[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 7, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17993-17995]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07164]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 7, 2021 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0255; Project Identifier AD-2020-01282-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports that very high
frequency (VHF) radio frequencies transfer between the active and
standby windows of the tuning control panel (TCP) without flightcrew
input. This proposed AD would require updating the TCP operational
software (OPS) and performing a software configuration check. 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 May 24,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this referenced service information 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 on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0255.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0255; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Carreras, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0255; Project Identifier
AD-2020-01282-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

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

Background

    The FAA has received reports indicating that VHF radio frequencies
transfer between the active and standby windows of the TCP without
flightcrew input. The flightcrew may not be aware of uncommanded
frequency changes and could fail to receive air traffic control
communications. Uncommanded frequency changes, if not addressed, could
result in missed communications, such as amended clearances or critical
instructions for changes to flight path, and consequent loss of safe
separation between aircraft, collision, or runway incursion.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-
SB230041-00 RB, Issue 002, dated September 14, 2020. The service
information describes procedures for updating the TCP OPS on TCP C, TCP
L, and TCP R, and for a performing a

software configuration check. 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.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions
identified in the service information described previously, except for
any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
proposed AD.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0255.

Explanation of Requirements Bulletin

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for
annotating which steps in the service information are ``required for
compliance'' (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept
into Boeing service bulletins.
    In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related
Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was
worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the
development of a new process in which the service information more
clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition
in the ``Accomplishment Instructions.'' The new process results in a
Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to
address the unsafe condition (i.e., only the RC actions).

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 89 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update software and perform check.....  0.75 work-hour x $85 per              $0          $63.75       $5,673.75
                                         hour = $63.75.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2021-0255; Project Identifier AD-
2020-01282-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by May 24, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and
787-10 airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB230041-00 RB, Issue
002, dated September 14, 2020.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 23,
Communications.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports that very high frequency (VHF)
radio frequencies transfer between the active and standby windows of
the tuning control panel (TCP) without flightcrew input. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address uncommanded frequency changes, which
could result in missed air traffic control communications such as
amended clearances and critical instructions for changes to flight
path, and consequent loss of safe separation between aircraft,
collision, or runway incursion.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB230041-00 RB, Issue 002,
dated September 14, 2020, do all applicable actions identified in,
and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-

SB230041-00 RB, Issue 002, dated September 14, 2020.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
B787-81205-SB230041-00, Issue 002, dated September 14, 2020, which
is referred to in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-
SB230041-00 RB, Issue 002, dated September 14, 2020.

(h) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB230041-00
RB, Issue 002, dated September 14, 2020, uses the phrase ``the Issue
001 date of Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB230041-00 RB,'' this
AD requires using ``the effective date of this AD.''

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
B787-81205-SB230041-00 RB, Issue 001, dated April 24, 2020.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO 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 manager of
the certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Frank Carreras,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Seattle ACO
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:
206-231-3539; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information 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>.

    Issued on March 25, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-07164 Filed 4-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 24, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 204)]
[Notices]
[Page 61477-61478]
[DOCID:fr24oc05-86]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 27117; 812-13097]

BBH Fund, Inc. and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.; Notice of
Application

October 18, 2005.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a)
of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.

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

    Summary of the Application: The requested order would permit
certain registered open-end management investment companies to enter
into and materially amend subadvisory agreements (``Subadvisory
Agreements'') without shareholder approval.
    Applicants: BBH Fund, Inc. (``BBH'') and Brown Brothers Harriman &
Co. (the ``Adviser,'' together with BBH, the ``Applicants'').
    Filing Date: The application was filed on June 14, 2004 and amended
on June 17, 2005, August 8, 2005 and October 12, 2005.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the
application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on November 14, 2005, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. Applicants, Gail C. Jones,
Esq., Reed Smith LLP, Federated Investors Tower, 12th Floor, 1001
Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3779.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd F. Kuehl, Branch Chief, at (202)
551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment
Company Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee from
the Commission's Public Reference Branch, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-0102 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>).

