[Federal Register: August 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 153)]
[Notices]
[Page 45546-45548]
[DOCID:fr09au06-77]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123; FRL-8083-1]

Methyl Bromide Tolerance Reassessment and Risk Management
Decision (TRED) for Methyl Bromide, and Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED) for Methyl Bromide's Commodity Uses; Notice of
Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Tolerance
Reassessment and Risk Management Decision (TRED) for Methyl Bromide,
and Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Methyl Bromide's
Commodity Uses, and opens a public comment period on this document. The
Agency's risk assessments and other related documents also are
available in the methyl bromide docket. Methyl bromide is a broad-
spectrum fumigant chemical that can be used as an acaricide,
antimicrobial, fungicide, herbicide, insecticide, nematicide, and
vertebrate control agent. This reregistration decision document covers
the methyl bromide uses that have accompanying food residue tolerances
such as post-harvest fumigation of food commodities in chambers at
ports or specialized structural fumigations at food processing
facilities, as well as some uses without tolerances that are performed
in similar facilities. EPA has reviewed the methyl bromide commodity
uses through the public participation process that the Agency uses to
involve the public in developing pesticide reregistration and tolerance
reassessment decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that
all pesticides meet current health and safety standards. EPA is
currently assessing risks and will develop risk management decisions
for five soil fumigant pesticides: Chloropicrin, dazomet, metam sodium,
methyl bromide, and a new active ingredient, iodomethane. Risks of a
sixth soil fumigant, 1, 3-D (Telone), will be discussed for comparative
purposes because the risk management decision was completed in 1998. A
decision on the reregistration of methyl bromide's non-commodity uses
that do not have food tolerances (e.g., pre-plant soil, greenhouse,
residential) is scheduled to be completed in 2007 with the other soil
fumigants.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 10, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0123. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or E-mail. The Federal http://www.regulations.gov

Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an E-mail comment directly to EPA
without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your E-mail address

will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that
is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your

comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation
of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Weiss, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; E-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or E-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of

the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Under section 4 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is reevaluating existing pesticides to
ensure that they meet current scientific and regulatory standards. EPA
has completed a Tolerance Reassessment and Risk Management Decision
(TRED) for Methyl Bromide, and Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(RED) for Methyl Bromide's Commodity Uses under section 4(g)(2)(A) of
FIFRA. Methyl bromide is a broad-spectrum fumigant chemical that can be
used as an acaricide, antimicrobial, fungicide, herbicide, insecticide,
nematicide, and vertebrate control agent. The most prevalent use
pattern is as a soil fumigant; however, it is also used as a structural
fumigant and for post-harvest treatment of commodities, which are the
uses considered in these decisions. EPA has determined that the data
base to support reregistration is substantially complete and that
products containing methyl bromide are eligible for reregistration
depending on their specific uses, provided the risks are mitigated in
the manner described in the RED. Upon submission of any required
product specific data under section 4(g)(2)(B) and any necessary
changes to the registration and labeling (either to address concerns
identified in the RED or as a result of product-specific data), EPA
will make a final reregistration decision under section 4(g)(2)(C) for
products containing methyl bromide.
    EPA must review tolerances and tolerance exemptions that were in
effect when the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) was enacted in
August 1996, to ensure that these existing pesticide residue limits for
food and feed commodities meet the safety standard established by the
new law. Tolerances are considered reassessed once the safety finding
has been made or a revocation occurs. EPA has reviewed and made the
requisite safety finding for the methyl bromide tolerances.
    EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004 (69 FR 26819) (FRL-7357-9), explains that in conducting these
programs, EPA is tailoring its public participation process to be
commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide.
Due to its uses, risks, and other factors, methyl bromide was reviewed
through the full 6-Phase process. Through this process, EPA worked
extensively with stakeholders and the public to reach the regulatory
decisions for methyl bromide commodity uses.
    The reregistration program is being conducted under Congressionally
mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both to make timely
decisions and to involve the public. The Agency is issuing the methyl
bromide commodity use RED for public comment. This comment period is
intended to provide an additional opportunity for public input and a
mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to the RED. All
comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES, and must
be received by EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will
become part of the

Agency Docket for methyl bromide. Comments received after the close of
the comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to
consider these late comments.
    The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and will provide a Response to Comments Memorandum in the
Docket and http://www.regulations.gov. If any comment significantly

affects the document, EPA also will publish an amendment to the RED in
the Federal Register. In the absence of substantive comments requiring
changes, the methyl bromide RED will be implemented as it is now
presented.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission
of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, the Administrator
shall determine whether pesticides containing such active ingredient
are eligible for reregistration, before calling in product-specific
data on individual end-use products and either reregistering products
or taking other ``appropriate regulatory action.''
    Section 408(q) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
21 U.S.C. 346a(q), requires EPA to review tolerances and exemptions for
pesticide residues in effect as of August 2, 1996, to determine whether
the tolerance or exemption meets the requirements of section 408(b)(2)
or (c)(2) of FFDCA. This review is to be completed by August 3, 2006.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: August 2, 2006.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-12898 Filed 8-8-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7010-7015]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03590]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R01-RCRA-2018-0431; FRL-9990-16-Region 1]

