[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72723-72727]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23254]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R06-OAR-2022-0984; FRL-11401-01-R6]

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Arkansas; Negative Declaration
for Existing Sulfuric Acid Plants; Plan Revision for Existing Kraft
Pulp Mills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the CAA
section 111(d) state plan revision submitted by the State of Arkansas
for existing kraft pulp mills subject to the Kraft Pulp Mills Emission
Guidelines (EG). The Arkansas section 111(d) plan revision for kraft
pulp mills contains administrative changes to the state regulations and
also aligns compliance testing requirements to be consistent with EPA's
kraft pulp mills new source performance standards. EPA is also
notifying the public that we have received a CAA section 111(d)
negative declaration from Arkansas for existing sulfuric acid plants
subject to the Sulfuric Acid Plants EG. This negative declaration
certifies that existing sulfuric acid plants subject to the Sulfuric
Acid Plants EG and the requirements of sections 111(d) of the CAA do
not exist within Arkansas. The EPA is proposing to approve the state
plan revision for existing kraft pulp mills, accept the negative
declaration for existing sulfuric acid plants and withdraw approval of
the Arkansas state plan for existing sulfuric acid plants, and amend
the agency regulations in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 22,
2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2022-0984, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected]. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact Karolina Ruan Lei, (214)
665-7346, [email protected]. For the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may not be publicly
available due to docket file size restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karolina Ruan Lei, EPA Region 6
Office, Air and Radiation Division--State Planning and Implementation
Branch,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. We encourage the
public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov. Please call
or email the contact listed above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

I. Background

A. Clean Air Act Section 111(d) Requirements

    Section 111 of the CAA, ``Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources,'' directs the EPA to establish emission standards
for stationary sources of air pollution that could potentially endanger
public health or welfare. These standards are referred to as New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS). Section 111(d) addresses the process by
which the EPA and states regulate standards of performance for existing
\1\ sources. When NSPS are promulgated for new sources, section 111(d)
and EPA regulations require that the EPA publish an Emission Guideline
(EG) to regulate the same pollutants from existing facilities. While
NSPS are directly applicable to new sources, EG for existing sources
(designated facilities) are intended for states to use to develop a
state plan to submit to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In this context and for purposes under CAA section 111(d),
the term ``existing'' source is synonymous with designated facility.
These are sources that were constructed, reconstructed, or modified
on or before the date specified in the emission guideline the source
applies to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    State plan submittals and revisions under CAA section 111(d) must
be consistent with the applicable EG and the requirements of 40 CFR
part 60, subpart B, and part 62, subpart A. The regulations at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart B, contain general provisions applicable to the
adoption and submittal of state plans and plan revisions under CAA
section 111(d). Additionally, 40 CFR part 62, subpart A, provides the
procedural framework by which the EPA will approve or disapprove such
plans and plan revisions submitted by a state. Once approved by the
EPA, the state plan or plan revision becomes federally enforceable. If
a state does not submit an approvable state plan to the EPA, the EPA is
responsible for developing, implementing, and enforcing a Federal plan.
However, 40 CFR 60.23(b) and 62.06 provide that if there are no
existing sources of the designated pollutant in the state, the state
may submit a letter of certification to that effect (i.e., negative
declaration) in lieu of a plan. The negative declaration exempts the
state from the requirements of subpart B that require the submittal of
a CAA section 111(d) plan.