Applicants' Representations

    1. BBH, a Maryland corporation, is registered under the Act as an
open-end management investment company. BBH currently offers multiple
series (each a ``Fund,'' and collectively, the ``Funds''), each of
which has its own investment objectives, policies and restrictions.\1\
BBH International Equity Fund (``International Equity Fund'') is the
only Fund that currently intends to rely on the requested order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants also request relief with respect to any other
existing or future registered open-end management investment company
or series therof that: (a) Is advised by the Adviser or any entity
controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Adviser;
(b) uses the management structure described in this application; and
(c) complies with the terms and conditions of this application
(included in the term ``Funds''). The only existing registered open-
end management investment company that currently intends to rely on
the requested order is named as an Applicant. If the name of any
Fund contains the name of Subadviser (as defined below), the name of
the Adviser that serves as the primary adviser to the Fund will
preced the name of the Subadviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Adviser, registered under the Investment Advisers Act of
1940 (``Advisers Act''), serves as investment adviser to each Fund
pursuant to an investment advisory agreement with BBH (``Advisory
Agreement''), that was approved by the board of directors of BBH (the
``Board''), including a majority of the directors who are not
``interested persons,'' as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act
(``Independent Directors''), and the shareholders of each Fund. Under
the terms of the Advisory Agreement, the Adviser provides the
International Equity Fund with investment research, advice and
supervision, and furnishes an investment program for the Fund
consistent with the investment objectives and policies of the Fund. The
Adviser has entered into, or will enter into, Subadvisory Agreements
with subadvisers (``Subadvisers''), to whom the Adviser may delegate
responsibility for providing investment advice and making investment
decisions for the International Equity Fund. Pursuant to the Advisory
Agreement, the Adviser receives a fee from the International Equity
Fund based on the average daily net assets. Each Subadviser is or will
be an investment adviser registered under the Advisers Act. The Adviser
has delegated daily management of the International Equity Fund's
assets to Subadvisers, who are paid by the Adviser out of the fee it
receives from the International Equity Fund. In the future, a Fund may
contract directly with and pay a Subadviser directly (``Direct Contract
Fund'').
    3. Applicants request relief to permit the Adviser, subject to
Board approval, to enter into and materially amend Subadvisory
Agreements without shareholder approval. The requested relief will not
extend to a Subadviser that is an affiliated person, as defined in
section 2(a)(3) of the Act, of a Fund or the Adviser, other than by
reason of serving as a Subadviser to one or more of the Funds (an
``Affiliated Subadviser'').

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 15(a) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that it is
unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered
investment company except pursuant to a written contract that has been
approved by the vote of a majority of the company's outstanding voting
securities. Rule 18f-2 under the Act provides that each series or class
of stock in a series company affected by a matter must approve such
matter if the Act requires shareholder approval.
    2. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provision of the Act, or
from any rule thereunder, if and to the extent that such exemption is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the
protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policies and provisions of the Act. Applicants believe that their
requested relief meets this standard for the reasons discussed below.
    3. Applicants state that the Funds' shareholders will rely on the
Adviser, subject to oversight by the Board, to select Subadvisers for
the Funds. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the
investor, the role of the Subadvisers is substantially equivalent to
that of individual portfolio managers employed by traditional
investment advisory firms. Applicants contend that requiring
shareholder approval of Subadvisory Agreements would impose costs and
unnecessary delays on the Funds and may preclude the Adviser from
acting promptly in a manner considered advisable by the

