[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 30231]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12742]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Civil Supersonic Aircraft Panel Discussion

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting participation.

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

SUMMARY: This notice advises interested persons that the FAA is
conducting its fourth public meeting on civil supersonic aircraft
research. The public meeting will include presentations on current
research programs and a question and answer session for attendees. The
purpose of the meeting is to raise public awareness of the continuing
technological advancements in supersonic aircraft technology aimed at
reducing the intensity of sonic boom.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on Thursday, July 14, 2011, in
Washington, DC from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Attendees are encouraged to either
come early or stay later to visit the Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
(Gulfstream) Supersonic Acoustic Signature Simulator (SASSII) that will
be outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT) building.
    Meeting registration is required by June 23; there is no
registration fee. All participants are requested to register at the
following Web site: https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEFEdlRnYzBiaHZtTUozTHVtbkF4d0E6M.Q

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the DOT Headquarters
building, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590, Conference
Room Oklahoma A-C. The DOT building is located across the street from
the Navy Yard Metro stop on the Green Line. Attendance is open to all
interested parties; however, for building security requirements, please
register by June 23 (see above for information on registration).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurette Fisher, Office of Environment
and Energy (AEE-100), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> and Sandy Liu,
Office of Environment and Energy (AEE-100), Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, telephone (202) 493-
4864.
    Background: Since March 1973, supersonic flight over land by civil
aircraft has been prohibited in the United States. The Concorde was the
only civil supersonic airplane that offered service to the United
States, but that airplane is no longer in service.
    The interest in supersonic aircraft technology has not disappeared.
Current research is dedicated toward reducing the impact of sonic booms
as they reach the ground, in an effort to make overland flight
acceptable. Recent research has produced promising results for low boom
intensity, and has renewed interest in developing supersonic civil
aircraft that could be considered environmentally acceptable for
supersonic flight over land.
    The FAA has held three previous public meetings. The first meeting
was held in Chicago, IL on Friday, October 24, 2008, as part of the
O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission Symposium. The second meeting was
held in Palm Springs, CA on Sunday, March 1, 2009, as part of the
Annual University of California Symposium on Aviation Noise and Air
Quality. And, the third meeting took place on Wednesday, April 21,
2010, as part of the joint meeting of the 159th Acoustical Society of
America and NOISE-CON 2010 in Baltimore, Maryland 21202.
    The purpose of these meetings is to raise public awareness on
advances in supersonic technology, and for the FAA, the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and industry to get
feedback from interested persons.
    Highlighting the effort to raise awareness, Gulfstream has
supported the FAA's public meetings by making its Supersonic Acoustic
Signature Simulator II (SASSII) available for attendees to visit. The
SASSII is a mobile audio booth designed and equipped to demonstrate the
``Gulfstream Whisper'', the aerospace company's latest effort to
provide a solution to the traditional sonic boom.
    A supersonic aircraft such as the Concorde in cruise produces a
traditional jagged ``N-wave'' sonic boom pressure wave, resulting in a
loud, jarring double boom on the ground as it passes by. Gulfstream's
patented spike for controlling and reducing sonic boom transforms the
traditional N-wave sonic boom into a smooth and more rounded pressure
wave shaped roughly like a sine wave or a sideways ``S''. This change
in the wave shape results in a softer sound that is quieter than the
Concord sonic boom by a factor of 10,000. Gulfstream developed the
mobile SASSII so others could experience this dramatic sound
difference. The simulator enables visitors to sense for themselves the
dramatic difference in sound, reverberation, and intensity. Using a
sophisticated, computer-based audio system, the acoustic engineer sends
the audio feed into a sound booth where visitors can compare various
sound signatures.
    Public involvement is essential in any future definition of an
acceptable new standard that would allow supersonic flights over land.
We anticipate that this will be one of many meetings informing the
public on the continual developments in the research of shaped sonic
booms and other technical and environmental challenges that need to be
addressed in developing a new supersonic airplane.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 18, 2011.
Lourdes Q. Maurice,
Executive Director, Office of Environment and Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-12742 Filed 5-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 29255]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12369]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1970-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Oklahoma; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-1970-DR), dated April 22, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 6, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to include the Public
Assistance program for the following area among the area determined to
have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by
the President in his declaration of April 22, 2011.

    Atoka County for Public Assistance (already designated for
Individual Assistance).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

    May 13, 2011.
W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-12369 Filed 5-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 134 (Monday, July 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 41972]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15022]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2206-089]