B. Emission Guidelines for Kraft Pulp Mills and Sulfuric Acid Plants

    Under CAA section 111(d), EPA has issued EGs regulating specific
pollutants from specified source categories that remain in effect,
including EGs for the control of total reduced sulfur (TRS) emissions
from kraft pulp mills and the control of sulfuric acid mist emissions
from sulfuric acid plants. TRS emissions \2\ are considered a welfare-
related pollutant, while sulfuric acid mist emissions are considered a
health-related pollutant under section 111(d) and 40 CFR part 60,
subpart B. The Kraft Pulp Mills EG applies to kraft pulp mills \3\ that
commenced construction, reconstruction, or modification on or before
September 24, 1976, while the Sulfuric Acid Plants EG applies to
sulfuric acid plants \4\ that commenced construction or modification on
or before August 17, 1971. The EGs for kraft pulp mills and sulfuric
acid plants have not been revised since their issuance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As defined under 40 CFR 60.281(c): ``Total reduced sulfur
(TRS) means the sum of the sulfur compounds hydrogen sulfide, methyl
mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide, and dimethyl disulfide, that are
released during the kraft pulping operation and measured by Method
16.''
    \3\ As defined under 40 CFR 60.281(a): ``Kraft pulp mill means
any stationary source which produces pulp from wood by cooking
(digesting) wood chips in a water solution of sodium hydroxide and
sodium sulfide (white liquor) at high temperature and pressure.
Regeneration of the cooking chemicals through a recovery process is
also considered part of the kraft pulp mill.''
    \4\ As defined under 40 CFR 60.81(a): ``Sulfuric acid production
unit means any facility producing sulfuric acid by the contact
process by burning elemental sulfur, alkylation acid, hydrogen
sulfide, organic sulfides and mercaptans, or acid sludge, but does
not include facilities where conversion to sulfuric acid is utilized
primarily as a means of preventing emissions to the atmosphere of
sulfur dioxide or other sulfur compounds.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New kraft pulp mills and sulfuric acid plants that commenced
construction, reconstruction, or modification after the specified dates
are subject to stricter standards under their respective NSPS at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart BB or BBa, and subpart H. For more information, see
``Kraft Pulp Mills, Notice of Availability of Final Guideline
Document,'' 44 FR 29828 (May 22, 1979),\5\ and ``Standards of
Performance for New Stationary Sources; Emission Guideline for Sulfuric
Acid Mist,'' 42 FR 55796 (October 18, 1977).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See also ``Kraft Pulping, Control of TRS Emissions from
Existing Mills'', US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS), EPA-45012-78-003b, March 1979 (``Kraft Pulp Mills
Emission Guidelines (EG)'').
    \6\ See also ``Final Guideline Document: Control of Sulfuric
Acid Mist Emission From Existing Sulfuric Acid Production Units'',
EPA-450/2-77-019, OAQPS No. 1.2-078, September 1977 (``Sulfuric Acid
Plants Emission Guidelines (EG)''). The Sulfuric Acid Plants EG are
also codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cd, ``Emissions Guidelines
and Compliance Times for Sulfuric Acid Production Units''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Arkansas CAA Section 111(d) Plan Approval History

    Arkansas followed EPA's EGs and guidance documents when developing
its CAA section 111(d) plans. Arkansas's section 111(d) plan for the
control of sulfuric acid mist emissions from sulfuric acid plants was
approved by EPA on May 12, 1982 (47 FR 20490). Arkansas's section
111(d) plan for control of TRS emissions from kraft pulp mills was
approved by EPA on September 12, 1984 (49 FR 35771); the compliance
schedule for the kraft pulp mills plan was separately approved on
November 10, 1986 (51 FR 40802). Revisions to Arkansas's section 111(d)
plans for sulfuric acid plants and kraft pulp mills were approved on
March 10, 1998 (63 FR 11608).

D. Arkansas CAA Section 111(d) Submittals for This Rulemaking

    Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment's Division of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted revisions to Arkansas's CAA
section 111(d) plan on June 20, 2022, and supplemented its submittal on
August 24, 2022, and August 31, 2022.\7\ In its section 111(d)
submittal, Arkansas provided for EPA's review (1) Arkansas's state plan
for existing municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills, which addressed the
2016 MSW landfills EG requirements; (2) revisions to Arkansas's plan
for existing sulfuric acid plants, which include a request for EPA to
withdraw approval of that plan and accept the State's negative
declaration for those types of facilities; and (3) revisions to
Arkansas's plan for existing kraft pulp mills. EPA took separate action
to approve Arkansas's section 111(d) plan for existing MSW landfills on
December 29, 2022 (87 FR 80076). This proposed rulemaking is acting on
the portion of the June 20, 2022 submittal pertaining to revisions to
Arkansas's section 111(d) plans for existing kraft pulp mills and
sulfuric acid plants, as well as the associated negative declaration
for existing sulfuric acid plants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Arkansas plans submitted by ADEQ does not cover sources
located in Indian country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation

A. Sulfuric Acid Plants Negative Declaration and Withdrawal of Approval
of Sulfuric Acid Plan

    Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission (APC&EC) Rule 19:
``Rules of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air Pollution
Control'', Chapter 8: ``111(d) Designated Facilities'' originally
contained Arkansas's provisions for implementing certain CAA section
111(d) EGs, including the Sulfuric Acid Plants EG. In its June 20, 2022
submittal, Arkansas removed the provisions in Rule 19.803, which were
specific to the Sulfuric Acid Plants EG, and provided a negative
declaration for existing sulfuric acid plants.
    The Arkansas plan for existing sulfuric acid plants, as approved by
the EPA on May 12, 1982 had two designated facilities subject to that
plan at the time, the Olin Corporation and the Monsanto Company (now El
Dorado Chemical Company). A 1998 plan revision was approved to remove
the Olin Corporation, which had closed, and reflect a name change for
the El Dorado Chemical Company. The El Dorado facility later underwent
reconstruction and is now subject to the NSPS for sulfuric acid plants
at 40 CFR part 60, subpart H. Since the El Dorado Chemical Company is
no longer subject to the EG for existing sulfuric acid plants, and
because there are no longer any subject facilities in Arkansas,
Arkansas requests that EPA withdraw approval of the Arkansas section
111(d) plan for sulfuric acid plants and accept the negative
declaration for existing sulfuric acid plants.
    EPA proposes to agree with Arkansas's determination that due to the
reconstruction of the El Dorado Chemical Company, this facility is no
longer considered a designated facility subject to the Sulfuric Acid
Plants EG. EPA also proposes that approval of the Arkansas section
111(d) plan for sulfuric acid plants can be withdrawn as there are no
longer any existing sulfuric acid plants in the State of Arkansas.