New Hampshire: Proposed Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The state of New Hampshire has applied to the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of changes to its
hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), as amended. EPA has reviewed New Hampshire's application
and has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed
to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, we are proposing to
authorize the State's changes. EPA seeks public comment prior to taking
final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Email: Stephen<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Stephen Yee, RCRA Waste Management & UST Section,
Office of Site Remediation & Restoration, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100 (Mail Code: OSRR07-01), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to:
Stephen Yee, RCRA Waste Management & UST Section, Office of Site
Remediation & Restoration, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite
100 (Mail Code: OSRR07-01), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number EPA-R01-
RCRA-2018-0431. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov,
or email. The federal www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. (For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm).
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy.
    You can view and copy New Hampshire's application and associated
publicly available materials from 9:00 a.m. to Noon and 12:30 to 3:30
p.m., Monday through Thursday, at the EPA Region 1 Library, 5 Post
Office Square, 1st floor, Boston, MA 02109-3912; by appointment; Tel:
(617) 918-1990 or from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday at
the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Public
Information Center, 29 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301; Tel: (603) 271-
2919 or 271-8876. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with either the EPA Library or the NHDES
Public Information Center to facilitate access to the documents.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Yee, RCRA Waste Management &
UST Section, Office of Site Remediation & Restoration, EPA Region 1, 5
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (Mail Code: OSRR07-01), Boston, MA 02109-
3912, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?

    States that have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the federal program. As the federal program changes, states must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
state programs may be necessary when federal or state statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, states must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
    New federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by federal
regulations that EPA promulgates pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) take effect in authorized states at the
same time that they take effect in unauthorized states. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and prohibitions in New Hampshire,
including the issuance of new permits implementing those requirements,
until the State is granted authorization to do so.

B. What decisions has EPA made in this rule?

    On September 10, 2018, New Hampshire submitted a complete program
revision application seeking authorization of changes to its hazardous
waste program that correspond to certain federal rules promulgated
between July 1, 1986 and June 30, 2014 (also known as Non-HSWA, HSWA,
and RCRA Clusters). EPA concludes that New Hampshire's application to
revise its authorized program meets all of the statutory and regulatory
requirements established under RCRA, as set forth in RCRA section
3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), and 40 CFR part 271. Therefore, EPA

proposes to grant New Hampshire final authorization to operate its
hazardous waste program with the changes described in the authorization
application, and as outlined below in Sections F and G of this
document.
    New Hampshire has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities within its borders and for carrying out the
aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised program
application, subject to the limitations of HSWA, as discussed above.

C. What is the effect of this proposed authorization decision?

    If New Hampshire is authorized for the changes described in New
Hampshire's authorization application, these changes will become part
of the authorized State hazardous waste program and will therefore be
federally enforceable. New Hampshire will continue to have primary
enforcement authority and responsibility for its State hazardous waste
program. EPA would maintain its authorities under RCRA sections 3007,
3008, 3013, and 7003, including its authority to:
     Conduct inspections, and require monitoring, tests,
analyses or reports;
     Enforce RCRA requirements, including authorized State
program requirements, and suspend or revoke permits; and
     Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State
has taken its own actions
    This action will not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the regulations which EPA is proposing to
authorize in New Hampshire are already effective and are not changed by
today's proposed action.

D. What happens if EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If EPA receives comments on this proposed action, we will address
all such comments in a later final rule. You may not have another
opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization,
you should do so at this time.

E. What has New Hampshire previously been authorized for?

    The State of New Hampshire initially received final authorization
on December 18, 1984, effective January 3, 1985 (49 FR 49093) to
implement the RCRA hazardous waste management program. EPA granted
authorization for changes to New Hampshire's program on the following
dates: November 14, 1994, effective January 13, 1995 (59 FR 56397); and
February 27, 2006, effective March 29, 2006 (71 FR 9727).

F. What changes are we proposing with today's action?

    On September 10, 2018, the State of New Hampshire submitted a final
complete program revision application, seeking authorization of changes
to its hazardous waste management program in accordance with 40 CFR
271.21. EPA proposes to determine, subject to receipt of written
comments that oppose this action, that New Hampshire's hazardous waste
program revisions are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less
stringent than the federal program, and therefore satisfy all of the
requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. EPA is
proposing to authorize New Hampshire for the following program changes:
    New Hampshire is seeking authorization for updated state
regulations addressing most federal requirements through June 30, 2014
and also for changes to New Hampshire's base program for which they had
been previously authorized. Significant program revisions in this
package include the Land Disposal Restrictions and hazardous waste
listings. We are proposing to authorize the program changes as provided
in each of the following Revision Checklists (RC):