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) regulations,
18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy
Projects has reviewed an application submitted by Duke Energy
Carolinas, LLC (licensee) to grant easements to the Town of Norwood,
North Carolina and Union County, North Carolina (co-applicants) to
allow the use of Yadkin-Pee Dee Hydroelectric Project No. 2206, project
lands and waters on Lake Tillery for municipal water supply. The Yadkin
Pee-Dee Project is located on the Yadkin and Pee Dee Rivers in Anson,
Montgomery, Richmond, and Stanly counties, North Carolina. The project
does not occupy federal land.
    An Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared as part of
Commission staff's review of the proposal. In the application, the
licensee proposes to grant easements to the co-applicants to construct
and operate a raw water intake facility (facility) on Lake Tillery, one
of the project's two storage reservoir. The easement area would total
0.34 acres of land within the project boundary. The intake structure
and intake piping would require a 0.25 acre easement and an adjacent
boathouse and pier for use in servicing the withdrawal facility would
require an additional 0.09 acre easement. The facility would withdrawal
a maximum annual average of 19.6 million gallons per day (MGD) and an
instantaneous maximum of 49.0 MGD. A maximum monthly average of up to
23.3 MGD of the water withdrawn would be transferred out of the Yadkin
River Basin into the Rocky River Basin, for consumptive use. A portion
of the transferred water would be returned via treated wastewater
effluent back through the Rocky River into the Pee Dee River
approximately five miles downstream from the Lake Tillery Dam.
    The EA contains Commission staff's analysis of the potential
environmental impacts of the construction and operation of the facility
and the proposed water withdrawal volume and concludes that approval of
the proposal would not constitute a major federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment.
    The EA may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number (P-
2206) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER> or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For further information, contact Robert Ballantine at (202) 502-
6289 or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 7, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-15022 Filed 7-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:I am an individual consumer requesting a 105 day extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The FDA had years to prepare the Proposed Rule and should provide an equal opportunity to consumers to research and respond. I smoked cigarettes for 35 years and tried everything from hypnosis to nicotine patches and nothing worked. About a year ago I gave up the cigarettes and began vaping.  It has changed my life for the better. I am healthier than I have been in years, no wheezing, no cigarette smell, etc.

I would like the opportunity to review the Proposed Rule and comment, but 75 days is NOT enough time.


[Federal Register: October 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 207)]
[Notices]
[Page 66077]
[DOCID:fr27oc10-45]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR10-15-002]

Bay Gas Storage Company Ltd.; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 20, 2010.
    Take notice that on October 13, 2010, Bay Gas Storage Company Ltd.
(Bay Gas) filed its Refund Report pursuant to its August 30, 2010
Settlement Agreement approved by a September 9, 2010, Letter Order.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday, October 27, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-27118 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 42 (Monday, March 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12675-12676]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04263]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0215]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of denials.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its denial of 144 applications from
individuals who requested an exemption from the Federal vision standard
applicable to interstate truck and bus drivers and the reasons for the
denials. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from the
vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not compromise
safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemptions does
not provide a level of safety that will be equivalent to, or greater
than, the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-113,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal vision standard for a renewable 2-year period if it
finds ``such an exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that
is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such an exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption
are set forth in 49 CFR part 381.
    Accordingly, FMCSA evaluated 144 individual exemption requests on
their merit and made a determination that these applicants do not
satisfy the criteria eligibility or meet the terms and conditions of
the Federal exemption program. Each applicant has, prior to this
notice, received a letter of final disposition on the exemption
request. Those decision letters fully outlined the basis for the denial
and constitute final Agency action. The list published in this notice
summarizes the Agency's recent denials as required under 49 U.S.C.
31315(b)(4) by periodically publishing names and reasons for denial.
    The following 45 applicants had no experience operating a CMV:

Joshua D. Adkins (PA)
Sterling Arkills (OR)
Karen A. Bright (SC)
Shane O. Bright (IL)
William C. Budka (MD)
Robert S. Campbell (WA)
Harley M. Cleckner (IN)
Brenton S. Cooper (WV)
Jose M. Corral (TX)
Roman S. Denson (AL)
Agron Dili (ND)
Gary M. Dunn, Jr. (MD)
Rodney S. Evans (IL)
Jonas M. Feth (MN)
Johnny D. Freeman (AR)
Scott J. Geritano (NC)
Scott D. Greiger (WI)
Scipio Hill (OH)
Eric R. Isble (PA)
Misty D. Jett (MO)
Daniel R. Kerner (NH)
Steven L. Lane (OR)
Keith A. Leary (CA)
Max J. Lopez (CO)
Paul Morgan (PA)
Richard N. Neff (PA)
Antonio Ortiz (KS)
Dasey D. Parks (GA)
George W. Parrish (OR)
Eduardo J. Pastran-Garcia (KS)
Mackenzie T. Pickle (TX)
Benjamin J. Pitchford (WI)
Matthew T. Pritchett (MD)
Cameron N. Puckett (OH)
James A. Purtle (MN)
Donald Rogers (OH)
Andrew W. Sheeder (PA)
James G. Shikany (MO)
Dominic J. Small (AL)
Ronald J. Swihart (AZ)
Bennie L. Tate (MI)
Otis L. Tate, Jr. (FL)
Bobby Tuggle (WA)
David C. Whybrew (OK)
Darrel J. Wilson (NC)

    The following 19 applicants did not have 3 years of experience
driving a CMV on public highways with their vision deficiencies:

Steven J. Black (PA)
Kenneth W. Blake (KS)
David W. Coburn (TX)
Zackary W. Craft (MO)
Kenneth Daggs (LA)
Larry E. Edwards (GA)
Alexandria J. Ensley (SC)
Rodney R. Greiner (MT)
Vashion E. Hammond (FL)
James K. Long (MN)
Richard M. Matheson (NC)
Derrick S. Miller (TN)
James C. Montgomery (TN)
John M. Moore (LA)
Marlon M. Moran (TX)
Cazzie L. Roberts (AL)
Samuel Rodriguez (OH)
Andrew R. Scroggins (IN)
Frank A. Wolfe (MD)

    The following 11 applicants did not have 3 years of recent
experience driving a CMV with the vision deficiency:

William P. Barrett (OH)
James F. Bowles (IL)
Kevin J. Campanella (IA)
Harry E. Farmer (WV)
Armand P. Fortier (NH)
Billy R. Lykins (OH)
Wayne L. Marshall (NY)
Anthony L. Pitts (AR)
Steven L. Rowles (PA)
Nicole L. Welborn (WI)
Scott A. Yon (PA)

    The following 2 applicants did not have sufficient driving
experience during the past 3 years under normal highway operating
conditions:

Kenneth A. Dinguss (WA)
Kevin M. Gambill (WV)

    Dwayne S. Davidson (OH) was charged with a moving violation(s) in
conjunction with a CMV accident(s).
    Jerry M. Richardson (NC) does not have verifiable proof of
commercial driving experience over the past 3 years under normal
highway operating conditions that would serve as an adequate predictor
of future safe performance.
    Roy W. Houser, II (NC) did not hold a license which allowed
operation of vehicles over 26,000 pounds for all or part of the
preceding 3-year period.
    Roberto Fernandez (NJ) did not have an optometrist or
ophthalmologist willing to make a statement that they are able to
operate a CMV from a vision standpoint.
    The following 18 applicants were denied for multiple reasons:

Lance T. Brown (KY)
David A. Farmer (SC)
Michael S. Gilmore (AR)
Richard L. Hines (PA)
Taylor M. Houghton (TX)
Theatmus Lovell (FL)
Christopher D. Miller (TX)
Larry J. Neitzel (NE)
Nicholas Pawlow (NJ)
Cynethia Rainey (SC)
Ingrid T. Reyes (DC)
Blaine A. Rosencrans (ND)
Willie T. Sanders (NE)
Ernesto Silva (NM)
John T. Smith (KS)
Richard W. Vanhandel (NJ)
Christopher P. Wagner (MO)
Edward B. Wilson (VA)

    The following 3 applicants have not had stable vision for the
preceding 3-year period:

David Dibb (WI)
Victor Gomez (CA)
Abelardo J. Gutierrez (TX)

    The following 2 applicants do not meet the vision standard in the
better eye:

Garvel J. Owens (MI)
Luke A. Wester (KS)

    The following 12 applicants met the current federal vision
standards. Exemptions are not required for applicants who meet the
current regulations for vision:

Stephen M. Billings (VT)
Alvin L. Bonjour (KS)
James H. Brown (VA)
Ernest L. Felcher, Jr. (WA)
Elizabeth N. Leal (TX)
Aniece A. Lembo (NY)
Dominic J. Macedo (NY)
Jeffery L. Parker (VA)
Wojciech Podwojcik (NC)
Robert M. Rossell (MN)
Douglas M Standy (ND)
Jose A. Trigueros Lopez (CA)

    The following 25 applicants will not be driving interstate,
intrastate commerce, or are not required to carry a DOT medical card:

Nelson M. Anselmo (RI)
Elliot Q. Boone (FL)
Harold B. Cochran (MI)
Orlando Colon (FL)
Joseph J. Crane (GA)
David E. Failor (PA)
Jerry D. Gibson (TX)
Percy L. Hicks (FL)
Peter P. Higbee (NJ)
Nicholas A. Jones (OH)
Robert C. Lavoie (NH)
Miguel A. Limon (CA)
Charles S. Lundgren (WA)
Judge McGee (TX)
Juan J. Melendez Maldonado (NC)
Gregory L. Messing (MI)
Dustin M. Ohm (MN)
Zachary R. Reamer (MN)
Gerardo Reyes Hernandez (CA)
Rolando Rosales (OK)
Carlos J. Sandoval Caisphal (CO)
Gary A. Underwood (GA)
Jimmie D. Washington (TX)
Bryan Whiting (NC)
Michael D. Wolfe (PA)

    The following 3 applicants performs transportation for the Federal
government, state, or any political sub-division of the state:

John F. Cole (CT)
Paul T. Collins (MI)
William W. Lewis (OH)

     Issued on: February 27, 2017.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-04263 Filed 3-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30000-30001]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10584]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[OMB Control No. 2105-XXXX; Docket No. DOT-OST-2020-0084]

Supplemental Notice of Information Collection; Improving Customer
Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation)

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Supplemental Notice; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Transportation has re-initiated OMB
review of the following proposed Information Collection Request
``Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280
Implementation)'' for approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
The U.S. Department of Transportation previously initiated, but did not
complete, such review under 85 FR 64614.