B. Kraft Pulp Mills Plan Revision

    The Arkansas regulations implementing the requirements of the Kraft
Pulp Mills EG are codified in APC&EC Rule 19, Chapter 8, with specific
requirements for existing kraft pulp mills outlined in Rule 19.804.
Since the Arkansas plan and plan revision for existing kraft pulp mills
were approved by EPA on September 12, 1984, and March 10, 1998,
Arkansas made additional changes to the state regulations implementing
the Kraft Pulp Mills EG requirements at APC&EC Rule 19, Chapter 8.
Changes to APC&EC Rule 19, Chapter 8, as adopted through January 28,
2022 by APC&EC, were submitted to EPA for review in Arkansas's June 20,
2022 submittal.
    The amendments to APC&EC Rule 19, Chapter 8 include name changes
and

removal of the International Paper Company, Camden Facility (permit
voided March 1, 2001), from the list of sources subject to the
requirements as the facility is permanently closed. The amendments also
realign the frequency of TRS compliance testing from annually to every
five years, consistent with the requirements for new kraft pulp mills
under 40 CFR, part 60, subpart BBa. EPA notes that the kraft pulp mills
provisions in Arkansas's revised plan provide that compliance testing
is not required for units with a continuous TRS emissions monitor, and
that these facilities are required by the plan to have equipment
installed for continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) for TRS. This
provision to require CEM for existing kraft pulp mills and waiving of
compliance testing requirements for units with CEM has not changed from
the previously EPA-approved plan for existing kraft pulp mills. The
amendments adopted into Rule 19 also include additional non-substantive
stylistic and formatting changes.
    EPA's detailed discussion and rationale of the Arkansas kraft pulp
mill plan revision can be found in in the EPA Technical Support
Document (TSD) for this proposed rule, which is available in the
docket. The TSD also contains a comparison of the 1998 EPA-approved
Arkansas kraft pulp mills plan provisions and the June 20, 2022 plan
provisions. EPA proposes to approve the revisions to the Arkansas kraft
pulp mills plan submitted on June 20, 2022 as meeting applicable
Federal requirements under the Kraft Pulp Mills EG and the implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, subpart B.

III. Proposed Action

    We are proposing to approve the state plan revision for existing
kraft pulp mills, accept the negative declaration for existing sulfuric
acid plants and withdraw approval of the Arkansas state plan for
existing sulfuric acid plants, and amend the agency regulations at 40
CFR part 62, subpart E, in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
EPA proposes that this action meets CAA section 111(d) requirements for
plan revisions, negative declarations, and plan approval withdrawals in
accordance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart B, 40 CFR part 62, subpart A,
and the applicable guidance and EG requirements.