RC 13--Definition of Solid Waste for 40 CFR 260.30--260.33 only;
RC 81--Petroleum Refinery Primary and Secondary Oil/Water/Solids
Separation Sludge Listings (F037 and F038);
RC 89--Revision to the Petroleum Refining Primary and Secondary Oil/
Water/Solids Separation Sludge Listings (F037 and F038); (RC 91)--
Administrative Stay for F032, F034, and F035 Listing (HSWA/Non HSWA)
(Superseded by 57 FR 5859 and 57 FR 61492, see RCs 101 and 120 in RCRA
Clusters II and III, respectively);
RC 101--Administrative Stay for the Requirement That Existing Drip Pads
be Impermeable (HSWA/Non HSWA) (Superseded by 57 FR 61492, see RC 120
in RCRA Cluster III);
RC 117A--Reissuance of the ``Mixture'' and ``Derived-From'' Rules;
RC 135--Recovered Oil Exclusion;
RC 140--Carbamate Production Identification and Listing of HW;
RC 150--Amendments to the Definition of Solid Waste; Amendment II;
RC 152--Imports and Exports of HW: Implementation of OECD Council
Decision;
RC 156--Military Munitions Rule: HW Identification and Management;
Explosives Emergencies; Manifest Exemption for Transport of HW on
Right-of-Ways on Contiguous Properties;
RC 159--Conformance with the Carbamate Vacatur;
RC 169--Petroleum Refining Process Wastes;
RC 178--Petroleum Refining Process Wastes--Leachate Exemption;
RC 183--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Technical Corrections;
RC 187--Petroleum Refining Process Wastes--Clarification;
RC 189--Chlorinated Aliphatics Listing and LDRs for Newly Identified
Wastes;
RC 192A--Mixture and Derived-From Rules Revisions;
RC 194--Mixture and Derived-From Rules Revision II;
RC 195--Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing Wastes Identification and
Listing;
RC 206--Nonwastewaters from Dyes and Pigments;
RC 207--Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Rule;
RC 218--F019 Exemption for Wastewater Treatment Sludges from Auto
Manufacturing Zinc Phosphating Processes;
RC 222--OECD Requirements; Export Shipments of Spend Lead-Acid
Batteries;
RC 225--Removal of Saccharin and Its Salts from the Lists of Hazardous
Constituents--There is no checklist for this rule because it removes
provisions from the regulations.;
RC 227--Revision of the Land Disposal Treatment Standards for Carbamate
Wastes;
RC 229--Conditional Exclusions for Solvent Contaminated Wipes;

    Special Consolidated Checklist for the Land Disposal Restrictions
(LDRs) as of 6/30/92 includes the following checklists:

 RC 34--Land Disposal Restrictions;
 RC 39--California List Waste Restrictions;
 RC 50--Land Disposal Restrictions for First Third Scheduled
Wastes;
 RC 62--Land Disposal Restrictions Amendments to First Third
Scheduled Wastes;
 RC 63--Land Disposal Restrictions for Second Third Scheduled
Wastes;
 RC 66--Land Disposal Restrictions; Correction to the First
Third Scheduled Wastes;
 RC 78H--Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled
Wastes;
 RC 78N--Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled
Wastes;
 RC 83--Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled
Wastes; Technical Amendments;
 RC 95--Land Disposal Restrictions for Electric Arc Furnace
Dust;

 RC 102--Second Correction to the Third Third Land Disposal
Restrictions;
 RC 103--Hazardous Debris Case-by-Case Capacity Variance;
 RC 106--Lead-bearing Hazardous Materials Case-by-Case Capacity
Variance;

    Special Consolidated Checklist for the Phases I-IV LDRs as of 12/
31/02 includes the following checklists:

 RC 109--Land Disposal Restrictions for Newly Listed Wastes and
Hazardous Debris;
 RC 116--Hazardous Soil Case-By-Case Capacity Variance;
 RC 117A--Reissuance of the ``Mixture'' and ``Derived-From''
Rules;
 RC 123--Land Disposal Restrictions; Renewal of the Hazardous
Waste Debris Case-by-Case Capacity Variance;
 RC 124--Land Disposal Restrictions for Ignitable and Corrosive
Characteristic Wastes Whose Treatment Standards Were Vacated;
 RC 136--Removal of the Conditional Exemption for Certain Slag
Residues;
 RC 137--Universal Treatment Standards and Treatment Standards
for Organic Toxicity Characteristic Wastes and Newly Listed Wastes;
 RC 151--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III--Decharacterized
Wastewaters, Carbamate Wastes, and Spent Potliners;
 RC 155--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III--Emergency
Extension of the K088 Capacity Variance;
 RC 157--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Treatment
Standards for Wood Preserving Wastes, Paperwork Reduction and
Streamlining, Exemptions From RCRA for Certain Processed Materials; and
Miscellaneous Hazardous Waste Provisions;
 RC 160--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III--Emergency
Extension of the K088 National Capacity Variance, Amendment;
 RC 161--Emergency Revision of the Carbamate Land Disposal
Restrictions;
 RC 167A--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Treatment
Standards for Metal Wastes and Mineral Processing Wastes;
 RC 167B--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Hazardous Soils
Treatment Standards and Exclusions;
 RC 167C--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV- Corrections;
 RC 170--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Zinc
Micronutrient Fertilizers, Amendment;
 RC 171--Emergency Revision of the Land Disposal Restrictions
(LDR) Treatment Standards for Listed Hazardous Wastes from Carbamate
Production;
 RC 172--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Extension of
Compliance Date for Characteristic Slags;
 RC 173--Land Disposal Restrictions; Treatment Standards for
Spent Potliners from Primary Aluminum Reduction (K088); Final Rule;
 RC 178--Petroleum Refining Process Wastes--Leachate Exemption;
 RC 183--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Technical
Corrections;
 RC 189--Chlorinated Aliphatics Listing and LDRs for Newly
Identified Wastes;
 RC 190--Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Deferral for PCBs
in Soil;
 RC 195--Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing Wastes Identification
and Listing;
 RC 201--Treatment Variance for Radioactively Contaminated
Batteries;

    Checklist for the Wood Preserving Listings as of 12/31/02 includes
the following checklists:

 RC 92--Wood Preserving Listings; Technical Corrections;
 RC 120--Wood Preserving; Revisions to Listings and Technical
Requirements;
 RC 162--Clarification of Standards for Hazardous Waste LDR
Treatment Variances;
 RC 167F--Exclusion of Recycled Wood Preserving Wastewaters.

