus
or school bus equipment (as those terms are defined in 49 U.S.C.
30125(a)): or
    (ii) violates section 30112(a)(2) of Title 49 United States Code,
shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $11,000 for each
violation. A separate violation occurs for each motor vehicle or item
of motor vehicle equipment and for each failure or refusal to allow or
perform an act required by this section. The maximum penalty under this
paragraph for a related series of violations is $17,250,000.
    (3) Section 30166. A person who violates section 30166 of Title 49
of the United States Code or a regulation prescribed under that section
is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty for
failing or refusing to allow or perform an act required under that
section or regulation. The maximum penalty under this paragraph is
$7,000 per violation per day. The maximum penalty under this paragraph
for a related series of daily violations is $17,350,000.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) The maximum civil penalty under this paragraph (c) for a
related series of violations is $1,225,000.
    (d) Consumer information--(1) Crash-worthiness and damage
susceptibility. A person that violates 49 U.S.C. 32308(a), regarding
crashworthiness and damage susceptibility, is liable to the United
States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $1,100 for each
violation. Each failure to provide information or comply with a
regulation in violation of 49 U.S.C. 32308(a) is a separate violation.
The maximum penalty under this paragraph for a related series of
violations is $600,000.
* * * * *
    (i) Medium- and heavy-duty vehicle fuel efficiency. The maximum
civil penalty for a violation of the fuel consumption standards of 49
CFR part 535 is not more than $37,500 per vehicle or engine. The
maximum civil penalty for a related series of violations shall be
determined by multiplying $37,500.00 times the vehicle or engine
production volume for the model year in question within the regulatory
averaging set.

    Issued on: August 30, 2012.
O. Kevin Vincent,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012-22043 Filed 9-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 20, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60298-60300]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27263]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1173; Product Identifier 2017-SW-030-AD; Amendment
39-19131; AD 2017-25-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. Helicopters

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding airworthiness directive (AD) 2011-27-08 for
Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model A109S and AW109SP helicopters. AD 2011-27-
08 required repetitively inspecting each elevator assembly for a crack.
This new AD retains the initial inspection interval and adds a
repetitive borescope inspection. This AD is prompted by the discovery
of another crack on an elevator assembly since AD 2011-27-08 was
issued. The actions of this AD are intended to prevent an unsafe
condition on these helicopters.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 4, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of January 4, 2018.
    We must receive comments on this AD by February 20, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1173; or in person at the Docket Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, any
incorporated-by-reference service information, the economic evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Matteo Ragazzi, Head of Airworthiness,
Viale G.Agusta 520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone
+39-0331-711756; fax +39-0331-229046; or at http://www.leonardocompany.com/-/bulletins. You may review the referenced
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1173.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Hatfield, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA,
10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, we
invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written
comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the
economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that resulted
from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific
portion of the AD, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should
submit them only one time. We will file in the docket all comments that
we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning this rulemaking during the
comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may
conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments.

Discussion

    We issued AD 2011-27-08 (77 FR 3382, January 24, 2012) (2011-27-
08), for Agusta Model A109S and AW109SP helicopters with elevator
assemblies, part number (P/N) 109-0200-02-601, 109-0200-02-801, 109-
0200-02-602, 109-0200-02-802, 109-0200-02-803, or 109-0200-02-804
installed. AD 2011-27-08 required repetitively inspecting the left and
right elevator assemblies for a crack and replacing the elevator
assembly before further flight if there is a crack. AD 2011-27-08 was
prompted by AD No. 2011-0150, dated August 9, 2011 (AD 2011-0150),
issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of
the European Union, to correct an unsafe condition for Agusta Model
A109S and AW109SP helicopters. EASA advised of a fracture of the left
elevator assembly along the riveting of the upper skin to the fourth
rib due to fatigue.