IV. Environmental Justice Considerations

    Information on Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) and how EPA defines
environmental justice can be found in the section titled ``Statutory
and Executive Order Reviews'' in this proposed rule. EPA is providing
additional analysis of environmental justice associated with this
action. The results of this analysis are being provided for
informational and transparency purposes, not as a basis of our proposed
action.
    EPA conducted screening analyses using EJSCREEN, an environmental
justice mapping and screening tool that provides EPA with a nationally
consistent dataset and approach for combining various environmental and
demographic indicators.\8\ The EJSCREEN tool presents these indicators
at a Census block group (CBG) level or a larger user-specified
``buffer'' area that covers multiple CBGs.\9\ An individual CBG is a
cluster of contiguous blocks within the same census tract and generally
contains between 600 and 3,000 people. EJSCREEN is not a tool for
performing in-depth risk analysis, but is instead a screening tool that
provides an initial representation of indicators related to
environmental justice and is subject to uncertainty in some underlying
data (e.g., some environmental indicators are based on monitoring data
which are not uniformly available; others are based on self-reported
data).\10\ To help mitigate this uncertainty, we have summarized
EJSCREEN data within larger ``buffer'' areas covering multiple block
groups and representing the average resident within the buffer areas
surrounding the sources. We present EJSCREEN environmental indicators
to help screen for locations where residents may experience a higher
overall pollution burden than would be expected for a block group with
the same total population. These indicators of overall pollution burden
include estimates of ambient particulate matter (PM2.5) and
ozone concentration, a score for traffic proximity and volume,
percentage of pre-1960 housing units (lead paint indicator), and scores
for proximity to Superfund sites, risk management plan (RMP) sites, and
hazardous waste facilities.\11\ EJSCREEN also provides information on
demographic indicators, including percent low-income, communities of
color, linguistic isolation, and education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The EJSCREEN tool is available at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen.
    \9\ See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/about/glossary.html.
    \10\ In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the five-year block group
estimates from the U.S. Census American Community Survey. The
advantage of using five-year over single-year estimates is increased
statistical reliability of the data (i.e., lower sampling error),
particularly for small geographic areas and population groups. For
more information, see https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_general_handbook_2020.pdf.
    \11\ For additional information on environmental indicators and
proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see ``EJSCREEN Environmental Justice
Mapping and Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical Documentation,''
Chapter 3 (October 2022) at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_technical_document.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA prepared EJSCREEN reports covering a buffer area of
approximately 3-mile radii and 6-mile radii for areas with insufficient
population data around each of the existing kraft pulp mills identified
by ADEQ as subject to the CAA section 111(d) plan for kraft pulp mills.
Table 1 presents a summary of results from the EPA's screening-level
analysis for the areas surrounding each existing kraft pulp mill in
Arkansas compared to the U.S. as a whole, where the kraft pulp mill was
located in an area where more than one of the EJ indices were greater
than the 80th percentiles. The full, detailed EJSCREEN report is
provided in the docket for this rulemaking.

                         Table 1--EJSCREEN Analysis Summary for Existing Arkansas Kraft Pulp Mills With EJ Indices Above 80%ile
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Values for buffer areas (radius) for each kraft pulp mill and the U.S. (percentile within U.S. where indicated)
                                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Variables                                                                  Georgia- Pacific
                                        Evergreen Packing    Twin Rivers Pine Bluff   Corporation (Ashley,   Domtar A.W. (Little            U.S.
                                      (Jefferson, 3 miles)    (Jefferson, 3 miles)          3 miles)           River, 3 miles)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollution Burden Indicators:

    Particulate matter (PM2.5),      9.33 [micro]g/m\3\      9.36 [micro]g/m\3\      9.21 [micro]g/m\3\     9.72 [micro]g/m\3\     8.67 [micro]g/m\3\ (--
     annual average.                  (72nd %ile).            (72nd %ile).            (68th %ile).           (80th %ile).           ).
    Ozone, summer seasonal average   40.1 ppb (32nd %ile)..  40.3 ppb (33rd %ile)..  38.3 ppb (22nd %ile).  40.8 ppb (36th %ile).  42.5 ppb (--).
     of daily 8-hour max.
    Traffic proximity and volume     180 (44th %ile).......  210 (47th %ile).......  48 (23rd %ile).......  75 (29th %ile).......  760 (--).
     score *.
    Lead paint (percentage pre-1960  0.21% (49th %ile).....  0.27% (55th %ile).....  0.38% (64th %ile)....  0.17% (44th %ile)....  0.27% (--).
     housing).
    Superfund proximity score *....  0.013 (8th %ile)......  0.014 (9th %ile)......  0.027 (26th %ile)....  0.035 (33rd %ile)....  0.13 (--).
    RMP proximity score *..........  0.14 (25th %ile)......  0.29 (48th %ile)......  0.88 (72nd %ile).....  0.65 (65th %ile).....  0.77 (--).
    Hazardous waste proximity score  0.23 (34th %ile)......  1.1 (58th %ile).......  1.7 (67th %ile)......  0.041 (7th %ile).....  2.2 (--).
     *.
Demographic Indicators:
    People of color population.....  79% (83rd %ile).......  82% (84th %ile).......  40% (59th %ile)......  40% (59th %ile)......  40% (--).
    Low-income population..........  52% (82nd %ile).......  57% (86th %ile).......  49% (79th %ile)......  47% (77th %ile)......  30% (--).
    Linguistically isolated          0% (0th %ile).........  0% (0th %ile).........  0% (0th %ile)........  0% (0th %ile)........  5% (--).
     population.
    Population with less than high   9% (51st %ile)........  16% (73rd %ile).......  14% (68th %ile)......  10% (57th %ile)......  12% (--).
     school education.
    Population under 5 years of age  4% (39th %ile)........  7% (66th %ile)........  4% (39th %ile).......  8% (76th %ile).......  6%.
    Population over 64 years of age  16% (53rd %ile).......  10% (27th %ile).......  22% (72nd %ile)......  21% (70th %ile)......  16% (--).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The Superfund
  proximity, RMP proximity, and hazardous waste proximity indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in
  kilometers.