A detailed cross walk for each of the checklists mentioned above can be
found in the administrative record for this Federal Register
authorization.

G. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?

    When revised state rules differ from the Federal rules in the RCRA
state authorization process, EPA determines whether the state rules are
equivalent to, more stringent than, or broader in scope than the
federal program. Pursuant to Section 3009 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6929,
state programs may contain requirements that are more stringent than
the federal regulations. Such more stringent requirements can be
federally authorized and, once authorized, become federally
enforceable. Although the statute does not prevent states from adopting
regulations that are broader in scope than the federal program, states
cannot receive federal authorization for such regulations, and they are
not federally enforceable.
    The most significant differences between the New Hampshire rules
and the federal rules are highlighted and summarized in the Table 1
below. It should be noted that this summary does not describe every
difference, nor every detail regarding the differences that are
described. Members of the regulated community are advised to read the
complete regulations to ensure that they understand their compliance
responsibilities.
    1. More Stringent Provisions
    There are aspects of the New Hampshire program which are more
stringent than the federal program. These requirements would become
part of New Hampshire's authorized program and would be federal
enforceable. All of these more stringent requirements are, or will
become, part of the federally enforceable RCRA program when authorized
by the EPA and must be complied with in addition to the State
requirements which track the minimum Federal requirements. These more
stringent requirements are identified as MS in the Table 1 below.
    2. Broader-In-Scope Provisions
    There are aspects of the New Hampshire program that are broader-in-
scope than the federal program. These broader-in-scope requirements do
not become part of the authorized program and EPA cannot enforce them.
Regulated entities must comply with these requirements in accordance
with State law. These broader-in-scope requirements are identified as
BIS in the Table 1 below.
    3. Partially Broader-In-Scope
    There are aspects of the New Hampshire program that are partially
broader-in-scope than the federal program. These partially broader-in-
scope requirements are the result of New Hampshire not adopting certain
portions of the regulations. These partially broader-in-scope
requirements are not part of the authorized program and EPA cannot
enforce them. However, the parts of the regulations which are not
partially broader-in-scope are part of the federally enforceable RCRA
program. Regulated entities must comply with these requirements in
accordance with State law. These broader-in-scope requirements are
identified as Partially BIS in the Table 1 below.
    4. Different but Equivalent Provisions
    New Hampshire also has some regulations that differ from, but have
been determined to be equivalent to, the federal regulations. These
state regulations will become part of the federally enforceable RCRA
program when authorized by the EPA. These different but equivalent
requirements are identified as EQ in the Table 1 below.
    5. There are certain federal requirements that EPA cannot delegate
to the States, although New Hampshire has adopted these requirements by

reference, EPA would continue to implement those requirements. These
requirements are identified in the Table 1 below.

