[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37589-37592]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13786]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0268; FRL-9947-55-OW]

Notice of Availability: Draft Protective Action Guide (PAG) for
Drinking Water After a Radiological Incident

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of document availability; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: As part of its mission to protect human health and the
environment, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes
protective action guides to help federal, state, local and tribal
emergency response officials make radiation protection decisions during
emergencies. EPA, in coordination with a multi-agency working group
within the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee, is
proposing an addition to the 2013 revised interim Protective Action
Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological Incidents (``2013 revised
PAG Manual'' hereafter) to provide guidance on drinking water. The
Draft Protective Action Guide for Drinking Water is now available in
the EPA Docket, under ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0268, and EPA is
requesting comment on the draft guide.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0268, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written

comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Christ, Standards and Risk
Management Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Mail
Code 4607M, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action does not impose any requirements on anyone. It notifies
interested parties of EPA's proposed, draft drinking water protective
action guide (PAG) and requests public comment. The drinking water PAG
will help federal, state, local, tribal officials and public water
systems make decisions about use of water during radiological
emergencies. The drinking water PAG is non-regulatory guidance.

B. What authority does EPA have to provide Protective Action Guidance?

    The historical and legal basis of EPA's role in the 2013 PAG Manual
begins with Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, in which the
Administrator of the EPA assumed all the functions of the Federal
Radiation Council (FRC), including the charge to ``. . . advise the
President with respect to radiation matters, directly or indirectly
affecting health, including guidance for all federal agencies in the
formulation of radiation standards and in the establishment and
execution of programs of cooperation with [s]tates.'' (Reorg. Plan No.
3 of 1970, sec. 2(a)(7), 6(a)(2); Sec.  274.h of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended (AEA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 2021(h)). Recognizing
this role, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) directed EPA,
in its Radiological Emergency Planning and Preparedness Regulations, to
``establish Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for all aspects of
radiological emergency planning in coordination with appropriate
federal agencies.'' (44 CFR 351.22(a)). FEMA also tasked EPA with
preparing ``guidance for state and local governments on implementing
PAGs, including recommendations on protective actions which can be
taken to mitigate the potential radiation dose to the population.'' (44
CFR 351.22(b)). All of this information was to ``be presented in the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) `Manual of Protective Action
Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents.' ''(44 CFR
351.22(b)).
    Additionally, section 2021(h) charged the Administrator with
performing ``such other functions as the President may assign to him
[or her] by Executive Order.'' Executive Order 12656 states that the
Administrator shall ``[d]evelop, for national security emergencies,
guidance on acceptable emergency levels of nuclear radiation. . ..''
(Executive Order No. 12656, sec. 1601(2)). EPA's role in PAGs
development was reaffirmed by the National Response Framework, Nuclear/
Radiological Incident Annex of June 2008.

C. What is the PAG Manual: Protective Action Guides and Planning
Guidance for Radiological Incidents?

    In 2013, EPA revised the PAG Manual to provide federal, state and
local emergency management officials with guidance for responding to
radiological emergencies (78 FR 22257, April 15, 2013). See the 2013
PAG Manual at https://www.epa.gov/radiation/protective-action-guides-pags. A protective action guide (PAG) is the projected dose to an
individual from a release of radioactive material at which a specific
protective action to reduce or avoid that dose is recommended.
Emergency management officials use PAGs for making decisions regarding
actions to protect the public from exposure to radiation during an
emergency. Such actions include evacuation, shelter-in-place, temporary
relocation, water and food restrictions.
    The PAGs are based on the following essential principles, which
also apply to the selection of any protective action during an
incident:
     Prevent acute effects.
     Balance protection with other important factors and ensure
that actions result in more benefit than harm.
     Reduce risk of chronic effects.
    The PAG Manual is not a legally binding regulation or standard and
does not supersede any environmental laws; PAGs are not intended to
define ``safe'' or ``unsafe'' levels of exposure or contamination. As
indicated by the use of non-mandatory language such as ``may,''
``should'' and ``can,'' the Manual only provides recommendations and
does not confer any legal rights or impose any legally binding
requirements upon any member of the public, states or any federal
agency. Rather, the PAG Manual provides projected radiation dose levels
at which specific actions are recommended in order to reduce or avoid
that dose. The 2013 revised interim PAG Manual is designed to provide
flexibility to be more or less restrictive as deemed appropriate by
decision makers based on the unique characteristics of the incident and
the local situation.