    This proposed action is proposing to approve Arkansas's June 20,
2022 CAA section 111(d) plan revision \12\ for kraft pulp mills and
accept Arkansas's negative declaration for existing sulfuric acid
plants; changes from the previously approved Arkansas plan for kraft
pulp mills are discussed under the section titled ``The EPA's
Evaluation'' in this proposed rule. As mentioned previously in this
rulemaking, total reduced sulfur (TRS) is considered a welfare-related
pollutant. Information on TRS and its relationship to negative health
impacts can be found at the Federal Register document titled ``Kraft
Pulp Mills, Notice of Availability of Final Guideline Document'' (44 FR
29828, May 22, 1979).\13\ We expect that this action will generally
have neutral environmental and health impacts on all populations,
including people of color and low-income populations, in Arkansas that
are located near an existing kraft pulp mill. At a minimum, this action
would not worsen any existing air quality and is expected to ensure the
area is meeting requirements to attain air quality standards. Further,
there is no information in the record indicating that this action is
expected to have disproportionately high or adverse human health or
environmental effects on a particular group of people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ As supplemented on August 24, 2022, and August 31, 2022.
    \13\ See also, the Kraft Pulp Mills EG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by
reference revisions to the Arkansas regulations as described in the
section titled ``Proposed Action'' in this proposed rule. The Arkansas
regulations at APC&EC Rule 19, Chapter 8, 111(d) Designated Facilities,
contain Arkansas's CAA section 111(d) plan provisions for existing
kraft pulp mills. We have made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a CAA
section 111(d) submission that complies with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7411(d); 42 U.S.C. 7429;
40 CFR part 60, subparts B and Cf; and 40 CFR part 62, subpart A. Thus,
in reviewing CAA section 111(d) state plan submissions, EPA's role is
to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the
Act and implementing regulations. Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason:

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023), and was therefore
not

subject to a requirement for Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it does not contain any
information collection activities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This action is certified to not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). This action will approve plan revisions and accept negative
declarations pursuant to CAA section 111(d) and will therefore have no
net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any
State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action will not apply on any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe
has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rulemaking does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per the definitions of ``covered
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive order. Therefore,
this action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it approves
a state program.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution and Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. This action
is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with
the Clean Air Act.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
    The air agency did not evaluate environmental justice
considerations as part of its submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. The EPA performed an environmental justice analysis, as
described in the section titled ``Environmental Justice
Considerations'' in this proposed rule. The analysis was done for the
purpose of providing additional context and information about this
rulemaking to the public, not as a basis of the action. Due to the
nature of the action being taken here, this action is expected to have
a neutral impact on the air quality of the affected area. In addition,
there is no information in the record upon which this action is based
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: October 16, 2023.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2023-23254 Filed 10-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 240 (Monday, December 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74173-74174]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29300]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements Agency
Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collection and the expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was
published on June 30, 2014 (79 FR 36865-36867).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 14, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725-17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Liza Lemaster-Sandbank,
Contracting Officer's Representative, Occupant Protection Division
(NTI-112), Office of Impaired Driving and Occupant Protection, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W44-
302, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Lemaster-Sandbank's phone number is 202-
366-4292 and her email address is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Implementing a Leadership Framework for Traffic Safety.
    Type of Request: New information collection requirement.
    Abstract: In 2012, there were 21,667 occupants of passenger
vehicles who died in motor vehicle traffic crashes. Of the occupants
for whom restraint status was known, 52% were unrestrained at the time
of the crash. Research shows that wearing a seatbelt or using a child
safety seat can greatly reduce the chances of fatal or serious injury
as a result of a motor vehicle collision. High visibility enforcement
(i.e., highly visible enforcement accompanied by public information
supporting the enforcement) has been demonstrated to increase seat belt
use. A NHTSA-convened work group of law enforcement representatives
from states with secondary seat belt laws, but