                                 Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Description of checklist
    number and the Federal      Analogous state authority \1\--(Env-Hw)
         requirement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    RC 117A--Reissuance of the ``Mixture'' and ``Derived-From'' Rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.3(a)(2)(i)...............  401.01(b)(3)--NH's mixture rule regulates
                                as characteristic wastes mixtures of
                                hazardous wastes with materials that are
                                not solid wastes (e.g., soils) if the
                                mixture exhibits a characteristic.
                                (Partially BIS).
261.3(a)(2)(iv)..............  401.01(b)(2); 401.01(c)(2)--NH's mixture
                                rule regulates as listed wastes mixtures
                                of hazardous wastes with materials that
                                are not solid wastes (e.g., soils).
                                (Partially BIS).
261.3(a)(2)(iv)(A)-(E).......  NH is not adopting an analog to these
                                provisions. (BIS).
261.3(b)(2)..................  401.01(b)(2); 404.02--NH's mixture rule
                                regulates as listed wastes mixtures of
                                hazardous wastes with materials that are
                                not solid wastes (e.g., soils).
                                (Partially BIS).
261.3(b)(3)..................  401.01(b)(3)--NH's mixture rule regulates
                                as characteristic wastes mixtures of
                                hazardous wastes with materials that are
                                not solid wastes (e.g., soils) if the
                                mixture exhibits a characteristic.
                                (Partially BIS).
261.3(c)(2)(i)...............  401.01(c)(2), 404.03(a), 404.03(b)--NH
                                includes precipitation run-off that
                                exhibits a characteristic. (Partially
                                BIS).
261.3(c)(2)(ii)(B)...........  401.03(b)(30)--NH has adopted the
                                exemption for fuels produced from the
                                refining of oil-bearing HW (now at 40
                                CFR 261.6(a)(3)(iii)) but has not
                                adopted the other exemptions. (Partially
                                BIS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     RC 135--Recovered Oil Exclusion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.3(c)(2)(ii)(B)...........  401.03(b)(30)--NH has adopted the
                                exemption for fuels produced from the
                                refining of oil-bearing HW (now at 40
                                CFR 261.6(a)(3)(iii)) but has not
                                adopted the other exemptions. (Partially
                                BIS).
261.6(a)(3)(v), now at         NH is not adopting these provisions.
 261.6(a)(3)(iv).               (BIS).
261.6(a)(3)(vi)..............  An analog to this provision does not
                                currently exist in NH rules, and this
                                provision was subsequently deleted in
                                RC169.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      RC 140--Carbamate Production Identification and Listing of HW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.3(a)(2)(iv)(E)-(G).......  NH is not adopting these exemptions.
                                (BIS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                RC 169--Petroleum Refining Process Wastes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.3(a)(2)(iv)(C)...........  N/A--NH is not adopting the exemption.
                                (BIS).
261.3(c)(2)(ii)(B)...........  401.03(b)(30)--NH has adopted the
                                exemption for fuels produced from the
                                refining of oil-bearing HW (40 CFR
                                261.6(a)(3)(iii)) but has not adopted
                                the other exemptions. (Partially BIS).
261.6(a)(3)(iv)(C)...........  NH is not adopting this provision. (BIS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            RC 192A--Mixture and Derived-From Rules Revisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.3(a)(2)(iv)..............  401.01(b)(2); 401.01(c)(2)--NH's mixture
                                rule regulates as listed wastes mixtures
                                of hazardous wastes with materials that
                                are not solid wastes (e.g., soils). NH
                                has not yet adopted RC191. (Partially
                                BIS).
261.3(c)(2)(i)...............  401.01(c)(2); 404.03(a); 404.03(b)--NH
                                includes precipitation run-off that
                                exhibits a characteristic. NH has not
                                yet adopted RC191. (Partially BIS).
261.3(h)(1)-(3)..............  NH has not yet adopted RC191. (BIS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           RC 194--Mixture and Derived-From Rules Revision II
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.3(a)(2)(iv)..............  401.01(b)(2), 401.01(c)(2)--NH's mixture
                                rule regulates as listed wastes mixtures
                                of hazardous wastes with materials that
                                are not solid wastes (e.g.,, soils). NH
                                has not yet adopted CL191. (Partially
                                BIS).
261.3(a)(2)(iv)(A)-(G).......  NH is not adopting these exemptions.
                                (BIS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              RC 207--Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
262.27(a)....................  510.01(e)--NH requires generators of
                                >=100 kgs./month to certify. (MS).
262.27(b)....................  510.01(f)--NH requires generators of <100
                                kgs./month to certify. (MS).
262.34(m)....................  511.02(b)(3); 507.03(a) and (b)--NH does
                                not allow accumulation as provided in 40
                                CFR 262.34(d)-(f). (MS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      RC 229--Conditional Exclusions for Solvent Contaminated Wipes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
260.10 ``Solvent-contaminated  401.02(d) and (e)--Used oil is a listed
 wipe''.                        waste in NH. NH's definition allows
                                wipes to contain used oil. (EQ) Wipes
                                used to clean up solvent spills of 12
                                fluid ounces or more are not eligible
                                for the exemption. (BIS).
261.4(a)(26)(i)..............  401.03(g)(3)-(7)--NH has added a
                                clarifying requirement at (g)(1) that
                                excess spent solvent can't be added to
                                wipes to avoid disposal. (EQ).
261.4(b)(18)(i)..............  401.03(g)(3)-(7)--NH has added a
                                clarifying requirement at (g)(1) that
                                excess spent solvent can't be added to
                                wipes to avoid disposal. (EQ).
261.4(b)(18)(vi)(A)..........  401.03(b)(28)c.3--NH prohibits disposal
                                in NH MSW landfills. (BIS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Special Consolidated Checklist for the Land Disposal Restrictions as of
                              June 30, 1992
------------------------------------------------------------------------
261.5(b)--(RC 34)............  503.01, 508, 1201.03(b)--NH has not
                                adopted the very small quantity
                                generator (VSQG) exclusion but does
                                exempt VSQGs from LDR requirements.
                                (MS).
261.5(f)(2); 261.5(g)(2)--(RC  503.01, 508--NH has not adopted the VSQG
 34).                           exclusion. (MS).
262.34(d)(4)--(RC 83)........  507.03(a)--NH rules allow generators of
                                between 100 and 1000 kgs./month to
                                accumulate up to 90 days rather than
                                180. (MS).
263.12--(RC 34)..............  104.63; 304.11; 601.01(b)(2) and (3);
                                701.01(a)--NH requires a permit for
                                transfer facilities. (MS).
268.1(c)(3)--(RCs 34, 39, 50,  1202.02(b)(1)--NH prohibits underground
 66, 78); 268.1(c)(3)(i)-       injection of HW. (MS)
 (ii)--(RC 78).
268.3(b)--(RCs 78, 102)......  1202.02(f), NH has not adopted an analog
                                to this provision. (MS).
268.5(a)-(i)--(RC 34)........  N/A--These federal regulations are not
                                being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 102.02(b)(1); 1202.02(a)(1).
268.6(a)-(n)--(RC 34)........  N/A--These federal regulations are not
                                being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 1202.02(a)(1).
268.7(a)(10)--(RCs 78, 83)...  509.05; 1202.02(i)--NH has not adopted an
                                analog to this provision. (MS).
268.42(b)--(RCs 34, 39, 78)..  N/A--These federal regulations are not
                                being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 1202.02(a)(1).
268.44(a)-(g)--(RC 34).......  N/A--These federal regulations are not
                                being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 102.02(b)(1); 1202.02(a)(1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Special Consolidated Checklist for the Phases I-IV Land Disposal
                  Restrictions as of December 31, 2002
------------------------------------------------------------------------
262.34(d)(4)--(RC 179).......  507.03(a)--NH rules allow generators of
                                between 100 and 1000 kgs./month to
                                accumulate up to 90 days rather than 180
                                (MS).
264.1(g)(6)--(RCs 124, 137)..  404.01; 701.02(a)(4)--NH rules do not
                                include language specifically allowing
                                dilution of D001 and D003 wastes in ENUs
                                and WWTUs. (MS).
265.1(c)(10)--(RCs 124, 137).  404.01, 701.02(a)(4)--NH rules do not
                                include language specifically allowing
                                dilution of D001 and D003 wastes in ENUs
                                and WWTUs. (MS).
268.1(c)(3)(i)-(ii)--(RC 151)  1202.02(b)(1)--NH prohibits underground
                                injection of HW. (MS).
268.3(b)--(RC 151)...........  1202.02(f)--NH has not adopted an analog
                                to this provision. (MS).
268.5(h)(2)(ii)-(vi)--(RC      N/A--These federal regulations are not
 109).                          being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 102.02(b)(1); 1202.02(a)(1).
268.7(a)(7)--(RCs 137, 157,    509.05; 1202.01 incorporates 40 CFR 268
 167C).                         by reference; 1202.02(b)(2)--NH
                                prohibits underground injection of HW.
                                (MS).
268.42(b)--(RC 109)..........  N/A--These federal regulations are not
                                being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 1202.02(a)(1).
268.44(a)(1)-(2)--(RC 162)...  N/A--These federal regulations are not
                                being incorporated by reference, since
                                the authority is being retained by EPA;
                                102.02(a); 102.02(b)(1); 1202.02(a)(1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Special Consolidated Checklist for the Wood Preserving Listings as of
                            December 31, 2002
------------------------------------------------------------------------
262.34(a)(1)(i)--(RC 92).....  507.01(a)--(EQ); 507.02(a)--(EQ);
                                509.02(a)(6)--(EQ); 507.02(b)-(f)--NH
                                requires storage on impervious surfaces;
                                secondary containment if wastes with
                                free liquids are stored near floor
                                drains, manholes, or sinks; and for
                                containers stored outside, protection
                                from precipitation, secondary
                                containment, and setbacks from wells and
                                storm drains (MS); 509.03(b), (e), (g)
                                and (i)--For satellite storage NH
                                requires: Training, appropriate
                                management of incompatible wastes, and
                                inspections. (MS).
262.34(a)(1)(ii)--(RC 92)....  507.01(a); 507.02(a)--(EQ); 507.03(a)--
                                (EQ); 509.02(a)(7)--(EQ); 508.03(d)--NH
                                requires federal VSQGs that accumulate
                                >=100 kg of HW in tanks to comply with
                                portions of Subpart J. (MS).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ State of New Hampshire's Hazardous Waste Rules, effective August 14,
  2017.