D. What additional guidance is being proposed for the PAG Manual?

    The draft drinking water protective action guidance was developed
by a multi-agency PAG Subcommittee of the Federal Radiological
Preparedness Coordinating Committee and is published by the EPA with
concurrence from the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense,
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the
Department of Health and Human Services, including both the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Labor.
    A large scale radiation contamination incident could impact the
United States, driving the need for a pre-established drinking water
PAG. EPA is proposing a two-tiered intermediate phase drinking water
PAG of 100 mrem projected dose in the first year for infants, children
and pregnant or nursing women and 500 mrem projected dose in the first
year for the general population. The proposed PAG is designed to work
in concert with the other Protective Action Guides currently in place
for other media in the intermediate phase (i.e., the Food and Drug
Administration's 500 mrem PAG for ingestion of food) and provides an
additional level of protection for the most sensitive life stages.
Authorities have flexibility on how to apply the PAG. In some cases
they may find it prudent to use a single PAG (e.g., 100 mrem) as a
target for the whole population, while in other circumstances,
authorities may find that it makes sense to use both targets
simultaneously. For example, emergency managers can use a two-tiered
approach to focus on protecting the most sensitive population with
limited, alternate water resources. Because the water and food PAGs are

designed to be used in concert, the appropriate protective actions will
be influenced by the exposure scenario and factors that influence the
viability of alternative approaches to reducing that dose.
    This proposed, additional draft guidance recommends protective
actions when drinking water may be impacted by a radiological or
nuclear incident. The two-tier approach seeks to balance the goal of
keeping radiation doses as low as possible with the practical and
logistical challenges of providing alternative drinking water during
the response to a disaster. EPA has included examples of estimated
costs for selected drinking water protective actions in the Docket, ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0268. In developing the drinking water PAG, the
Agency considered potential cumulative exposure from a radiation
incident. Ultimately, a PAG does not represent an ``acceptable''
routine exposure; a PAG is a dose at which protective action is advised
in order to reduce or avoid that dose. Every PAG is developed with the
same three principles: prevent acute effects, balance protection with
other important factors and ensure that actions result in more benefit
than harm, and reduce risk of chronic effects. Emergency management
officials should consider all exposure routes when making protective
action decisions in an emergency.
    Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Agency has
established maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for radiological
contaminants in drinking water. The National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations (NPDWR) for radionuclides are based on lifetime exposure
criteria and assume 70 years of continued exposure to contaminants in
drinking water. While the SDWA framework is appropriate for day-to-day
normal operations, it may not provide the necessary tools to assist
emergency responders with determining the need for an immediate
protective action. EPA expects that any drinking water system adversely
impacted during a radiation contamination incident will take action to
return to compliance with MCLs as soon as practicable.