exemplary work in support of occupant protection enforcement,
identified strong leadership as the critical component in their
successes. Strong leadership within any law enforcement agency can
result in various practices and methodologies that spotlight a
program's importance and help to make occupant protection, as well as
other traffic safety issues, an integral part of the agencies' culture.
Regardless of whether the occupant protection program is organized as a
specialized unit or broadly integrated within the routine operations of
the law enforcement agency, key management and enforcement roles must
be clearly defined and assigned to specific individuals by the
executive staff.
    NHTSA is undertaking a study to implement a leadership model
framework within three law enforcement agencies selected by NHTSA,
evaluate the process and determine if the traffic safety outcome of
interest is realized, specifically the impact on increased seat belt
use and reduction in unrestrained fatalities. To accomplish this, NHTSA
will provide technical assistance to three law enforcement
demonstration communities for the implementation of leadership
frameworks in support of safety initiatives, specifically occupant
protection. Evaluation measures will involve the independent
identification, collection and evaluation of both qualitative and
quantitative data that specifically document changes in enforcement
activity and its effects on the surrounding communities' behaviors.
Under this proposed effort, a total of 108 interviews of law
enforcement personnel will be conducted over two time periods. Eighteen
interviews will be conducted in each of the three demonstration sites,
once during the demonstration implementation and once at the end of the
demonstration project. Overall findings will be provided to other law
enforcement agencies to use as a resource for improving occupant
protection enforcement programs and efforts.
    Affected Public: Interviewees will represent law enforcement
leadership as well as line officers. Law enforcement leadership
participants will include the top management in the agency (colonel,
chief, etc.). The interviewees will either be self-selected or selected
by the demonstration agency. The demonstration agency will have the
best insights into individuals who best represent these three types for
inclusion into the study and will assist in announcements of interview
participation opportunities as well as scheduling that is amenable to
particular interviewees. NHTSA's contractor will work closely with the
demonstration communities (well in advance of data collection) to
provide them with the information they need to select interviewees who
can provide the best data for the study. This will ensure that the
right people are selected, have ample time to be provided information
about the study, and are able to be replaced with another suitable
participant if they choose not to participate. To get volunteers, the
contractor will provide information to the demonstration sites about
what types of volunteers they are seeking, but will ultimately rely on
each site to disseminate that information to officers. If officers do
not volunteer for interviews, the contractor will work with the site to
explore additional ways of disseminating information about the
interviews and/or encouraging participation; if necessary, the site
will be asked to select additional participants for interviews.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 135 hours (108 interviews, averaging
1.25 hours).
    Comments are invited on the following:
    (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection;
    (iii) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (iv) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30
days of publication.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A).

    Issued on: December 9, 2014.
Jeff Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2014-29300 Filed 12-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32295-32303]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11531]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0787; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00252-T;
Amendment 39-22048; AD 2022-10-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (600), CL-600-2A12 (601),
and CL-600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants) airplanes. This AD
was prompted by a report of a wing stall (wing drop/un-commanded roll)
during a landing flare. This AD requires revising the existing airplane
flight manual (AFM) to incorporate a limitation and procedure for the
wing anti-ice (WAI) system in order to mitigate the risk of ice
accumulation on the wing leading edges. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 5, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; internet
https://www.bombardier.com. You may view this 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-2021-0787.

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-
0787; 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 final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chirayu Gupta, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2021-06, dated February 26,
2021 (TCCA AD CF-2021-06) (also referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (600),
CL-600-2A12 (601), and CL-600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants)
airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0787.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier,
Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (600), CL-600-2A12 (601), and CL-600-2B16 (601-
3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on September 15, 2021 (86 FR 51279). The NPRM was
prompted by a report of a wing stall (wing drop/un-commanded roll)
during a landing flare. The NPRM proposed to require revising the
existing AFM to incorporate a limitation and procedure for the WAI
system in order to mitigate the risk of ice accumulation on the wing
leading edges. The FAA is issuing this AD to address ice accumulation
on the wing leading edges, which could result in a wing stall during
landing and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for minor editorial changes.
    The FAA has determined that these minor changes:

     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued the following service information, which
specifies a revised AFM limitation and procedure for the WAI system in
order to mitigate the risk of ice accumulation on the wing leading
edge. These documents are distinct since they apply to different
airplane configurations.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section of the Canadair Challenger AFM,
Product Publication No. 600, Revision A114, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section C., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
3., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the Canadair Challenger AFM,
Product Publication No. 600, Revision A114, dated April 16, 2020.