Board. Applicants also note that the Advisory Agreement will remain
subject to the shareholder approval requirements in section 15(a) of
the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.
    4. Applicants note that the Commission has proposed rule 15a-5
under the Act and agree that the requested order will expire on the
effective date of rule 15a-5 under the Act, if adopted.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Investment Company Act Release No. 26230 (Oct. 23, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Before a Fund may rely on the order requested in the
application, the operation of the Fund in the manner described in the
application will be approved by a majority of the Fund's outstanding
voting securities, as defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Fund
whose public shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus
containing the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the
initial shareholder(s) before shares of such Fund are offered to the
public.
    2. Each Fund relying on the requested order will disclose in its
prospectus the existence, substance, and effect of any order granted
pursuant to the application. In addition, each Fund relying on the
requested order will hold itself out to the public as employing the
``manager of managers'' structure described in the application. Such
Fund's prospectus will prominently disclose that the Adviser has
ultimate responsibility, subject to oversight by the Board, to oversee
the Subadvisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and
replacement.
    3. The Adviser will provide general management and administrative
services to each Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for
the general management and investment of the Fund's assets, and,
subject to review and approval by the Board, will (i) Set each Fund's
overall investment strategies; (ii) evaluate, select and recommend
Subadvisers to manage all or a part of a Fund's assets; (iii) when
appropriate allocate and reallocate a Fund's assets among multiple
Subadvisers; (iv) monitor and evaluate the performance of the
Subadvisers; and (v) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure
that the Subadvisers comply with the relevant Fund's investment
objective, policies, and restrictions.
    4. Each Fund will comply with the fund governance standards that
the Commission adopted in Investment Company Act Release No. 26520, by
the compliance date set forth therein (``Compliance Date''). Prior to
the Compliance Date, a majority of the Board will be Independent
Directors, and the nomination of new or additional Independent
Directors will be at the discretion of the then-existing Independent
Directors. Any person who acts as legal counsel for the Independent
Directors will be an independent legal counsel, as defined in rule 0-
1(a)(6) under the Act.
    5. The Adviser will not enter into a Subadvisory Agreement with any
Affiliated Subadviser without such agreement, including the
compensation to be paid thereunder, being approved by the shareholders
of the applicable Fund.
    6. When a Subadviser change is proposed for a Fund with an
Affiliated Subadviser, the Board, including a majority of the
Independent Directors, will make a separate finding, reflected in the
Board minutes, that such change is in the best interests of the Fund
and its shareholders and does not involve a conflict of interest from
which the Adviser or the Affiliated Subadviser derives an inappropriate
advantage.
    7. Shareholders of any Direct Contract Fund will approve any change
to a Subadvisory Agreement if such change would result in an increase
in the overall management and advisory fees payable by the Fund that
have been approved by the shareholders of the Fund.
    8. No director or officer of a Fund, or director or officer of the
Adviser will own directly or indirectly (other than through a pooled
investment vehicle that is not controlled by such person) any interest
in a Subadviser, except for (i) ownership of interests in the Adviser
or any entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common
control with the Adviser; or (ii) ownership of less than 1% of the
outstanding securities of any class of equity or debt of any publicly-
traded company that is either a Subadviser or an entity that controls,
is controlled by or is under common control with a Subadviser.
    9. Within 90 days of the hiring of a new Subadviser, the Adviser
will furnish shareholders of the applicable Fund all information about
the new Subadviser that would be included in a proxy statement. To meet
this obligation, the Adviser will provide shareholders of the
applicable Fund with an information statement meeting the requirements
of Regulation 14C, Schedule 14C and Item 22 of Schedule 14A under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
    10. The requested order will expire on the effective date of rule
15a-5 under the Act, if adopted.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5862 Filed 10-21-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 102 (Friday, May 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31430-31431]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12716]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2012-0043]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated April 13, 2012, the Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad (MBCR)
and Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority (MBTA) jointly petitioned the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a temporary waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety
regulations contained at 49 CFR part 236. FRA assigned the petition
Docket Number FRA-2012-0043.
    MBCR and MBTA seek relief from the requirements of 49 CFR 236.301,
Where signals shall be provided. Relief is sought at two interlockings
located on drawbridges on the Gloucester Branch. The Manchester Draw,
Milepost (MP) 25.30 in Manchester-by-the-Sea; and the Gloucester Draw,
MP 31.0, in Gloucester, Essex County, MA. The Gloucester Branch is a
line of railroad owned by MBTA and operated and maintained by MBCR.
There are two main tracks over both bridges, with the trackage through
the subject area signaled with the current of traffic (in only one
direction on either track). Currently, signals at both bridges that
govern movements against the current of traffic are set to display
``stop'' aspects only. The signal control wires for those signals are
disconnected. Only the light wires are active, keeping the subject
signals displaying a red aspect and constantly lit. Relief is requested
until such time as the signals at the Manchester Draw and Gloucester
Draw are upgraded in conjunction with Positive Train Control (PTC)
implementation pursuant to the MBTA PTC Implementation Plan (Revision
3) (September 2010), filed at FRA-2010-0030 as Document Number 0003
(filed on November 17, 2010).
    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 (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Ave.
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 party
desires 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:
     Web site: 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 July 9, 2012 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to 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 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 online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 18, 2012.
Ron Hynes,
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-12716 Filed 5-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: March 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 43)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11557-11560]
[DOCID:fr04mr08-16]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0606; FRL-8536-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area's
Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) is requesting that the
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Ozone Nonattainment Area (or also referred
to here as the Allentown Area, or simply the Area) be redesignated as
attainment for the 8-hour ozone ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
The Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area is composed of Carbon, Lehigh, and
Northampton Counties. EPA is approving the ozone redesignation request
for the Allentown Area. In conjunction with its redesignation request,
PADEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for the
Allentown Area that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. EPA is approving
the 8-hour maintenance plan. PADEP also submitted a 2002 base year
inventory for the Allentown Area, which EPA is approving. In addition,
EPA is approving the adequacy determination for the motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Allentown-
Bethlehem-Easton Area maintenance plan for purposes of transportation
conformity, and is approving those MVEBs. EPA is approving the
redesignation request, the maintenance plan, and the 2002 base year
emissions inventory as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance
with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on April 3, 2008.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0606. All documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State
submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by e-
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On January 7, 2008 (73 FR 1162), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The NPR proposed
approval of Pennsylvania's redesignation request and maintenance plan
SIP revisions for the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area that provide for
continued attainment of