E. How were comments received on the 2013 draft PAG Manual considered
in developing this proposal?

    On April 15, 2013, EPA published a Federal Register notice
requesting public comments on the appropriateness of developing and
incorporating a drinking water PAG in the revised PAG Manual (78 FR
22257).
    Regarding the specific issue of drinking water, the Agency received
about 50 comment letters from members of the public, state and local
emergency response and health organizations, environmental advocates,
industry associations, organizations opposed to nuclear power, and from
national and international radiation protection organizations.
    Several commenters from state emergency management agencies and
radiation control programs expressed an urgent need for EPA to
establish a drinking water PAG, pointing out that drinking water is the
only media not currently addressed in the PAG Manual. Commenters stated
that a drinking water PAG is a critical aspect of a coordinated
emergency response after a radiation contamination incident.
    Commenters representing states agencies from Ohio, Kansas,
Pennsylvania, Illinois and Washington suggested that a drinking water
PAG should be established at the 500 mrem level, to be consistent with
the FDA food PAG and with the DHS guidance \1\ for water. While EPA
agrees with the need of establishing a drinking water PAG, which is
consistent with currently available guidance, it is also important to
note that EPA believes that when possible, PAG recommendations should
provide an additional level of protection to sensitive life-stages. For
short-term incidents, it is appropriate to consider a lower tier PAG
level of 100 mrem for sensitive life-stages including pregnant women,
nursing women and children 15 years old and under. This approach of
setting a two-tier level of protection incorporates suggestions
submitted by commenters regarding the adequate consideration of
children and sensitive subpopulations. There is an abundant precaution
built into the derivation of the drinking water PAG through a variety
of assumptions, including amount of water consumed, exposure duration
and dose-response modeling, using the dose-response for the most
sensitive life stages to derive the PAG for children through age 15
years. Today's proposal ensures that protective measures are
appropriate for all members of the public, including sensitive
subpopulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Guidance established by the Department of Homeland Security
as an intermediate-level PAG for drinking water interdiction (73 FR
45029, April 1, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast, several commenters from environmental protection
advocate organizations suggested that a drinking water PAG is not
needed, and urged EPA to base any emergency response measures regarding
drinking water solely on the NPDWR for Radionuclides MCLs. Some
commenters expressed concerns that establishing a drinking water PAG
would weaken existing environmental standards and regulations. However,
the drinking water standards are legal limits designed to prevent
health effects from everyday exposure to low levels of radiation over
long periods and they are not changing with this proposal.
    Estimated risk of excess cancer cases for lifetime exposure (70
years) to radioactive contaminants in drinking water at 4 mrem/yr (the
MCL) generally falls in a range of risks deemed acceptable by the
Agency's regulations. Estimated risks associated with a shorter (one
year) exposure to radioactivity in drinking water at the proposed PAG
levels fall within a similar range. Emergency guides are temporary
measures to minimize risk while enabling prioritization of limited
resources during an emergency response.
    The PAG levels are guidance for emergency situations; they do not
supplant any standards or regulations, nor do they affect the
stringency or enforcement of any standards or regulations. The PAG
levels are intended to be used only in an emergency when radiation
levels have already exceeded environmental standards. EPA expects that
any drinking water system adversely impacted during a radiation
incident will take action to return to compliance with Safe Drinking
Water Act levels as soon as practicable.

F. When will the PAG Manual be finalized?

    Once comments on this proposed, additional draft action have been
addressed, EPA will add drinking water guidance to the full PAG Manual,
which will then be issued in final form for incorporation into state,
local, tribal and federal emergency response plans over a one-year
implementation timeframe.

G. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number, subject heading,
Federal Register date and page number.
     Follow directions--the EPA may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing the chapter
number of the draft action guide
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide technical information
and data that you used.

     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow it to be
reproduced.
     Illustrate your concerns with specific examples and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

H. What specific comments are being sought?

    While all comments regarding any aspect of the draft drinking water
PAG guidance will be considered, please comment on the following issues
specifically:
     Please comment on the appropriateness of the drinking
water PAG and the guidance for advance planning.
     Please comment on what implementation challenges might be
associated with the two-tiered approach to the water PAG that EPA
should consider, and suggest additional guidance that would be helpful.
     Please comment on whether (and if so why) EPA should
reconsider using a single-tier drinking water PAG rather than tiered
approach proposed in the draft action guide.
     Please suggest additional guidance that would aid pre-
incident planning and implementation specific to your community's
drinking water systems.
     Please comment on how this guidance should be implemented
in emergency response and recovery plans at all levels of government,
including considerations for public communications during an emergency.
    In the future, calculations and derived response levels will be
provided in the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center
(FRMAC) Assessment Manuals. Emergency planners are referred to FRMAC
Monitoring and Sampling Methods to assess surface and drinking water
impacts from a radiological emergency. See the Assessment and
Monitoring & Sampling folders at http://www.nv.doe.gov/nationalsecurity/homelandsecurity/frmac/manuals.aspx. After considering
public comments, EPA intends to issue a final PAG Manual, which will
supersede the 1992 PAG Manual and the 2013 revised PAG Manual.