Actions Since AD 2011-27-08 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2011-27-08, EASA has issued Emergency AD No.
2017-0085-E, dated May 12, 2017 (EAD 2017-0085-E), which supersedes AD
2011-0150. EASA advises that since AD 2011-0150 was issued, another
crack was found in an elevator assembly during a post-flight inspection
on an A109S helicopter. EAD 2017-0085-E requires a one-time visual or
dye-penetrant inspection of the elevator upper skin in the area of the
fourth rib, and also requires drilling an access hole in each elevator
and performing repetitive inspections of the internal areas with an
endoscope. If there is a crack, EAD 2017-0085-E requires replacing the
cracked elevator assembly or contacting Agusta for an approved repair.
    Also, the FAA is in the process of updating Agusta's name change to
Leonardo Helicopters S.p.A. on its FAA type certificate. Because this
name change is not yet effective, this AD specifies Agusta.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, its technical representative,
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in the EASA AD. We
are issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by
EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist
or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Leonardo Helicopters has issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin
(EASB) No. 109S-076 for Model A109S helicopters, and EASB No. 109SP-113
for Model AW109SP helicopters, both Revision A and dated May 12, 2017.
Each EASB specifies procedures for visually inspecting the elevator
assembly skin for a crack, adding an inspection hole to the elevator
assembly, and inspecting the interior of the elevator assembly with an
endoscope.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

AD Requirements

    This AD retains the initial visual inspection of AD 2011-27-08, but
changes the compliance time to before further flight or before the
elevator assembly exceeds 400 hours TIS, whichever occurs later.
    The AD also requires, within 10 hours TIS or before the elevator
assembly exceeds 400 hours TIS, whichever occurs later, drilling an
access hole on the lower face of each elevator assembly and performing
a borescope inspection of the internal areas of the elevator assembly
leading edge and trailing edge longerons and upper web for a crack. If
there is a crack, the AD requires replacing the elevator assembly
before further flight. Lastly, this AD requires repeating the borescope
inspection every 25 hours TIS.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD allows a dye-penetrant inspection of the elevator
assembly as an option, while this AD does not.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 14 helicopters of U.S.
Registry.
    At an average labor rate of $85 per hour, we estimate that
operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this
AD. Inspecting the elevator assemblies with a magnifying glass will
require 3 work-hours for a cost of $255 per helicopter and $3,570 for
the U.S. fleet.
    Drilling an access hole will require 1 work-hour and required parts
cost would be minimal, for a cost of $85 per helicopter and $1,190 for
the U.S. fleet.
    Inspecting with a borescope will require 1 work-hour for a cost of
$85 per helicopter and $1,190 for the U.S. fleet per inspection cycle.
    If required, replacing a cracked elevator assembly will require 10
work-hours and required parts will cost $23,905 for a cost per
helicopter of $24,755.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because some of the corrective actions must be accomplished before
further flight. Therefore, we find good cause that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable. In addition,
for the reason stated above, we find that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2011-27-08, Amendment 39-16910 (77 FR 3382, January 24, 2012), and
adding the following new AD:

2017-25-17 Agusta S.p.A.: Amendment 39-19131; Docket No. FAA-2017-
1173; Product Identifier 2017-SW-030-AD.

 (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model A109S and AW109SP helicopters with
elevator assemblies, part number (P/N) 109-0200-02-601, 109-0200-02-
801, 109-0200-02-602, 109-0200-02-802, 109-0200-02-803, or 109-0200-
02-804 installed, certificated in any category.

 (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a fatigue crack on the
elevator assembly. This condition could result in failure of the
elevator, reduced maneuverability of the helicopter, and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.

 (c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2011-27-08, Amendment 39-16910 (77 FR
3382, January 24, 2012).

 (d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective January 4, 2018.