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. The
NPR also proposed approval of a 2002 base year emissions inventory for
the Area. The formal SIP revisions were submitted by PADEP on June 26,
2007, with technical correction SIP revision concerning emissions
inventory data submitted on August 9, 2007. Other specific requirements
of Pennsylvania's redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP
revisions, and the rationale for EPA's proposed actions, are explained
in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments were
received on the NPR.
    However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23591, April 30, 2004). South
Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.Cir.
2006). On June 8, 2007, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v.
EPA, Docket No. 04-1201, in response to several petitions for
rehearing, the D.C. Circuit clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated
only with regard to those parts of the rule that had been successfully
challenged. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to
classifications for areas currently classified under subpart 2 of Title
I, part D of the Act as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour
attainment dates, and the timing for emissions reductions needed for
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS remain effective. The June 8
decision left intact the Court's rejection of EPA's reasons for
implementing the 8-hour standard in certain nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By limiting the vacatur, the Court let
stand EPA's revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-
backsliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been
successfully challenged. The June 8 decision reaffirmed the December
22, 2006 decision that EPA had improperly failed to retain measures
required for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding
provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review
(NSR) requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment
classification; (2) Section 185 penalty fees for the 1-hour severe or
extreme nonattainment areas; and (3) measures to be implemented
pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the
contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress toward
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain NAAQS. In
addition, the June 8 decision clarified that the Court's reference to
conformity requirements for anti-backsliding purposes was limited to
requiring the continued use of the 1-hour motor vehicle emissions
budgets until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity
determinations, which is already required under EPA's conformity
regulations. The Court thus clarified the 1-hour conformity
determinations are not required for anti-backsliding purposes.
    For the reasons set forth in the proposal, EPA does not believe
that the Court's rulings alter any requirements relevant to this
redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation, and do not
prevent EPA from finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the
Court's December 22, 2006 and June 8, 2007 decisions impose no
impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to
attainment, because even in the light of the Court's decisions,
redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation
provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation
requests.

II. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's redesignation
request, maintenance plan, and 2002 base year emissions inventory SIP
revisions because they satisfy the requirements for approval. EPA has
evaluated Pennsylvania's redesignation request that was submitted on
June 26, 2007 and determined that it meets the redesignation criteria
set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the
redesignation request and monitoring data demonstrate that the
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard.
The final approval of this redesignation request will change the
designation of the Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area submitted on June 26, 2007 as a
revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is also approving the MVEBs
submitted by PADEP in conjunction with its redesignation request. In
addition, EPA is approving the 2002 base year emissions inventory
submitted by PADEP on June 26, 2007 (as well as a technical correction
SIP including omitted emissions inventory information submitted on
August 9, 2007) as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP.
    In this final rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public that we have
found that the MVEBs for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) in the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area for the
8-hour ozone maintenance plan are adequate and approved for conformity
purposes. As a result of our finding, the Area must use the MVEBs from
the submitted 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for future conformity
determinations. There are two separate metropolitan planning
organizations (MPOs) responsible for transportation planning within the
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area. They are the Lehigh Valley
Transportation Study MPO (for Lehigh and Northampton Counties), and the
Northeastern Pennsylvania Alliance (for Carbon County). The adequate
and approved MVEBs for each MPO within the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton
Area are provided in the following tables:

  Adequate and Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Lehigh
  Valley Transportation Study MPO (Covering the Lehigh and Northampton
 Counties Portion of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area) (2009 & 2018)
                     [In tons per summer day (TPSD)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Budget year                          VOC     NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009....................................................    20.6    28.9
2018....................................................    12.4    12.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Adequate and Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the
   Northeastern Pennsylvania Alliance MPO (Covering the Carbon County
      Portion of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Area) (2009 & 2018)
                     [In tons per summer day (TPSD)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Budget year                          VOC     NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009....................................................     3.4     5.9
2018....................................................     2.3     3.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Allentown Area is subject to the CAA's requirement for the
basic nonattainment areas until and unless it is redesignated to
attainment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves

state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it
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). This final rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Because this action affects the status of a geographical area, does not
impose any new requirements on sources, or allows the state to avoid
adopting or implementing other requirements, this action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because
it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Redesignation is an action that
affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new
requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 5, 2008. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action, approving the redesignation of the Allentown-Bethlehem-
Easton Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated
maintenance plan, the 2002 base year emission inventory, and the MVEBs
identified in the maintenance plan, may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Dated: February 21, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

0
2. In Sec.  52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding
an entry at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2020  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Name of non- regulatory SIP       Applicable                                                     Additional
           revision              geographic  area   State  submittal  date   EPA approval date     explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan   Allentown-         06/26/07, 08/9/07.......  03/04/08 [Insert   Technical
 and 2002 Base Year Emissions    Bethlehem-Easton                             page number        correction
 Inventory.                      Area: Carbon,                                where the          dated 08/9/07
                                 Lehigh, and                                  document begins].  addresses
                                 Northampton,                                                    omitted
                                 Counties.                                                       emissions
                                                                                inventory
                                                                                information
                                                                                from 06/26/07
                                                                                submittals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
4. In Sec.  81.339, the table entitled ``Pennsylvania--Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)'' is amended by revising the entry for the Allentown-
Bethlehem-Easton, PA, Carbon County, Lehigh County, Northampton County,
to read as follows:

Sec.  81.339  Pennsylvania

* * * * *

                                      Pennsylvania--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Designation \a\                    Category/ classification
         Designated area         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Date \1\             Type                Date \1\               Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA:         04/03/08  Attainment.
 Carbon County Lehigh County
 Northampton County.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian County located in each county or area, except otherwise noted.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E8-4029 Filed 3-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 243)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 71828-71830]
[DOCID:fr19de07-32]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0347; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-253-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330 and A340 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    Two A330 operators have reported that the guide shaft of the
Refuel Isolation Valve has been broken away from the main casting
and entered the fuel tank. The Supplier Investigation evidenced that
water builds-up in the cavity of the Refuel Isolation Valve and
freezes during flight. When refuel pressure is applied to the
piston, the ice restricts the piston travel on one side leading to
an asymmetric movement of the piston resulting in breakage of the
guide shaft. A non-bonded metallic object within the fuel tank can
result [in] a potential ignition source, which in combination with a
lightning strike constitutes an unsafe condition.