DATES: Submit comments on or before: June 16, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by Information Collection 2105-
XXXX, Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280
Implementation), by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments to https://www.regulations.gov,
will be posted to the docket unchanged.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the
Chief Information Officer, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. ATTN: Chief Data Officer/IC 2105-XXXX, Improving Customer
Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation).
    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information
Collection 2105-XXXX, Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11,
Section 280 Implementation) in all correspondence related to this
collection. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check
regulations.gov, approximately two-to-three business days after
submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for

posting of comments submitted by mail).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information
should be directed to Amira Boland, Office of Management and Budget,
725 17th St. NW, Washington, DC 20006, or via email to
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section
280 Implementation).
    Abstract: A modern, streamlined and responsive customer experience
means: Raising government-wide customer experience to the average of
the private sector service industry; developing indicators for high-
impact Federal programs to monitor progress towards excellent customer
experience and mature digital services; and providing the structure
(including increasing transparency) and resources to ensure customer
experience is a focal point for agency leadership.
    This proposed information collection activity provides a means to
garner customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner
in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving
customer service delivery as discussed in Section 280 of OMB Circular
A-11 at https://www.performance.gov/cx/a11-280.pdf. As discussed in OMB
guidance, agencies should identify their highest-impact customer
journeys (using customer volume, annual program cost, and/or knowledge
of customer priority as weighting factors) and select touchpoints/
transactions within those journeys to collect feedback.
    These results will be used to improve the delivery of Federal
services and programs. It will also provide government-wide data on
customer experience that can be displayed on www.performance.gov to
help build transparency and accountability of Federal programs to the
customers they serve.
    As a general matter, these information collections will not result
in any new system of records containing privacy information and will
not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and
attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly
considered private.
    The U.S. Department of Transportation will only submit collections
if they meet the following criteria.
     The collections are voluntary;
     The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on
considerations of total burden hours or burden-hours per respondent)
and are low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal Government;
     The collections are non-controversial and do not raise
issues of concern to other Federal agencies;
     Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions
from respondents who have experience with the program or may have
experience with the program in the near future;
     Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected
only to the extent necessary and is not retained;
     Information gathered is intended to be used for general
service improvement and program management purposes;
     Upon agreement between OMB and the agency all or a subset
of information may be released as part of A-11, Section 280
requirements only on performance.gov. Summaries of customer research
and user testing activities may be included in public-facing customer
journey maps or summaries.
     Additional release of data must be done coordinated with
OMB.
    These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and
actionable communications between the Agency, its customers and
stakeholders, and OMB as it monitors agency compliance on Section 280.
These responses will inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality
of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected,
vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on services will be
unavailable.
    Current Action: Supplementary Notice of New Collection of
Information.
    Type of Review: New.
    Affected Public: Individuals and Households, Businesses and
Organizations, State, Local or Tribal Government.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: Below is a preliminary estimate of
the aggregate burden hours for this new collection. U.S. Department of
Transportation will provide refined estimates of burden in subsequent
notices.
    Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: Approximately five
types of customer experience activities such as feedback surveys, focus
groups, user testing, and interviews.
    Average Number of Respondents per Activity: 1 response per
respondent per activity.
    Annual Responses: 2,001,550.
    Average Minutes per Response: 2 minutes--60 minutes, dependent upon
activity.
    Burden Hours: U.S. Department of Transportation requests
approximately 101,125 burden hours.
    Request for Comments: Comments submitted in response to this notice
will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval.
    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the
accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of
operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide
information.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able
to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to
complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.
    All written comments will be available for public inspection
Regulations.gov.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid Office of Management and Budget control number.

Daniel Morgan,
Assistant Chief Information Officer for Data Services/Chief Data
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022-10584 Filed 5-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 150 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46286-46287]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18997]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0652]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bayou Boeuf, Amelia, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Delay of effective date for temporary deviation from
regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the effective date of a published
temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway Company swing span bridge
across Bayou Boeuf, mile 10.2, at Amelia, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.
The modification of the date is necessary due to a delay in the
scheduled arrival of repair equipment. The deviation is necessary to
complete scheduled repairs necessitated by a bridge allision. This
deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation
position for sixteen consecutive hours.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. through 11 p.m. on
Thursday, September 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0652 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0652 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Jim Wetherington, Bridge Branch Office, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 20, 2012, the Coast published a
notice of temporary deviation from regulations in the Federal Register
(77 FR 42637). The BNSF Railway Company requested this temporary
deviation from the operating schedule of the swing span railroad bridge
across Bayou Boeuf, mile 10.2, at Amelia, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana,
for August 16, 2012, to perform repairs necessitated by an allision.
Due to delay in production and delivery of repair equipment, the BNSF
Railway requested a modification to the effective date from August 16,
2012 to September 13, 2012. The bridge provides no vertical clearance
in the closed-to-navigation position.
    Notices will be published in the Eighth Coast Guard District Local
Notice to Mariners and will be broadcast via the Coast Guard Broadcast
Notice to Mariners System.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, the bridge currently opens on
signal for the passage of vessels. This deviation allows the vertical
lift span of the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position
from 7 a.m. through 11 p.m. on Thursday, September 13, 2012.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: July 24, 2012.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2012-18997 Filed 8-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 49)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 12162-12163]
[DOCID:fr15mr10-14]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1184; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-39]

Class E Airspace; Manila, AR

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Manila, AR.
Decommissioning of the Manila non-directional beacon (NDB) at Manila
Municipal Airport has made this action necessary for the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before April 29, 2010.