H. Who handles permits after the final authorization takes effect?

    When the final authorization takes effect, New Hampshire will issue
permits for all the provisions for which it is authorized and will
administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue to administer and
enforce any RCRA and HSWA (Hazardous and Solid Waste Act) permits or
portions of permits that it has issued in New Hampshire prior to the
effective date of this authorization until the State incorporates the
terms and conditions of the federal permits into the State RCRA
permits. EPA will not issue any new permits, or new portions of
permits, for the provisions listed in the Table above after the
effective date of this authorization. EPA will continue to implement
and issue permits for any HSWA requirements for which New Hampshire is
not yet authorized. EPA has the authority to enforce state-issued
permits after the State is authorized.

I. What is codification and is EPA codifying New Hampshire's hazardous
waste program as authorized in this rule?

    Codification is the process of placing citations and references to
the State's statutes and regulations that comprise the State's
authorized hazardous waste program into the Code of Federal
Regulations. EPA does this by adding these citations and references to
the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is not proposing to
codify the

authorization of New Hampshire's changes at this time. However, EPA
reserves the ability to amend 40 CFR part 272, subpart EE for this
authorization of New Hampshire's program changes at a later date.

J. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action
from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). This action proposes to
authorize State requirements for the purpose of RCRA section 3006 and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Therefore, this action is not subject to review by OMB. This action is
not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory
action because actions such as today's proposed authorization of New
Hampshire's revised hazardous waste program under RCRA are exempted
under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, I certify that this action
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.). Because this action proposes to authorize pre-existing
requirements under State law and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(2 U.S.C. 1531-1538). For the same reason, this action also does not
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal governments,
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on
the relationship between the national government and the states, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it merely proposes to authorize State
requirements as part of the State RCRA hazardous waste program without
altering the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established by RCRA. This action also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is
not economically significant and it does not make decisions based on
environmental health or safety risks. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
    Under RCRA section 3006(b), EPA grants a state's application for
authorization as long as the state meets the criteria required by RCRA.
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it
reviews a state authorization application, to require the use of any
particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard
that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996),
in proposing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of this action in accordance with the
``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive
order. This action does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.). ``Burden'' is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by
law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying
and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States. Because this action proposes authorization of pre-
existing State rules which are at least equivalent to, and no less
stringent than existing federal requirements, and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law, and there are no
anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects,
this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority:  This action is issued under the authority of
sections 2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