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 18,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 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
; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory
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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0347;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-253-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued
Airworthiness Directive 2007-0239, dated September 3, 2007 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Two A330 operators have reported that the guide shaft of the
Refuel Isolation Valve has been broken away from the main casting
and entered the fuel tank. The Supplier Investigation evidenced that
water builds-up in the cavity of the Refuel Isolation Valve and
freezes during flight. When refuel pressure is applied to the
piston, the ice restricts the piston travel on one side leading to
an asymmetric movement of the piston resulting in breakage of the
guide shaft. A non-bonded metallic object within the fuel tank can
result [in] a potential ignition source, which in combination with a
lightning strike constitutes an unsafe condition.
    For the reasons described above, this Airworthiness Directive
(AD) requires replacement of the affected Refuel Isolation Valve
with a more robust valve similar to that designed for the A380.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A330-28-3103; A340-28-4120; and
A340-28-5044; all dated July 17, 2007. The actions described in this
service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition
identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S.

operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend
to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and
related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 34 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 14 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $8,000 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $310,080, or $9,120 per product.

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 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2007-0347; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
253-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by January 18, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the Airbus Model A330 and A340 airplanes
identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD; certificated
in any category; all certified models; all serial numbers.
    (1) Model A330 and A340 airplanes except those on which Airbus
Modification 55664 has been embodied in production or Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-28-3103, A340-28-4120, or A340-28-5044 has been
embodied in service.
    (2) Model A330-300 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification
40176 (optional LH (left hand) coupling) has been embodied in
production or Airbus Service Bulletin A330-28-3018 (optional LH
coupling) has been embodied in service; except those on which Airbus
Modification 56148 has been embodied in production or Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-28-3103 has been embodied in service.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Two A330 operators have reported that the guide shaft of the
Refuel Isolation Valve has been broken away from the main casting
and entered the fuel tank. The Supplier Investigation evidenced that
water builds-up in the cavity of the Refuel Isolation Valve and
freezes during flight. When refuel pressure is applied to the
piston, the ice restricts the piston travel on one side leading to
an asymmetric movement of the piston resulting in breakage of the
guide shaft. A non-bonded metallic object within the fuel tank can
result [in] a potential ignition source, which in combination with a
lightning strike constitutes an unsafe condition.
    For the reasons described above, this Airworthiness Directive
(AD) requires replacement of the affected Refuel Isolation Valve
with a more robust valve similar to that designed for the A380.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions in accordance
with the instructions defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-28-
3103, A340-28-4120, or A340-28-5044, all dated July 17, 2007, as
applicable.
    (1) Within 18,000 flight hours from the effective date of this
AD: Replace the refuel isolation valve(s); and re-identify the
refuel/defuel coupling in accordance with the instructions defined
in the applicable service bulletin.
    (2) For refuel Isolation Valve and Refuel/Defuel Coupling Spare
units: From the effective date of this AD, no person may install an
affected refuel isolation valve unit or an affected refuel/defuel
coupling unit as a replacement part on an aircraft, unless it has
been modified in accordance with the instructions defined in the
applicable service bulletin.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from

a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-
approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are
approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated
agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before
it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2007-0239, dated
September 3, 2007, and Airbus Service Bulletins A330-28-3103, A340-
28-4120, and A340-28-5044, all dated July 17, 2007, for related
information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 10, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-24519 Filed 12-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 11193]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL18-123-000; QF87-481-002]

T.E.S. Filer City Station Limited Partnership; Notice of
Application

    Take notice that on March 5, 2018, T.E.S. Filer City Station
Limited Partnership, filed an application for Commission Certification
as a Qualifying Cogeneration Facility.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the
website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 27, 2018.