    Dated: June 3, 2016.
Joel Beauvais,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2016-13786 Filed 6-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 83 (Friday, April 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24034-24035]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-E-0087]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; CONVENIA

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the
regulatory review period for CONVENIA and is publishing this notice of
that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination
because of the submission of an application to the Director of Patents
and Trademarks, Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent
which claims that animal drug product.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written petitions along with three copies and written comments
to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food

and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD
20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, rm. 6222, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug
and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide
that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as
the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical
device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory
review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these Acts, a
product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the
amount of extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For animal drug products, the
testing phase begins on the earlier date when either a major
environmental effects test was initiated for the drug or when an
exemption under section 512(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)) became effective and runs until
the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the animal drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of Patents and
Trademarks may award (for example, half the testing phase must be
subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent
was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review
period for an animal drug product will include all of the testing phase
and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(4)(B).
    FDA approved for marketing the animal drug product CONVENIA
(cefovecin sodium). CONVENIA is indicated for the treatment of skin
infections (wounds and abscesses) caused by susceptible strains of
Pasteurella multocida in cats; and the treatment of skin infections
(secondary superficial pyoderma, abscesses and wounds) caused by
susceptible strains of Staphylococcus intermedius and Streptococcus
canis (Group G) in dogs. Subsequent to this approval, the Patent and
Trademark Office received a patent term restoration application for
CONVENIA (U.S. Patent No. 6,020,329) from Pfizer, Inc., and the Patent
and Trademark Office requested FDA's assistance in determining this
patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated
September 2, 2009, FDA advised the Patent and Trademark Office that
this animal drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and
that the approval of CONVENIA represented the first permitted
commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the Patent and
Trademark Office requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory
review period.
    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
CONVENIA is 2,841 days. Of this time, 2,801 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 40 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 512(j) of the FD&C Act
became effective: July 17, 2000. The applicant claims November 16,
1999, as the date the investigational new animal drug application
(INAD) became effective. However, the date that a major health or
environmental effects test is begun or the date on which the Agency
acknowledges the filing of a notice of claimed investigational
exemption for a new animal drug, whichever is earlier, is the effective
date for the INAD. According to FDA records, July 17, 2000, is the
effective date for the INAD.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the animal drug product under section 512 of the FD&C Act: March 17,
2008. The applicant claims March 15, 2008, as the date the new animal
drug Application (NADA) for CONVENIA (NADA 141-285) was initially
submitted. However, a review of FDA records reveals that the date of
FDA's official acknowledgement letter assigning a number to NADA 141-
285 was March 17, 2008, which is considered to be the initially
submitted date for NADA 141-285.
    3. The date the application was approved: April 25, 2008. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NADA 141-285 was approved on April
25, 2008. This determination of the regulatory review period
establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension.
However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory
limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent
extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant
seeks 1,462 days of patent term extension.
    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments and ask for a
redetermination by June 28, 2011. Furthermore, any interested person
may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant
for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review
period by October 26, 2011.
    To meet its burden, the petition must contain sufficient facts to
merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d
sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in
21 CFR 10.30.
    Comments and petitions should be submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management. Three copies of any mailed information are to be
submitted, except that individuals may submit one copy. Comments are to
be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading
of this document. Comments and petitions may be seen in the Division of
Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: April 15, 2011.
Jane A. Axelrad,
Associate Director for Policy, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
[FR Doc. 2011-10379 Filed 4-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 28, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43747-43750]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18273]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0118; Product Identifier 2017-NM-083-AD; Amendment
39-19371; AD 2018-17-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of arcing and smoke emanating from the windshields.
This AD requires a revision to the maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to include an inspection of the windshield moisture seal
for signs of cracks, erosion, wear, and other deterioration; doing that
inspection and repair if necessary; and re-torqueing the screws that
fasten the windshield heater terminal lugs and applying sealant to the
screw heads of the windshield heaters. We are issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 2, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 2,
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., Q Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected]; internet:
http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards 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 http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2018-0118.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0118; 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, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Operations, 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: Steve Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-
7367; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We 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 DHC-8-400 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on March 1, 2018 (83 FR 8810). The NPRM was prompted by
reports of arcing and smoke emanating from the windshields. The NPRM
proposed to require a revision to the maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to include an inspection of the windshield
moisture seal for signs of cracks, erosion, wear, and other
deterioration; doing that inspection and repair if necessary; and re-
torqueing the screws that fasten the windshield heater terminal lugs
and applying sealant to the screw heads of the windshield heaters.
    We are issuing this AD to detect and correct loose windshield
heater terminal lugs. Loose terminal lugs could create sparks that lead
to burning of the lugs and, due to the excessive heat, cracking of the
windshields. If not corrected, such a condition could cause a loss of
cabin pressure resulting in an emergency descent.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD

CF-2017-18, dated May 26, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-400 series
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    There have been numerous reports of arcing and smoke emanating
from the windshields. Review of these incidents revealed that the
windshield heater terminal lugs tend to loosen over time. Loose
terminal lugs could create sparks that lead to burning of the lugs
and, due to the excessive heat, cracking of the windshields. If not
corrected, this condition could cause a loss of cabin pressure
resulting in an emergency descent.