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. You
must identify the docket number, FAA-2009-1184/Airspace Docket No. 09-
ASW-39, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Dockets
Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the ground floor of the
building at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in 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 and be submitted in triplicate to the address
listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of
their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-
addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made:
``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2009-1184/Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-39.''
The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/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 ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface for standard instrument approach procedures
at Manila Municipal Airport, Manila, AR. Airspace reconfiguration is
necessary due to the decommissioning of the Manila NDB and the
cancellation of the NDB approach. Adjustment to the geographic
coordinates would be made in accordance with the FAA's National
Aeronautical Charting Office. Controlled airspace is needed for the
safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    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 so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this 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.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 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 controlled airspace at Manila Municipal Airport,
Manila, AR.

List 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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASW AR E5 Manila, AR [Amended]

Manila Municipal Airport, AR
    (Lat. 35[deg]53'40'' N., long. 90[deg]09'16'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Manila Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX on February 24, 2010.
Walter Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-5567 Filed 3-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47696-47699]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17014]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3993; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-065-AD;
Amendment 39-18592; AD 2016-15-01]
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 all
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, F4-600R
series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes
(collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310
series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of partial loss of
no-back brake (NBB) efficiency on the trimmable horizontal stabilizer
actuator (THSA). This AD requires an inspection to determine THSA part
numbers, serial numbers, and flight cycles on certain THSAs; and
repetitive replacement of certain THSAs. We are issuing this AD to
prevent loss of THSA NBB efficiency, which, in conjunction with the
inability of the power gear to keep the ball screw in its last
commanded position, could lead to an uncommanded movement of the
horizontal stabilizer, possibly resulting in loss of control of the
airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective August 26, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 26,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; 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-2016-3993.

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-2016-
3993; 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: Dan Rodina, 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 all Airbus Model A300
series airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, F4-600R series airplanes,
and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model
A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2016 (81 FR 11690) (``the
NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of partial loss of NBB
efficiency on the THSA. The NPRM proposed to require an inspection to
determine THSA part numbers, serial numbers, and flight cycles on
certain THSAs; and repetitive replacement for certain THSAs. We are
issuing this AD to prevent loss of THSA NBB efficiency, which, in
conjunction with the inability of the power gear to keep the ball screw
in its last commanded position, could lead to an uncommanded movement
of the horizontal stabilizer, possibly resulting in loss of control of
the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2015-0081, dated May 7, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition on all Airbus Model A300 series airplanes; Model A300
B4-600, B4-600R, F4-600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R
Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series
airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During endurance qualification tests on a Trimmable Horizontal
Stabilizer Actuator (THSA) concerning another aeroplane type, a
partial loss of the no-back brake (NBB) efficiency was experienced.
Investigation results concluded that this partial loss of braking
efficiency in some specific aerodynamic load conditions was due to
polishing and auto-contamination of the NBB carbon friction disks.
    Due to design similarity on the A300-600, A300-600ST and A310
fleet, the same tests were initiated by the THSA manufacturer on
certain type THSA, sampled from the field. Subject tests confirmed
that THSA Part Number (P/N) 47142 series, as installed on the A300-
600, A300-600ST and A310 fleet, are also affected by this partial
loss of NBB efficiency.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, and in
conjunction with the power gear not able to keep the ball screw in
its last commanded position, could potentially lead to an
uncommanded movement of the Horizontal Stabilizer, possibly
resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires the
removal from service of each affected THSA, with the intent of in-
shop NBB carbon disk replacement.

    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-2016-
3993.

Comments

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

Support for the NPRM

    The Airline Pilots Association International stated that it fully
supports the intent of the NPRM.

Requests To Revise Compliance Date

    Airbus, FedEx Express, and United Parcel Service requested that we
revise the compliance date in paragraph (j)(3) of the proposed AD from
February 1, 2018, to February 1, 2019. The commenters stated that this
revision would match the MCAI.
    We agree with the commenters' request. This was a typographical
error. Our intent was to match the MCAI. We have revised paragraph
(j)(3) of this AD accordingly.