 (e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

 (f) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight or before the elevator assembly
accumulates 400 hours time-in-service (TIS), whichever occurs later,
inspect the left and right elevator upper skin along the 4th rib
station rivet line from the leading edge to 200 mm aft with a 10X or
higher power magnifying glass for a crack in the area depicted in
Figure 1 of Leonardo Helicopters Emergency Alert Service Bulletin
(EASB) No. 109S-076, Revision A, dated May 12, 2017 (EASB 109S-076),
or EASB No. 109SP-113, Revision A, dated May 12, 2017 (EASB 109SP-
113), as appropriate for your model helicopter. If there is a crack,
before further flight, replace the elevator assembly.
    (2) Within 10 hours TIS or before the elevator assembly
accumulates 400 hours TIS, whichever occurs later:
    (i) Drill a 19.05 mm access hole on the lower face of each
elevator assembly as depicted in Figure 2 of EASB 109S-076 or EASB
109SP-113, as appropriate for your model helicopter. Apply Alodine
or equivalent coating and epoxy polyamide primer to the hole
surface.
    (ii) Using a borescope, inspect the internal area of each
elevator assembly for a crack along the leading edge and trailing
edge longerons and upper web as depicted in Figure 3 of EASB 109S-
076 or EASB 109SP-113, as appropriate for your model helicopter. If
there is a crack, before further flight, replace the elevator
assembly. Repeat this inspection at intervals not to exceed 25 hours
TIS.

 (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards
Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to:
David Hatfield, Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section,
Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth,
TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

 (h) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD No. 2017-0085-E, dated May 12, 2017. You may view
the EASA AD on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2017-1173.

 (i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 5520 Elevator
Structure.

 (j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Leonardo Helicopters Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No.
109S-076, Revision A, dated May 12, 2017.
    (ii) Leonardo Helicopters Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No.
109SP-113, Revision A, dated May 12, 2017.
    (3) For Leonardo Helicopters service information identified in
this AD, contact Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Matteo Ragazzi, Head
of Airworthiness, Viale G. Agusta 520, 21017 C. Costa di Samarate
(Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-711756; fax +39-0331-229046; or at
http://www.leonardocompany.com/-/bulletins.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December 4, 2017.
Scott A. Horn,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-27263 Filed 12-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


1 Toxics Release Inventory TRI Reporting Forms Modifications:

Burden Reduction Rule Shelley Fudge TRI Program Division 202 566 0674 Fudge. Shelley@ epa. gov 2 Reporting Forms Modifications Rule ° Primary goal: Proposing changes to Form R and Form A in order to streamline TRI reporting,

wherever possible, to reduce burden on reporters (& EPA) while maintaining utility of the data ° Options derived from public comments and program considerations ° Timeline:

  Proposed rule anticipated release: December 2004 3 Four types of options 1. Facility information to remove from Form R and Form A, and instead, obtain from EPA's on line data systems 2. Items to remove from Form R collection and TRI publications entirely 3. Sections to modify of Form R 4. Clarify Form A applicability 4 Facility information to remove from Part I of Form R and Form A, and instead,

obtain from Facility Registry System ( FRS)

° Lat/ long ( Sec. 4.6)

° RCRA ID # ( Sec. 4.8)

° NPDES permit # ( Sec. 4.9)

° UIC well code # ( Sec. 4.10) 5 In detail:

Remove Lat/ long ( Sec. 4.6)

° Proposed Action:

  Remove Lat/ Long data field from Form R, and instead pull Lat/ Long data from EPA's Facility Registry System ( FRS).

° Justification:

  Part of EPA's overall effort to centralize data collection and dissemination. FRS has been designated as EPA's authoritative, centralized source of Lat/ Long data. 6 In detail:

Remove RCRA, NPDES and UIC Program ID Numbers ° Proposed Action:

  Remove these data fields from Form R, and instead pull the data from EPA's Facility Registry System ( FRS).

° Justification:

  Provide burden reduction and avoid duplication of effort.

  FRS has been designated as EPA's authoritative,

centralized source of such facility information. 7 Items to remove from Form R, Part II collection and TRI publications entirely ° Remove "% from Stormwater" ( 5.3C)

° Remove two columns from " On site Waste Treatment Methods and Efficiency" ( 7A):

  " Range of influent concentration" ( 7A. 1c)

  " Based on Operating Data?" ( 7A. 1e)

° Remove optional additional information checkbox ( Sec. 8.11) 8 In detail:

Remove "% From Stormwater" ( 5.3C)

° Proposed Action:

  Remove "% from Stormwater" for each " Stream or Water Body Name" under " Qty of the toxic chemical entering each environmental medium Onsite" ( Sec.