    Required actions include a revision to the maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to include an inspection of the
windshield moisture seal for signs of cracks, erosion, wear, or other
deterioration; doing that inspection and repair if necessary; and re-
torqueing the screws that fasten the windshield heater terminal lugs
and applying sealant (Humiseal) to the screw heads of the windshield
heaters. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2018-0118.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this final rule. The following presents the comments received on the
NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Revise Requirements Related to Temporary Revision (TR)

    Horizon Air requested that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD be
revised to either refer to Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance
Requirements Manual (MRM) Part 1, Revision 13, dated March 15, 2017
(``MRM Part 1, Revision 13''), or include a statement that, ``When this
temporary revision has been included in general revisions of the PSM
[product support manual], the general revisions may be inserted in the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, provided the relevant
information in the general revision is identical to that in Bombardier
[Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Review Board Report] TR MRB-0099 [dated
December 9, 2016 (``TR MRB-0099'')].'' The commenter noted that
paragraph (g) of the proposed AD would require incorporation of TR MRB-
0099 and that this TR has already been incorporated into MRM Part 1,
Revision 13.
    We agree to clarify the requirement in paragraph (g) of the AD. As
noted by the commenter, the TR has already been incorporated into MRM
Part 1, Revision 13. Therefore, if operators incorporate MRM Part 1,
Revision 13, into the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable,
they are in compliance with paragraph (g)(1) of this AD (i.e., since
the MRM Part 1, Revision 13, contains the information in TR MRB-0099,
by incorporating MRM Part 1, Revision 13, the operator is complying
with the requirement to incorporate the information specified in TR
MRB-0099). We have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to include a
statement in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD that specifies if the
information in TR MRB-0099 has been included in the general revisions
of the maintenance requirements manual and the general revisions have
been inserted in the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable,
the requirement of paragraph (g)(1) of this AD is met.

Request To Include Instructions for Doing Inspection

    Horizon Air requested that Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 MRB Task
561001E201, ``General Visual Inspection of the Windshield Moisture
Seal,'' (``MRB Task 561001E201''), Task 56-10-01-210-801, of the
Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Airplane Maintenance Manual, be included in
paragraph (i) of the proposed AD as approved instructions for doing the
inspection of the moisture seal on the left and right windshields.
    We agree with the commenter's request. We have included information
in Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD that guidance for doing the
inspection of the moisture seal can be found in MRB Task 561001E201. We
also re-designated Note 1 to paragraph (i) of the proposed AD to Note 2
to paragraph (i) of this AD.

Request To Include Additional Information in Note 1 to Paragraph (i) of
the Proposed AD

    Horizon Air requested that Note 1 to paragraph (i) of the proposed
AD include PPG Sierracin Component Maintenance Manual (CMM) 56-10-12,
Revision B, dated October 21, 2004. The commenter observed that Note 1
to paragraph (i) of the proposed AD provided additional guidance for
repair of the moisture seal and referred to PPG Aerospace
Transparencies Abbreviated CMM, Part Number NP-157901, Revision 6,
dated June 16, 2015. The commenter did not provide justification for
this request.
    We partially agree with the commenter's request. We have moved the
content of Note 1 to paragraph (i) of the proposed AD into Note 2 to
paragraph (i) of this AD. Instead of Revision B, we have included
Revision D, dated April 6, 2017, of PPG Sierracin CMM, 56-10-12, as an
additional source of guidance for repair of the moisture seal.