Request To Allow Maintenance Records Review

    FedEx Express requested that we allow a review of the operator's
maintenance records to determine the part number and serial number of
the THSA specified in paragraph (h)(1) of the proposed AD. FedEx
Express stated that this review would accomplish the same intent as a
physical inspection of the THSA.
    We agree with the commenter's request. We have revised paragraph
(h)(1) of this AD to allow doing a review of airplane maintenance
records in lieu of the THSA inspection if the part number and serial
number of the THSA can be conclusively determined from that review.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD 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 correcting 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 AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Airbus Service Bulletin A300-27-6070, dated
February 17, 2015; and Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2106, dated
February 17, 2015. This service information describes procedures for
inspection and replacement of the THSA.
    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 152 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it would take about 27 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $590,000 per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on
U.S. operators to be $90,028,840, or $592,295 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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):

2016-15-01 Airbus: Amendment 39-18592. Docket No. FAA-2016-3993;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-065-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 26, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-
103, and B4-203 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622
airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
    (4) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
    (5) Airbus Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
    (6) Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324,
and -325 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of partial loss of no-back brake
(NBB) efficiency on the trimmable horizontal stabilizer actuator
(THSA). We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of THSA NBB
efficiency, which, in conjunction with the inability of the power
gear to keep the ball screw in its last commanded position, could
lead to an uncommanded movement of the horizontal stabilizer,
possibly resulting in loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Affected THSAs

    THSAs affected by the requirements of this AD have part numbers
(P/Ns) 47142-403, 47142-413, 47142-414, and 47142-423.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:  FAA AD 2011-15-08,
Amendment 39-16755 (76 FR 42029, July 18, 2011), requires
installation of three secondary retention plates for the gimbal
bearings on the THSA upper primary attachment, which involved a THSA
part number change from the -300 series to the -400 series.

    Note 2 to paragraph (g) of this AD:  The life limits specified
in Part 4 of the airworthiness limitations section are still
relevant for the affected THSA. This AD addresses a replacement
limit for the NBB disks installed on the THSA, not the life limit
for the THSA itself.

(h) Inspection for Affected THSAs, Flight Cycles, and THSA Replacement

    Before each date and before exceeding the corresponding THSA
flight-cycle limits specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and
(j)(3) of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and
(h)(2) of this AD; and before exceeding the flight-cycle limit
corresponding to each date as specified in paragraphs (j)(1),
(j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD.
    (1) Do an inspection of the THSA to determine the part number
and serial number. A review of airplane maintenance records is
acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number and serial
number of the THSA can be conclusively determined from that review.
    (2) Do an inspection of the airplane maintenance records to
determine the flight cycles accumulated on each affected THSA since
first installation on an airplane, or since last NBB replacement,
whichever is later. If no maintenance records conclusively
identifying the last NBB disk replacement are available, the flight
cycles accumulated since first installation of the THSA on an
airplane apply.

(i) THSA Replacement

    By each date specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3)
of this AD, for those affected THSAs having reached or exceeded the
corresponding number of flight cycles specified in paragraphs
(j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD, replace the THSA with a
serviceable unit, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-27-6070, dated February 17, 2015; or
Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2106, dated February 17, 2015, as
applicable.

(j) Compliance Dates and THSA Flight-Cycle Limits

    Paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD specify
compliance dates and THSA flight-cycle limits for accomplishing the
actions required by paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD.
    (1) As of 30 days after the effective date of this AD: The
affected THSA flight-cycle limit is 30,000 flight cycles since first
installation of the THSA on an airplane, or since last NBB
replacement, whichever is later.
    (2) As of February 1, 2017: The affected THSA flight-cycle limit
is 20,000 flight cycles since first installation of the THSA on an
airplane, or since last NBB replacement, whichever is later.
    (3) As of February 1, 2019: The affected THSA flight-cycle limit
is 14,600 flight cycles since first installation of the THSA on an
airplane, or since last NBB replacement, whichever is later.

(k) Serviceable THSA Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable THSA is a unit
identified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD.
    (1) A THSA identified in paragraph (g) of this AD that, as of
each date specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this
AD, has not exceeded the flight-cycle limits specified in paragraphs
(j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD since first installation of
the THSA on an airplane, or since the last NBB disk replacement,
whichever is later.
    (2) A THSA with a different part number (e.g., a THSA that is
not identified in paragraph (g) of this AD) that is not affected by
the requirements of this AD.

(l) THSA Replacements

    As of each date and before exceeding the flight-cycle limit
corresponding to each date

specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD:
Replace each affected THSA with a serviceable unit, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-27-6070, dated February 17, 2015; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A310-27-2106, dated February 17, 2015.

(m) Parts Installation Limitation

    Before each date specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and
(j)(3) of this AD, an operator may install an affected THSA on an
airplane, provided that the unit has not exceeded the corresponding
number of flight cycles specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and
(j)(3) of this AD, since first installation on an airplane, or since
last NBB replacement, whichever is later.

(n) 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 Dan Rodina,
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
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) 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.

(o) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
EASA AD 2015-0081, dated May 7, 2015, 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-
2016-3993.

(p) 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 A300-27-6070, dated February 17,
2015.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2106, dated February 17,
2015.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; 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 July 11, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-17014 Filed 7-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15192-15193]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05498]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-0419]

Pan American Laboratories, LLC, et al.; Withdrawal of Approval of
Three New Drug Applications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval
of three new drug applications (NDAs) from multiple holders of those
NDAs. The basis for the withdrawal is that these NDA holders have
repeatedly failed to file required annual reports for those NDAs.