    Dated: January 29, 2019.
Deborah A. Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2019-03590 Filed 2-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 139 (Friday, July 21, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46955-46956]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15468]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1242; Special Conditions No. 25-839-SC]

Special Conditions: Textron Aviation, Inc. Model 560XL(XLS+)
Airplane; Electronic System Security Protection From Unauthorized
Internal Access

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Textron Aviation,
Inc. (Textron) Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane. This airplane will have a
novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state of
technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport-
category airplanes. This design feature is associated with the
installation of a digital system that contains a wireless and hardwired
network with hosted application functionality that allows access, from
a source internal to the airplane, to the airplane's internal
electronic component. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not
contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design
feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on Textron Aviation, Inc. on July 21,
2023. Send comments on or before September 5, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2023-1242 using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Docket: Background documents or comments received may be
read at https://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thuan T. Nguyen, Avionics Software &
Components Unit, AIR-626D, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy
and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines,
Washington 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The substance of these special conditions
has been published in the Federal Register for public comment in
several prior instances with no substantive comments received.
Therefore, the FAA finds, pursuant to 14 CFR 11.38(b), that new
comments are unlikely, and notice and comment prior to this publication
are unnecessary.

Privacy

    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in title
14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 11.35, the FAA will post all
comments received without change to https://www.regulations.gov/,
including any personal information you provide. The FAA will also post
a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about
these special conditions.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
these special conditions contain commercial or financial information
that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as
private, and that is relevant or responsive to these special
conditions, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and the indicated comments will not be
placed in the public docket of these special conditions. Send
submissions containing CBI to Thuan T. Nguyen, Avionics Software &
Components Unit, AIR-626D, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy
and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines,
Washington 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected]. Comments the FAA receives, which are not
specifically designated as CBI, will be placed in the public docket for
these special conditions.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested people to take part in this rulemaking
by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date for
comments, and will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do
so without incurring delay. The FAA may change these special conditions
based on the comments received.

Background

    On June 30, 2021, Textron Aviation, Inc. applied for an amended
type certificate (ATC) for the installation of a digital system that
contains a wireless and hardwired network with hosted application
functionality that allows access, from sources internal to the
airplane, to the airplane's internal electronic components. The Textron
Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane, which is a derivative of the Model 560XL
currently approved under Type Certificate No. A22CE, is a two-engine
transport category airplane. The maximum seating capacity is 12
passengers and 2 crew members. The maximum takeoff weight is 20,200 to
20,330 pounds, depending on the specific variant.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Textron must show that the Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane, as
changed, continues to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
listed in Type Certificate No. A22CE or the applicable regulations in
effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier
amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (e.g., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards

for the Textron Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane because of a novel or
unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the applicant apply for an ATC to modify any
other model included on the same type certificate to incorporate the
same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would
also apply to the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Textron Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane must comply with the
exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the noise-
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Textron Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane will incorporate a novel or
unusual design feature, which is the installation of a digital system
that contains a wireless and hardwired network with hosted application
functionality that allows access, from sources internal to the
airplane, to the airplane's internal electronic components.

Discussion

    The Textron Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane electronic system
architecture and network configuration change is novel or unusual for
commercial transport airplanes because it is composed of several
connected wireless and hardwired networks. This proposed system and
network architecture is used for a diverse set of airplane functions,
including:
     Flight-safety related control and navigation systems,
     Airline business and administrative support, and
     Passenger entertainment.
    The airplane's control domain and airline information services
domain of these networks perform functions required for the safe
operation and maintenance of the airplane. Previously, these domains
had very limited connectivity with other network sources. This network
architecture creates a potential for unauthorized persons to access the
aircraft control domain from sources internal to the airplane, and
presents security vulnerabilities related to the introduction of
computer viruses and worms, user errors, and intentional sabotage of
airplane electronic assets (networks, systems, and databases) critical
to the safety and maintenance of the airplane.
    The existing FAA regulations did not anticipate these networked
airplane-system architectures. Furthermore, these regulations and the
current guidance material do not address potential security
vulnerabilities, which could be exploited by unauthorized access to
airplane networks, data buses, and servers. Therefore, these special
conditions ensure that the security (i.e., confidentiality, integrity,
and availability) of airplane systems will not be compromised by
unauthorized wireless or hardwired electronic connections from within
the airplane. These special conditions also require the applicant to
provide appropriate instruction to the operator to maintain all
electronic-system safeguards that have been implemented as part of the
original network design so that this feature does not allow or
reintroduce security threats.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Textron Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane. Should Textron apply at a later
date for an amended type certificate to modify any other model included
on Type Certificate No. A22CE to incorporate the same novel or unusual
design feature, these special conditions would apply to that model as
well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only a certain novel or unusual design feature
on Textron Model 560XL(XLS+) airplane. It is not a rule of general
applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, and
44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for the Textron 560XL(XLS+) airplane for
airplane electronic-system internal access.
    1. The applicant must ensure that the design provides isolation
from, or airplane electronic-system security protection against, access
by unauthorized sources internal to the airplane. The design must
prevent inadvertent and malicious changes to, and all adverse impacts
upon, airplane equipment, systems, networks, and other assets required
for safe flight and operations.
    2. The applicant must establish appropriate procedures to allow the
operator to ensure that continued airworthiness of the airplane is
maintained, including all post-type-certification modifications that
may have an impact on the approved electronic-system security
safeguards.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 17, 2023.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-15468 Filed 7-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 5, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61645-61647]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25570]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0997; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-043-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-200 Series Airplanes;
Model A330-300 Series Airplanes; Model A340-200 Series Airplanes; and
Model A340-300 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:

    During fatigue testing of the MLG [main landing gear], three
failures of the retraction bracket occurred before the calculated
life limitation. Further analysis has confirmed that those failures
were due to fatigue initiated by fretting between the bush and lug
bore.
    The failure of the retraction bracket, if not detected, could
lead to a MLG extension with no damping resulting in MLG structural
damage.
* * * * *
    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 November 21,
2011.