Request To Exclude Job Set-Up and Close Out From Required Actions

    Horizon Air requested that only the sections of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-30-16, Revision A, dated
September 27, 2017, that address the unsafe condition be specified in
paragraph (j) of the proposed AD. The commenter stated that including
the job set-up and close out sections of the Accomplishment
Instructions restricts an operator's ability to perform other
maintenance in conjunction with the incorporation of the actions
specified in this service bulletin.
    We agree with the commenter's request to clarify which section of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-30-
16, Revision A, dated September 27, 2017, that operators must use to
accomplish the actions required by paragraph (j) of this AD. We have
revised paragraph (j) of this AD to specify that operators must do the
applicable actions in accordance with paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-30-
16, Revision A, dated September 27, 2017.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this final rule with the changes described previously and minor
editorial changes. We have 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.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 84-30-16, Revision A, dated
September 27, 2017. This service information describes procedures for
re-torqueing the screws that fasten the windshield heater terminal lugs
and applying sealant to the screw heads of the windshield heaters.
    Bombardier has also issued Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Review Board
Report Temporary Revision (TR) MRB-0099, dated December 9, 2016. This

temporary revision describes procedures for inspecting the moisture
seal for the left and right windshields for signs of cracks, erosion,
wear, and other deterioration.
    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

    We estimate that this AD affects 54 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost     Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection/Re-torque/Seal......  Up to 3 work-hours x                 $0  Up to $255........  Up to $13,770.
                                  $85 per hour = $255.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we
recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the
past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per
airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program
changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-
operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate.
Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90
work-hours x $85 per work-hour).
    We have received no definitive data that will enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition repair specified in this AD.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    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),
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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 (AD):

2018-17-17 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-19371; Docket No. FAA-
2018-0118; Product Identifier 2017-NM-083-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 2, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-400, -401, and
-402 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 4001
through 4524 inclusive.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of arcing and smoke emanating
from the windshields. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
loose windshield heater terminal lugs. Loose terminal lugs could
create sparks that lead to burning of the lugs and, due to the
excessive heat, cracking of the windshields. If not corrected, such
a condition could cause a loss of cabin pressure resulting in an
emergency descent.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Revision to Inspection or Maintenance Program

    (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise
the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
the task specified in Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Review
Board Report Temporary Revision (TR) MRB-0099, dated December 9,
2016.
    (2) If the information in Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance
Review Board Report Temporary Revision (TR) MRB-0099, dated December
9, 2016, has been included in the general revisions of the
Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Requirements Manual and the
general revisions have been inserted into the maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, the requirement in paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD is met.

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or
intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
in accordance with the

procedures specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD.

(i) Inspection and Corrective Action

    Within 1,600 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first, do a general visual inspection
of the moisture seal on the left and right windshields for signs of
cracks, erosion, wear, and other deterioration (including
discoloration, warping, or missing material). If any crack, erosion,
wear, or other deterioration is found, before further flight, repair
the moisture seal in accordance with 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.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD:  Additional guidance for
inspection of the moisture seal can be found in Bombardier Q400 Dash
8 Maintenance Review Board (MRB) Task 561001E201, ``General Visual
Inspection of the Windshield Moisture Seal,'' (Task 56-10-01-210-
801, of the Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Airplane Maintenance Manual).

    Note 2 to paragraph (i) of this AD: Additional guidance for
repair of the moisture seal can be found in PPG Aerospace
Transparencies Abbreviated Component Maintenance Manual, Part Number
NP-157901, Revision 6, dated June 16, 2015; and PPG Sierracin
Component Maintenance Manual, 56-10-12, Part Number 802600, Revision
D, dated April 6, 2017.

(j) Re-Torqueing and Sealing Screws

    Within 8,000 flight hours or 60 months after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Re-torque the windshield heater
terminal lug screws for the left and right windshields and apply
Humiseal to the screw heads of the windshield heaters, in accordance
with paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-30-16, Revision A,
dated September 27, 2017.

(k) 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 local Flight Standards District 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:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO. If approved by
the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2017-18, dated May 26, 2017, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2018-0118.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Steve
Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative
Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 516-794-
5531.