     Sub-section I., Before Landing, of Chapter 42.,
CONSOLIDATED CHECK LIST, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of the
Canadair Challenger AFM, Product Publication No. 600, Revision A114,
dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 4., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, Product Support Publication (PSP) No. 600-1, Revision 106, dated
April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section C., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the Canadair Challenger AFM,
Product Support Publication (PSP) No. 600-1, Revision 106, dated April
16, 2020.
     Sub-section I., Before Landing, of Chapter 23.,
CONSOLIDATED CHECK LIST, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of the
Canadair Challenger AFM, Product Support Publication (PSP) No. 600-1,
Revision 106, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision 123, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of
the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision 123, dated April
16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Bombardier Canadair
Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1, Revision 82, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of
the Bombardier Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1, Revision 82,
dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 86, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of
the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 86, dated April
16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Bombardier Canadair
Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1B-1, Revision 84, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of
the Bombardier Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1B-1, Revision 84,
dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, PSP No. 601A-1, Revision 106, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of
the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601A-1, Revision 106, dated April
16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Bombardier Canadair
Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601A-1-1, Revision 95, dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of
the Bombardier Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601A-1-1, Revision 95,
dated April 16, 2020.
     Sub-sub section B., Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
4., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Section 02-04, Operating
Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger
604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1, Revision 116, dated December 18,
2019. (For obtaining the limitation and procedure for the Bombardier
Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1, use Document
Identification No. CH 604 AFM.)
     Sub-section M., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Section
04-14, Ice and Rain Protection, of Chapter 4--NORMAL PROCEDURES, of the
Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1, Revision 116,
dated December 18, 2019. (For obtaining the limitation and procedure
for the Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1, use
Document Identification No. CH 604 AFM.)
     Sub-sub section B., Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
4., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Section 02-04, Operating
Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger
605 AFM, Publication No. PSP 605-1, Revision 54, dated December 18,
2019. (For obtaining the limitation and procedure for the Bombardier
Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. PSP 605-1, use Document
Identification No. CH 605 AFM.)
     Sub-section M., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Section
04-14, Ice and Rain Protection, of Chapter 4--NORMAL PROCEDURES, of the
Bombardier Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. PSP 605-1, Revision 54,
dated December 18, 2019. (For obtaining the limitation and procedure
for the Bombardier Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. PSP 605-1, use
Document Identification No. CH 605 AFM.)
     Sub-sub section B., Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
4., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Section 02-04, Operating
Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger
650 AFM, Publication No. PSP 650-1, Revision 19, dated December 18,
2019. (For obtaining the limitation and procedure for the Bombardier
Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. PSP 650-1, use Document
Identification No. CH 650 AFM.)
     Sub-section M., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Section
04-14, Ice and Rain Protection, of Chapter 4--NORMAL PROCEDURES, of the
Bombardier Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. PSP 650-1, Revision 19,
dated December 18, 2019. (For obtaining the limitation and procedure
for the Bombardier Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. PSP 650-1, use
Document Identification No. CH 650 AFM.)
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 619 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................              $0              $85          $52,615
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2022-10-10 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-22048; Docket No. FAA-
2021-0787; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00252-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 5, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., airplanes, certificated in
any category, as identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this
AD.
    (1) Model CL-600-1A11 (600) airplanes having serial numbers (S/
Ns) 1001 through 1085 inclusive.
    (2) Model CL-600-2A12 (601) airplanes having S/Ns 3001 through
3066 inclusive.
    (3) Model CL-600-2B16 (601-3A, 601-3R, and 604 Variants)
airplanes having S/Ns 5001 through 5194 inclusive; 5301 through 5665
inclusive; 5701 through 5988 inclusive; and 6050 through 6153
inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 30, Ice and Rain
Protection.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a wing stall during a
landing flare. Photographs after landing showed that the airplane
had mixed ice on the leading edges of the wings; therefore, it was
determined that during descent the wing anti-ice (WAI) system had
been OFF because the ice detector did not detect ice. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address ice accumulation on the wing leading
edges, which could result in a wing stall during landing and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision

    Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
existing AFM to incorporate the specified sections of the Bombardier
or Canadair Challenger AFM revision limitations and procedures for
the WAI system specified in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31MY22.217