DATES: Approval is withdrawn as of March 17, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly S. Lehrfeld, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6226, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-3137.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The holder of an approved application to
market a new drug for human use is required to submit annual reports to
FDA concerning its approved application in accordance with Sec.  314.81
(21 CFR 314.81).
    In the Federal Register of November 18, 2019 (84 FR 63661), FDA
published a notice offering an opportunity for a hearing (NOOH) on a
proposal to withdraw approval of these NDAs because the holders of
those NDAs had repeatedly failed to submit the required annual reports
for those NDAs. The holders of the NDAs identified in table 1 did not
respond to the NOOH. Failure to file a written notice of participation
and request for hearing as required by Sec.  314.200 (21 CFR 314.200)
constitutes an election by those holders of the NDAs not to make use of
the opportunity for a hearing concerning the proposal to withdraw
approval of their NDAs and a waiver of any contentions concerning the
legal status of the drug products. Therefore, FDA is withdrawing
approval of the three applications listed in table 1 of this document.
FDA notes that the NOOH also proposed to withdraw approval of NDA
018663, but FDA has decided not to pursue withdrawal of approval of
this NDA at this time.

     Table 1--Approved NDAs for Which Required Reports Have Not Been
                                Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Application No.               Drug                  NDA holder
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NDA 014217............  Maolate (chlorphenesin   Pan American
                         carbamate) Tablet, 400   Laboratories, LLC,
                         milligrams (mg).         4099 Highway 190,
                                                  Covington, LA 70433.
NDA 020530............  Iontocaine (epinephrine  Iomed, Inc., 2441 South
                         and lidocaine            3850 West, Suite A,
                         hydrochloride (HCl))     Salt Lake City, UT
                         Topical Solution, 0.01   84120-9941.
                         mg/milliliter; 2%.
NDA 021504............  LidoSite Topical         Vyteris, Inc., 13-01
                         System: LidoSite Patch   Pollitt Dr., Fair
                         (lidocaine HCl and       Lawn, NJ 07410.
                         epinephrine topical
                         iontophoretic patch)
                         10%/0.1% and LidoSite
                         Controller.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA finds that the holders of the NDAs listed in table 1 have
repeatedly failed to submit reports required by Sec.  314.81. In
addition, under Sec.  314.200, FDA finds that the holders of the NDAs
have waived any contentions concerning the legal status of the drug
products. Therefore, under these findings, approval of the NDAs listed
in table 1 and all amendments and supplements thereto are hereby
withdrawn as of March 17, 2020.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although it was not a factor in FDA's determination, we note
that all three drugs covered by these NDAs are in discontinued
marketing status.

    Dated: March 12, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-05498 Filed 3-16-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: November 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 224)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 65476-65478]
[DOCID:fr21no07-18]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0213; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-233-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-102, DHC-8-103,
DHC-8-106, DHC-8-201, DHC-8-202, DHC-8-301, DHC-8-311, and DHC-8-315
Airplanes, and Model DHC-8-400 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    Several cases have been reported where the pilot, co-pilot or
observer utility light system has failed, resulting in a burning
smell within the cockpit. An investigation has revealed that, due to
the orientation and location of the carbon molded potentiometers
used to control the intensity of the light, the potentiometers can
fail and overheat in such a way that burning of the ceiling panel
and the associated insulation blanket could occur. This could lead
to the presence of smoke in the cockpit, requiring that the pilots
carry out the appropriate emergency procedure.

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

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 21,
2007.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Operations office

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wing Chan, Aerospace Engineer, Systems
and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification
Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0213;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-233-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

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

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2007-11, dated August 9, 2007 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''),
to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    Several cases have been reported where the pilot, co-pilot or
observer utility light system has failed, resulting in a burning
smell within the cockpit. An investigation has revealed that, due to
the orientation and location of the carbon molded potentiometers
used to control the intensity of the light, the potentiometers can
fail and overheat in such a way that burning of the ceiling panel
and the associated insulation blanket could occur. This could lead
to the presence of smoke in the cockpit, requiring that the pilots
carry out the appropriate emergency procedure.

Corrective actions include replacing the affected carbon molded
resistive element potentiometers with wire-wound type potentiometers,
for the pilot, co-pilot, and, if applicable, observer utility lights.
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletins 8-33-53, Revision A; and
84-33-10, Revision A; both dated March 14, 2007. The actions described
in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe
condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 186 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 3 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Where the
service information lists required parts costs that are covered under
warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs.
As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some
parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $44,640, or $240 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2007-
0213; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-233-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by December 21, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model DHC-8-102, DHC-8-103,
DHC-8-106, DHC-8-201, DHC-8-202, DHC-8-301, DHC-8-311, and DHC-8-315
airplanes, serial numbers 003 through 639; and Model DHC-8-400
series airplanes, serial numbers 4003, 4004, 4006, and 4008 through
4149; certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 33: Lights.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    Several cases have been reported where the pilot, co-pilot or
observer utility light system has failed, resulting in a burning
smell within the cockpit. An investigation has revealed that, due to
the orientation and location of the carbon molded potentiometers
used to control the intensity of the light, the potentiometers can
fail and overheat in such a way that burning of the ceiling panel
and the associated insulation blanket could occur. This could lead
to the presence of smoke in the cockpit, requiring that the pilots
carry out the appropriate emergency procedure.