(m) 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) Bombardier Q400 Dash 8 Maintenance Review Board Report
Temporary Revision (TR) MRB-0099, dated December 9, 2016.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-30-16, Revision A, dated
September 27, 2017.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone: 416-375-
4000; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected];
internet: http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on August 16, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-18273 Filed 8-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 13, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21730-21732]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08366]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-8136; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-189-AD;
Amendment 39-18480; AD 2016-08-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report of missing fasteners in certain locations of the fuselage during
production. This AD would require inspecting for missing, damaged, or
incorrectly installed fasteners; and corrective actions if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the fuselage
due to missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage.

DATES: This AD is effective May 18, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 18, 2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax
+33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
8136.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
8136; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, 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: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus Model A330-
223F and -243F airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
January 4, 2016 (81 FR 22) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a
report of missing fasteners in certain locations of the fuselage during
production. The NPRM proposed to require inspecting for missing,
damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners; and corrective actions if
necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the
fuselage due to missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners,
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0197, dated September 4, 2014 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model
A330-223F and -243F airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During inspection of various fuselage areas on some A330-200F
aeroplanes on the production line, prior to delivery, some fasteners
were found missing.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
crack initiation and propagation, possibly resulting in reduced
structural integrity of the fuselage.
    To address this condition, Airbus issued several Service
Bulletins (SB), providing inspection and modification instructions,
as applicable.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
detailed inspections of the affected areas and, depending on
findings, accomplishment of the applicable corrective actions.

    Corrective actions include replacing any missing, damaged, or
incorrectly installed fasteners, and repair of any discrepancy
(deformation or cracking of the fastener rows) of the affected fuselage
frame areas. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2015-8136.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting 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

    We reviewed the following Airbus service information, which
describes procedures for inspecting for missing, damaged, or
incorrectly installed fasteners; and corrective actions.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3202, dated May 6, 2014.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3212, dated May 6, 2014.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3213, dated May 6, 2014.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3214, dated May 6, 2014.
    We also reviewed the following Airbus service information, which
describes procedures for modification of certain sections of the
fuselage.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3216, dated May 6, 2014.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3217, dated May 6, 2014.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3218, dated May 6, 2014.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3219, dated May 6, 2014.
    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

    We estimate that this AD affects 3 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 10 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic inspection requirements of this AD, and 1
work-

hour per product to report inspection findings. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $2,805, or $935 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary modification will take
about 40 work-hours and require parts costing $210, for a cost of
$3,610 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this action.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition repairs specified in this AD.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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 (AD):

2016-08-04 Airbus: Amendment 39-18480; Docket No. FAA-2015-8136;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-189-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 18, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes,
certificated in any category; manufacturer serial numbers 1004,
1032, 1051, 1062, 1070, 1092, 1115, 1136, 1148, 1164, 1175, 1180,
1320, 1332, 1344, 1350, 1368, 1380, 1386, 1406, 1414, 1418, and
1428.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of missing fasteners in certain
locations of the fuselage during production. We are issuing this AD
to prevent cracking of the fuselage due to missing, damaged, or
incorrectly installed fasteners, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the fuselage.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Detailed Inspection

    Within 72 months since first flight of the airplane: Do a
detailed inspection of all applicable fuselage zones for missing,
damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3202, dated May 6, 2014.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3212, dated May 6, 2014.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3213, dated May 6, 2014.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3214, dated May 6, 2014.

(h) Corrective Actions

    If any missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fastener is
found during the detailed inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, before further flight, do a detailed inspection for
discrepancies (deformation or cracking) of the adjacent fastener
rows of the applicable fuselage zones, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD.
    (1) If no discrepancy is found, before further flight, modify
the affected fuselage zone, in accordance with the applicable
service information specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through
(h)(1)(iv) of this AD.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3216, dated May 6, 2014.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3217, dated May 6, 2014.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3218, dated May 6, 2014.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3219, dated May 6, 2014.
    (2) If any discrepancy is found, before further flight, repair
using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA).

(i) Reporting Requirement

    Submit a report (including both positive and negative findings)
to Airbus, Customer Services Directorate, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex France, Attn: SDC32 Technical Data and
Documentation Services; fax: (+33) 5 61 93 28 06; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD. The report must include the
information specified in the inspection report of the applicable
service information

specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which the inspection specified in paragraph
(g) of this AD is accomplished on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after performing the
inspection.
    (2) For airplanes on which the inspection specified in paragraph
(g) of this AD is accomplished before the effective date of this AD:
Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this
AD.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    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. 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA;
or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must
include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.
    (4) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0197, dated September 4, 2014, for
related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2015-8136.