5.3C)

° Justification:

  Reduce burden and simplify Sec. 5 of Form R.

  Unnecessary to continue collecting this data since this section doesn't appear to be widely used. 9 In detail:

Remove 7A. 1c and 7A. 1e in " On site Waste Treatment Methods and Efficiency"

° Proposed Action:

  Remove " Range of influent concentration" ( 7A. 1c), and " Based on operating data?" ( 7A. 1e)

° Justification:

  Reduce burden and simplify Sec. 7 of Form R.

  Unnecessary to continue collecting this data since these sections don't appear to be widely used. 10 In detail:

Remove optional additional information checkbox ( Sec. 8.11)

° Proposed Action:

  Remove Sec. 8.11 yes/ no question: " Is additional info on source reduction, recycling, or pollution control activities included with this report?" from Form R.

  Continue to provide facilities the opportunity to submit this information and make it available through one of EPA's on line systems ( e. g., e DOCKET or Envirofacts)

  Include instructions on how to do this in reporting forms &

instructions booklet.

° Justification:

  Streamline Form R   it is unnecessary to collect yes/ no response.

  Increase public access to this additional information   thereby promoting source reduction activities of TRI facilities 11 Sections to modify of Form R ° Decrease number of codes in " On Site Waste Treatment Method( s) Sequence" ( 7A. 1b)

° Replace specific % amount with range codes in " Waste Treatment Efficiency Estimate" ( 7A. 1d) with range codes ° Simplify " On site Energy Recovery Processes" ( 7B)   use yes/ no checkbox ° Decrease number of codes in " On site Recycling Processes"

( 7C) 12 In detail:

" On site Waste Treatment Method( s)

Sequence" ( Sec. 7A. 1b )

° Proposed Action:

  Reduce existing 64 codes with 6 treatment " M" codes from Form R, Sec. 6.2.

° Justification:

  While EPCRA requires the reporting of waste treatment or disposal methods used for each waste stream ( 7A. 1b),

EPA does not believe that this data is widely used.

  7A. 1b codes aren't in TRI Explorer ( in Envirofacts)

  Reduce burden, increase uniformity of codes 13 In detail:

" Waste Treatment Efficiency Estimate"

( Sec. 7A. 1d)

° Proposed Action:

  Allow facilities to report a range amount instead of the specific current percentage amount currently required.

° Justification:

  While EPCRA requires the reporting of an estimate of the treatment efficiency achieved by the methods reported in 7A. 1b, EPA this information doesn't appear to be widely used.

  Reduce burden, increase uniformity of codes. 14 In detail:

" On site Energy Recovery Processes"

( Sec. 7B)

° Proposed Action:

  Remove the three existing " U" codes; instead, provide " yes/ no" checkbox for those who do on site energy recovery.

° Justification:

  Reduce burden, simplify and increase uniformity of codes. 15 In detail:

" On site Recycling Processes" ( Sec. 7C)

° Proposed Action:

  Replace the 16 existing recycling codes with the four recycling " M" codes already used in Sec. 6.2.

° Justification:

  Reduce burden, simplify and increase uniformity of codes. 16 Clarify Form A applicability ° Proposed Action:

  Clarify EPA policy regarding use of Form A Certification Statement ° Justification:

  Address comments from facilities concerned about Form A eligibility 17 Next Steps ° The many options described here are still being fleshed out with other EPA offices.

° Our current burden savings analysis is thus based on the rule's overall cost and burden savings.

° Once we know which options will be included in the proposal, we can complete our burden savings analysis. 18 Burden Reduction Analytical Results ° Preliminary estimates for cost savings from the proposal are up to $ 5.6 million.

° Preliminary estimates for total burden savings are up to 124,000 hours.