    Dated: March 6, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-05105 Filed 3-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 14, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51033-51035]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19606]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0778; Project Identifier 2019-CE-062-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Daher Aerospace (Type Certificate
Previously Held by SOCATA) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Daher Aerospace (type certificate previously held by
SOCATA) Model TBM 700 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an
aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as a non-conforming dump switch ejecting from its slot. This
proposed AD would require modifying certain dump switches. 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 29,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12 140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Daher
Aerospace, 601 NE 10 Street, Pompano Beach, FL 33060; phone: (954) 366-
3331; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website: https://www.daher.com/en/aircraft-manufacturer/customer-service/. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0778; 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 MCAI,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Johnson, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:
(720) 626-5462; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0778;
Project Identifier 2019-CE-062-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such

marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be
placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI
should be sent to Gregory Johnson, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA,
General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International Validation Branch,
901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106. 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 European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
EASA AD 2019-0306, dated December 18, 2019 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to address the unsafe condition on certain serial-
numbered Daher Aerospace (formerly SOCATA) Model TBM 700 airplanes. The
MCAI states:

    It has been determined that, in certain conditions, an affected
switch [dump switch part number<PHONE_NUMBER> without a seal] may eject
from its slot. Investigations identified the root cause in a non-
conformity of the affected switch.
    This condition, if not corrected, could, in case of smoke/fumes
in the cabin, prevent evacuation of the smoke/fumes, possibly
resulting in excessive flight crew workload and/or injury to
aeroplane occupants.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, DAHER AEROSPACE
issued the [service bulletin] SB to provide modification
instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
modification of the affected parts by installation of a seal, and
introduces requirements for installation of a dump switch.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0778.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Daher Aerospace Service Bulletin SB 70-271-21,
Revision 1, dated November 2019. The service information contains
procedures for modifying each dump switch part number<PHONE_NUMBER> by
removing the two indicator light units, installing a seal, installing a
thin layer of grease, and installing the two indicator lights. 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.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 150 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA also estimates that it
would take about 1 work-hour per airplane and require parts costing
$800 to comply with the modification that would be required by this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the inspection cost of
this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $132,750, or $885 per
airplane.
    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected operators.

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Daher Aerospace (Type Certificate Previously Held by SOCATA): Docket
No. FAA-2021-0778; Project Identifier 2019-CE-062-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by October 29, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Daher Aerospace (type certificate previously
held by SOCATA) Model TBM 700 airplanes, serial numbers 1106 and
larger, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2130, Cabin Pressure
Control System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI)

originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify
and address an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI
describes the unsafe condition as a non-confirming dump switch
ejecting from its slot. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent dump
switches ejecting from their slots, which, in case of smoke/fumes in
the cabin, could prevent evacuation of the smoke/fumes. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in excessive flight crew
workload and injury to airplane occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, inspect
each dump switch part number (P/N)<PHONE_NUMBER> to determine if a seal
is installed, as depicted in Figure 3 of Daher Aerospace Service
Bulletin SB 70-271-21, Revision 1, dated November 2019.
    (1) If a seal is installed, no further action is required by
this paragraph.
    (2) If a seal is not installed, within 12 months after the
effective date of this AD, modify the dump switch in accordance with
steps 2) through 5) of the Description of Accomplishment
Instructions in Daher Aerospace Service Bulletin SB 70-271-21,
Revision 1, dated November 2019.