(l) 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) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3202, dated May 6, 2014.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3212, dated May 6, 2014.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3213, dated May 6, 2014.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3214, dated May 6, 2014.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3216, dated May 6, 2014.
    (vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3217, dated May 6, 2014.
    (vii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3218, dated May 6, 2014.
    (viii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3219, dated May 6, 2014.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 31, 2016.
Victor Wicklund,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-08366 Filed 4-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 18, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73436-73437]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25400]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0889; Airspace Docket No. 20-ASO-25]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace, and Class E Airspace;
Smyrna, TN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class D airspace, and Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Smyrna
Airport, Smyrna, TN. An evaluation of airspace in the area determined
this airport to require an adjustment of Class D and E airspace.
Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations in the area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 4, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to: the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket No. FAA-2020-0889; Airspace Docket No. 20-ASO-25, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed on-line at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class D airspace and Class E extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Smyrna Airport, Smyrna, TN, to support
IFR operations in the area.

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-
2020-0889 and Airspace Docket No. 20-ASO-25) and be submitted in
triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2020-0889; Airspace Docket No. 20-ASO-25.'' The postcard
will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this document may be changed in light of the
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays at the office
of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room
350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective
September 15, 2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,

air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA proposes an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations part 71 to amend Class D airspace for Smyrna, TN as the FAA
has determined that extensions of 1.2 miles each side of the 142[deg]
bearing from the airport, extending from the 3.9-mile radius to 5.5-
miles southeast of the airport, and within 1.2-miles each side of the
181[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 3.9-mile radius
to 5.5-miles south of the airport are necessary for the safety of IFR
aircraft landing at Smyrna Airport. Also, the Class D ceiling would be
reduced from 3,000 feet to 2,500 feet as per the request of the air
traffic facilities involved. In addition, the FAA proposes to update
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface by
increasing the airport radius from 9-miles to 11.5 miles. Also, the
reference to Nashville Class C, in the Class D description, would be
removed as it is not necessary (7400.11, 1003.b).
    Class D airspace and Class E airspace designations are published in
Paragraphs 5000 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11E, dated
July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which is incorporated
by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979),
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will
only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO TN D Smyrna, TN [Amended]

Smyrna Airport, TN
    (Lat. 36[deg]00'32'' N, long. 86[deg]31'12'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to but not
including 2,500 feet MSL within a 3.9-mile radius of the Smyrna
Airport, and within 1.2 miles each side of the 142[deg] bearing from
the airport, extending from the 3.9-mile radius to 5.5-miles
southeast of the airport, and within 1.2-miles each side of
the181[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 3.9-mile
radius to 5.5-miles south of the airport. This Class D airspace area
is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will
thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO TN E5 Nashville, TN [Amended]

Nashville International Airport, TN
    (Lat. 36[deg]07'28'' N, long. 86[deg]40'41'' W)
Smyrna Airport
    (Lat. 36[deg]00'32'' N, long. 86[deg]31'12'' W)
Sumner County Regional Airport
    (Lat. 36[deg]22'30'' N, long. 86[deg]24'30'' W)
Lebanon Municipal Airport
    (Lat. 36[deg]11'25'' N, long. 86[deg]18'56'' W)
Murfreesboro Municipal Airport
    (Lat. 35[deg]52'43'' N, long. 86[deg]22'39'' W)
John C. Tune Airport
    (Lat. 36[deg]10'59'' N, long. 86[deg]53'11'' W)
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Hospital Point In Space
Coordinates
    (Lat. 36[deg]08'30'' N, long. 86[deg]48'6'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 15 mile radius of Nashville International Airport, and
within a 11.5-mile radius of Smyrna Airport, and within a 7-mile
radius of Sumner County Regional Airport, and within a 10-mile
radius of Lebanon Municipal Airport, and within a 9-mile radius of
Murfreesboro Municipal Airport, and within an 8.6-mile radius of
John C. Tune Airport, and that airspace within a 6-mile radius of
the Point In Space serving Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Hospital.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on November 12, 2020.
Matthew N. Cathcart,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team North, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2020-25400 Filed 11-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P