Corrective actions include replacing the affected carbon molded
resistive element potentiometers with wire-wound type
potentiometers, for the pilot, co-pilot, and, if applicable,
observer utility lights.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, unless
already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For Model DHC-8-102, DHC-8-103, DHC-8-106, DHC-8-201, DHC-8-
202, DHC-8-301, DHC-8-311, and DHC-8-315 airplanes: Install
Bombardier Modsum 8Q101603 to replace the affected carbon molded
resistive element potentiometers with wire-wound type
potentiometers, for both the pilot and co-pilot utility lights, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 8-33-53, Revision A, dated March 14, 2007.
    (2) For Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes: Install Bombardier
Modsum 4-126381 to replace the affected carbon molded resistive
element potentiometers with wire-wound type potentiometers, for the
pilot, co-pilot, and observer utility lights, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-33-10,
Revision A, dated March 14, 2007.
    (3) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-33-53 or 84-33-10,
both dated December 1, 2006, as applicable, are considered
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified
in this AD.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Wing Chan, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York
Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in
the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI,
your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-11,
dated August 9, 2007; Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-33-53, Revision
A, dated March 14, 2007; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-33-10,
Revision A, dated March 14, 2007; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 13, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-22728 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 44303]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16144]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9948-82-OECA]

Production of Confidential Business Information in Pending
Enforcement Litigation; Transfer of Information Claimed as Confidential
Business Information to the United States Department of Justice and
Parties to Certain Litigation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') is providing
notice of disclosure in civil enforcement litigation against Navistar
International Corp. and Navistar, Inc. pursuant to 40 CFR 2.209(d). In
response to discovery requests received by the United States in the
litigation styled, United States of America v. Navistar International
Corp., and Navistar, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-6143, pending in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (the
``Navistar Litigation''), the United States Department of Justice
(``DOJ'') is disclosing information which has been submitted to EPA by
vehicle and engine manufacturers that is claimed to be, or has been
determined to be, potential confidential business information
(collectively ``CBI''). The use of the CBI is limited to the Navistar
Litigation and its distribution is restricted by terms of a Court
confidentiality order.

DATES: Access by DOJ and/or the parties to the Navistar Litigation to
material, including CBI, discussed in this document, is ongoing and
expected to continue during the Navistar Litigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Kulschinsky, Air Enforcement
Division, Office of Civil Enforcement (2242A); telephone number: 202-
564-4133; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States has initiated a civil
enforcement action alleging that Navistar International Corp. and
Navistar, Inc., violated Title II of the Clean Air Act in connection
with the production and sale of on-highway heavy-duty diesel engines in
calendar years 2009 and 2010. This notice is being provided, pursuant
to 40 CFR 2.209(d), to inform affected businesses that EPA intends to
transmit certain information, which has been submitted by vehicle and
engine manufacturers that is claimed to be, or has been determined to
be, potential confidential business information (collectively ``CBI''),
to defendants in this enforcement action. The information includes EPA
communications with, and information provided by, vehicle and engine
manufacturers in connection with the certification of heavy-duty diesel
motor vehicle engines or non-road engines, some of which may include
CBI.
    The parties to the Navistar Litigation have entered into an Agreed
Confidentiality Order, see Case No. 15-cv-6143, ECF Document No. 35 in
the Navistar Litigation docket, filed December 15, 2015, (the
``Confidentiality Order''), that governs the treatment of information,
including CBI, that is designated ``Confidential'' pursuant to the
Confidentiality Order. The Confidentiality Order provides for limited
disclosure and use of CBI and for the return or destruction of CBI at
the conclusion of the litigation. In accordance with 40 CFR 2.209(c)-
(d), DOJ must disclose such information to the extent required to
comply with the discovery obligations of the United States in the
Navistar Litigation, including its obligations under the
Confidentiality Order.

    Dated: June 30, 2016.
Phillip A. Brooks,
Director, Air Enforcement Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-16144 Filed 7-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76049-76050]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31027]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0643]

Draft Guidance for Industry on Electronic Source Data in Clinical
Investigations; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice
that appeared in the Federal Register of Tuesday, November 20, 2012 (77
FR 69632). The document announced the availability of a draft guidance
entitled ``Electronic Source Data in Clinical Investigations.'' The
document was published with an incorrect date in the DATES section.
This document corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Fitzmartin, Office of Planning &
Informatics, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 1160, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2012-28198, appearing on page
69632 in the Federal Register of Tuesday, November 20, 2012, the
following correction is made:
    1. On page 69632, in the third column, in the DATES section, the
date ``January 22, 2013'' is corrected to read ``March 26, 2013.''

    Dated: December 20, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-31027 Filed 12-21-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P