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 W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed 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; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0997;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-043-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2010-0205, dated October 8, 2010 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During fatigue testing of the MLG [main landing gear], three
failures of the retraction bracket occurred before the calculated
life limitation. Further analysis has confirmed that those failures
were due to fatigue initiated by fretting between the bush and lug
bore.
    The failure of the retraction bracket, if not detected, could
lead to a MLG extension with no damping resulting in MLG structural
damage.
    Airbus carried out an investigation, demonstrating that the life
limit of retraction brackets must be reduced to 19,800 Landings
(LDG), which is below the life limit stated in the following A330
and A340 Airbus ALS Part 4 revisions:

--Airbus A330 ALS Part 4 revision 02 approved by EASA on 16 December
2009.
--Airbus A340 ALS Part 4 revision 01 approved by EASA on 15 December
2009.

    In order to maintain the structural integrity of the aeroplane,
this [EASA] AD requires the replacement of these MLG retraction
brackets before the accumulation of 19,800 total LDG.

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

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 29 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 25 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $200,000 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
parts. 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 $5,861,625, or $202,125 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, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2011-0997; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-
043-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 21, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223,
-243, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343
airplanes; and Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313
airplanes; certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial
numbers; except airplanes on which Airbus modification 54500 has
been embodied in production; and except airplanes on which Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-32-3212 or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-
4256 has been embodied in service; as applicable to airplane model.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    During fatigue testing of the MLG [main landing gear], three
failures of the retraction bracket occurred before the calculated
life limitation. Further analysis has confirmed that those failures
were due to fatigue initiated by fretting between the bush and lug
bore.
    The failure of the retraction bracket, if not detected, could
lead to a MLG extension with no damping resulting in MLG structural
damage.
* * * * *

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Actions

    (g) Before the accumulation of 19,800 total landings on the
retraction brackets of the main landing gear or within 900 flight
hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later:
Replace the affected retraction bracket of the MLG specified in
table 1 of this AD with a serviceable part, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA,
or European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent).
Thereafter, before the accumulation of 19,800 total landings on any
retraction bracket of the MLG identified in table 1 of this AD,
replace the retraction bracket with a serviceable part, in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, or EASA (or its delegated agent).

                 Table 1--Retraction Bracket of the MLG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Nomenclature                           Part Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retraction Bracket of the MLG...............................   201478303
                                                               201478304
                                                               201478305
                                                               201478306
                                                               201478307
                                                               201478308
                                                               201428380
                                                               201428381
                                                               201428382
                                                               201428383
                                                               201428384
                                                               201428385
                                                               201428378
                                                               201428379
                                                               201428351
                                                               201428352
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 1:  Additional guidance for the replacement can be found in
Task 32-11-11-400-804-A, Removal of the MLG Retraction Bracket
Assembly, and Task 32-11-11-000-804-A, Installation of the MLG
Retraction Bracket Assembly, of subsection 32-11-11 of Chapter 32 of
the Airbus A330 Aircraft Maintenance Manual, Revision 36, dated
January 1, 2011.

    Note 2: ``Total landings'' are the accumulated landings since
the initial entry of the MLG retraction bracket into service on any
airplane.

    Note 3: The initial entry into service for the transferable
systems components/items is defined as the date at which the
component/item accomplishes the first flight for which it will
undertake its intended function.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 4:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, 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, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be e-mailed 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) 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.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to MCAI Airworthiness Directive EASA 2010-0205, dated
October 8, 2010, for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 22, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-25570 Filed 10-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 14, 2007

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET DOT-OST-2004-17265

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION (JETBLUE) filed 10/17/07 for:

XX  Renewal of exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide
the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between points in the United States, on the one hand, and Santo Domingo
and Santiago, Dominican Republic, on the other hand.

Applicant rep: Jonathan B. Hill<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst: Thuy H.
Cooper<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken: November 14, 2007, through
November 14, 2009, or until 90 days after final Department action on
JetBlue’s corresponding application for a certificate of public
convenience and necessity in Dockets DOT-OST-2004-17264 and
DOT-OST-2005-22228, whichever occurs earlier.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and the Dominican Republic of 1986 and the
overall state of aviation relations between the United States and the
Dominican Republic.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated: XX Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

    XX Standard exemption conditions (attached)

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the exemption services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov

APPENDIX

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, the Transportation Security Administration, and with all
applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning security, including,
but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.  To assure compliance with all
applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning security, the holder
shall, before commencing any new service (including charter flights) to
or from a foreign airport, contact its International Principal Security
Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether
the Transportation Security Administration has determined that security
is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be served;

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

			11/2006

 JetBlue states that it currently operates this service from New York
(John F. Kennedy International Airport).

 PAGE