(h) Parts Installation Provision

    As of the effective date of this AD, do not install a dump
switch P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> on any airplane unless the switch has been
modified as described in Daher Aerospace Service Bulletin SB 70-271-
21, Revision 1, dated November 2019. Removal of a dump switch from
an airplane and re-installation of that dump switch on the same
airplane within the same maintenance visit is not an installation
for purposes of this paragraph.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Gregory Johnson,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2019-0306, dated December 18, 2019, for more information. You may
examine the EASA AD in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2021-0778.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Daher
Aerospace, 601 NE 10 Street, Pompano Beach, FL 33060; phone: (954)
366-3331; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website: https://www.daher.com/en/aircraft-manufacturer/customer-service/. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on September 2, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-19606 Filed 9-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 52)]
[Notices]
[Page 12795-12796]
[DOCID:fr19mr07-59]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-OAR-2006-0894; FRL-8288-8]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Registration of Fuels and Fuel
Additives: Requirements for Manufacturers (Renewal); EPA ICR No.
0309.12, OMB Control No. 2060-0150

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)(44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the
nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before April 18,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-
2006-0894, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket

Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to:
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James W. Caldwell, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Mailcode: 6406J, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On July 17, 2006 (71 FR 40513), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments during the
comment period. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted
to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-OAR-2006-0894, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in-person viewing at the Air and radiation

Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-
566-1742.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at
http://www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives

them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted
material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is
restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    Title: Registration of Fuels and Fuel Additives--Requirements for
Manufacturers.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 0309.12, OMB Control No. 2060-0150.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2007.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: In accordance with the regulations at 40 CFR part 79,
subparts A, B, C, and D, Registration of Fuels and Fuel Additives,
manufacturers (including importers) of motor-vehicle gasoline, motor-
vehicle diesel fuel, and additives for those fuels, are required to
have these products registered by the EPA prior to their introduction
into commerce. Registration involves providing a chemical description
of the fuel or additive, and certain technical, marketing, and health-
effects information. The development of health-effects data, as
required by 40 CFR part 79, subpart F, is covered by a separate
information collection. Manufacturers are also required to submit
periodic reports (annually for additives, quarterly and annually for
fuels) on production volume and related information. The information is
used to identify products whose evaporative or combustion emissions may
pose an unreasonable risk to public health, thus meriting further
investigation and potential regulation. The information is also used to
ensure that gasoline additives comply with EPA requirements for
protecting catalytic converters and other automotive emission controls.
The data have been used to construct a comprehensive data base on fuel
and additive composition. Most of the information is confidential.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average two
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Manufacturers of Fuels and Fuel
Additives.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,050.
    Frequency of Response: On Occasion, quarterly, annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 17,150.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,372,000. This includes no
annualized capital and $39,750 in O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 2,340 hours in
the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This increase is the result of

an increase in the number of manufacturers producing fuels.

    Dated: March 12, 2007.
Oscar Morales,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E7-4928 Filed 3-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

							                                         OFFICE OF

				PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

	AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

Date/Time: 	March 25, 2014 / 3:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

Subject: 	Pesticide Reevaluation Division (PRD) Meets with Oxon Italia
S.p.A. to Discuss Status of Atrazine Registration Review.

From: 		Marianne A. Mannix, Chemical Review Manager

Re-evaluation Management and Implementation Branch III

Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P)

Participants: 	Neil Anderson (EPA), Avivah Jakob (EPA), Marianne Mannix
(EPA), Nicola Gelmett (Oxon Italia S.p.A.), Liz Rea (Sipcam Agro USA),
Giovanni Mattaini (Sipcam Agro USA)

Meeting Summary:

At the request of the registrant, on March 24, 2015 members of the
atrazine registration review team (from PRD) met with Oxon Italia
S.p.A., one of the four atrazine technical registrants, to discuss the
status of atrazine registration review and the ongoing atrazine water
monitoring programs. The team provided a general overview of the ongoing
water monitoring programs, a status update for the registration review
of atrazine and informed the registrant that the registration review
Preliminary Risk Assessments are expected to publish in June of 2015.
Atrazine is an herbicide registered for use on corn, sorghum, and
sugarcane. The registration review case for atrazine opened in June of
2013 (Registration Review Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0266).