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31MY22.218

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31MY22.219

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31MY22.220

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York 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 ATTN: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2021-06, dated February 26, 2021, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-07871.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Chirayu Gupta,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services
Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), Product Publication No. 600, Revision
A114, dated April 16, 2020.
    (ii) Sub-section C., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
3., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section,
of the Canadair Challenger AFM, Product Publication No. 600,
Revision A114, dated April 16, 2020.
    (iii) Sub-section I., Before Landing, of Chapter 42.,
CONSOLIDATED CHECK LIST, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of the
Canadair Challenger AFM, Product Publication No. 600, Revision A114,
dated April 16, 2020.
    (iv) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 4., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, Product Support Publication (PSP) No. 600-1, Revision 106,
dated April 16, 2020.
    (v) Sub-section C., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section,
of the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 600-1, Revision 106, dated
April 16, 2020.
    (vi) Sub-section I., Before Landing, of Chapter 23.,
CONSOLIDATED CHECK LIST, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section, of the
Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 600-1, Revision 106, dated April
16, 2020.
    (vii) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision 123, dated April 16, 2020.
    (viii) Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of
Chapter 4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES
section, of the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1A, Revision
123, dated April 16, 2020.
    (ix) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Bombardier Canadair
Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1, Revision 82, dated April 16, 2020.
    Note 1 to paragraph (j)(2)(ix): The List of Effective Pages
contains a page date error for page i of the LIMITATIONS Contents.
The page date identified is in the List of Effective Pages is
October 26, 2009; the date specified on page i is April 16, 2020.
    (x) Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section,
of the Bombardier Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1A-1,
Revision 82, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xi) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 86, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xii) Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section,
of the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1B, Revision 86, dated
April 16, 2020.
    (xiii) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Bombardier Canadair
Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1B-1, Revision 84, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xiv) Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section,
of the Bombardier Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601-1B-1,
Revision 84, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xv) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Canadair Challenger
AFM, PSP No. 601A-1, Revision 106, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xvi) Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Chapter
4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES section,
of the Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601A-1, Revision 106, dated
April 16, 2020.
    (xvii) Sub-sub section (2), Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
I., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Chapter 3., OPERATING
LIMITATIONS, of the LIMITATIONS section, of the Bombardier Canadair
Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601A-1-1, Revision 95, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xviii) Sub-section E., Icing Conditions During Flight, of
Chapter 4., SYSTEMS OPERATIONS--ANTI-ICE, of the NORMAL PROCEDURES
section, of the Bombardier Canadair Challenger AFM, PSP No. 601A-1-
1, Revision 95, dated April 16, 2020.
    (xix) Sub-sub section B., Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
4., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Section 02-04, Operating
Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger
604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1, Revision 116, dated December 18,
2019.
    Note 2 to paragraph (j)(2)(xix): For obtaining the limitation
and procedure specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(xix) and (xx) of this
AD for the Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1,
use Document Identification No. CH 604 AFM.
    (xx) Sub-section M., Icing Conditions During Flight, of Section
04-14, Ice and Rain Protection, of Chapter 4--NORMAL PROCEDURES, of
the Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. PSP 604-1,
Revision 116, dated December 18, 2019.
    (xxi) Sub-sub section B., Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
4., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Section 02-04, Operating
Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger
605 AFM, Publication No. PSP 605-1, Revision 54, dated December 18,
2019.
    Note 3 to paragraph (j)(2)(xxi): For obtaining the limitation
and procedure specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(xxi) and (xxii) of this
AD for the Bombardier Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. PSP 605-1,
use Document Identification No. CH 605 AFM.
    (xxii) Sub-section M., Icing Conditions During Flight, of
Section 04-14, Ice and Rain Protection, of Chapter 4--NORMAL
PROCEDURES, of the Bombardier Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No.
PSP 605-1, Revision 54, dated December 18, 2019.
    (xxiii) Sub-sub section B., Wing Anti-ice System, of sub-section
4., Operation in Icing Conditions, of Section 02-04, Operating
Limitations, of Chapter 2--LIMITATIONS, of the Bombardier Challenger
650 AFM, Publication No. PSP 650-1, Revision 19, dated December 18,
2019.
    Note 4 to paragraph (j)(2)(xxiii): For obtaining the limitation
and procedure specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(xxiii) and (xxiv) of
this AD for the Bombardier Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. PSP
650-1, use Document Identification No. CH 650 AFM.
    (xxiv) Sub-section M., Icing Conditions During Flight, of
Section 04-14, Ice and Rain Protection, of Chapter 4--NORMAL
PROCEDURES, of the Bombardier Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No.
PSP 650-1, Revision 19, dated December 18, 2019.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-

Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone
514-855-2999; email [email protected]; internet https://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this 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>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 6, 2022.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-11531 Filed 5-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 100 (Thursday, May 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 23787]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10785]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0524; FRL-9993-88-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Stationary Combustion Turbines
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Stationary Combustion
Turbines (EPA ICR Number 2177.07, OMB Control Number 2060-0582) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2019.
Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register, on
May 30, 2018 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR
is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public.
An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 24, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0524, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for
Stationary Combustion Turbines (40 CFR part 60, subpart KKKK) were
proposed on February 18, 2005, and promulgated on July 6, 2006. These
regulations apply to new stationary combustion turbines with a heat
input at peak load equal to or greater than 10.7 gigajoules (10 MMBtu)
per hour, based on the higher heating value of the fuel. New facilities
include those that commenced construction, modification or
reconstruction after the date of proposal. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart KKKK.
    In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of
all affected facilities subject to NSPS.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Stationary combustion turbines.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart KKKK).
    Estimated number of respondents: 730 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 76,100 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $8,670,000 (per year), which includes $0 in
annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is an adjustment increase in burden
hours and costs for both the respondents and the Agency as currently
identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. The increase is
not due to any program changes. The increase is due to an adjustment in
the number of new or modified sources. This ICR assumes the respondent
universe subject to the regulation has continued to grow at a constant
rate since the last ICR renewal. The increase in the number of
respondents also results in an increase in the number of responses.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-10785 Filed 5-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P