[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 6, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63160-63161]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22003]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0379]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: Operational
Waivers for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for a new information collection.
The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting
comments on the following collection of information was published on
April 10, 2010. The FAA proposes collecting information about requests
for waivers from certain operational rules that apply to small unmanned
aircraft systems (sUAS). The FAA will use the collected information to
make determinations whether to authorize or deny the requested
operations of sUAS. The proposed information collection is necessary to
issue such authorizations or denials consistent with the FAA's mandate
to ensure safe and efficient use of national airspace.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by November 5, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Grogan by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Title: Operational Waivers for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.
    Form Numbers: N/A (online portal).
    Type of Review: New.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on April 10, 2020 (85 FR 20333). The FAA has seen
increased operations of small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) flying
under 14 CFR part 107. Under 14 CFR 107.205, operators of small UAS may
seek waivers from certain operational rules. The FAA is updating and
modernizing the process for applying for such waivers using the
DroneZone website. These improvements will facilitate the process of
collecting and submitting the information required as part of a waiver
application. The reporting burdens for operational waiver applications
are currently covered by Information Collection Request (ICR) 2120-
0768. As part of this effort, the FAA is creating a new ICR just for
operational waiver applications. In order to process operational waiver
requests, the FAA requires the operator's name, the operator's contact
information, and information related to the date, place, and time of
the requested small UAS operation. Additional information is required
related to the proposed waiver and any necessary mitigations. The FAA
will use the requested information to determine if the proposed UAS
operation can be conducted safely. This information is necessary for
the FAA to meet its statutory mandate of maintaining a safe and
efficient national airspace. See 49 U.S.C. 40103, 44701 and 44708.
    Respondents: sUAS Operators: 8,034 per year.
    Frequency: On occasion. For requests for operational waivers, a
respondent

will need to provide the information once at the time of the request
for the waiver. If granted, operational waivers may be valid for up to
four (4) years.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes. The FAA
estimates 1.3 responses per respondent.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 0.65 hours per respondent, for a
total of 5,222 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 30, 2020.
Dwayne C. Morris,
Project Manager, Flight Standards Service, General Aviation and
Commercial Division.
[FR Doc. 2020-22003 Filed 10-5-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 18, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2563-2566]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00509]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-1183; Project Identifier AD-2021-01193-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; CFM International, S.A. Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all CFM International, S.A. (CFM) LEAP-1A23, LEAP-1A24, LEAP-
1A24E1, LEAP-1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-1A29, LEAP-1A29CJ,
LEAP-1A30, LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, and LEAP-1A35A model
turbofan engines. This proposed AD was prompted by the detection of
melt-related freckles in the billet, which may reduce the life of
certain compressor rotor stages 6-10 spools, high pressure turbine
(HPT) rotor interstage seals, HPT rotor stage 2 disks, low pressure
turbine (LPT) stage 1 disks, LPT stage 2 disks, LPT stage 3 disks, and
LPT stage 4 disks. This proposed AD would require revising the
airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the applicable CFM LEAP-1A
Engine Shop Manual (ESM) and the operator's existing approved
continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP) to incorporate
reduced life limits for these parts. This proposed AD would also
require the removal of certain LPT stage 4 disks identified by serial
number (S/N) prior to their new life limits. The FAA is proposing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 4,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact CFM
International, S.A., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D
Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1183; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mehdi Lamnyi, Aviation Safety
Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-1183; Project Identifier
AD-2021-01193-E'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Mehdi
Lamnyi, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA receives
which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the
public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA was notified by the manufacturer of the detection of melt-
related freckles in the billet, which may reduce the life of certain
compressor rotor stages 6-10 spools, HPT rotor interstage seals, HPT
rotor stage 2 disks, LPT stage 1 disks, LPT stage 2 disks, LPT stage 3
disks, and LPT stage 4 disks (life-limited parts (LLPs)). Through the
manufacturer's investigation, it was determined that these LLPs may
have subsurface anomalies that developed during the manufacturing
process, resulting in a lower life capability. As a result of its
investigation, the manufacturer determined the need to reduce the life
limits of these LLPs. To reflect these reduced life limits, the
manufacturer revised the CFM ALS, Chapter 05 of CFM LEAP 1A ESM.
Additionally, the manufacturer published service information that
specifies procedures for the removal and replacement of these LLPs
before reaching their new life limits.
    The FAA is proposing to require operators to update the ALS of the
applicable CFM LEAP-1A ESM, with the reduced life limits for these
LLPs. The FAA is also proposing to require operators to remove certain
LPT stage 4 disks identified by S/N before reaching their new life
limits. The LPT stage 4 disks, identified by S/N in Figure 1 to
paragraph (g)(2) of this proposed AD, were discovered by the
manufacturer after publication of the ALS updates. This condition, if
not addressed, could result in uncontained debris release, damage to
the engine, and damage to the airplane.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed CFM High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits
LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated September 15, 2021
(CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C); CFM High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life
Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 007-00, dated September 15,
2021 (CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C); and CFM Low Pressure Turbine
Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009-00, dated June
1, 2021 (LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C). CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C,
CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C, and CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C
provide the new life limits for the LLPs. 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
ADDRESSES.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009-00,
dated July 26, 2021; and CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 006-00,
dated July 26, 2021. This service information provides the new life
limits for the LLPs.
    The FAA also reviewed CFM Service Bulletin (SB) LEAP-1A-72-00-0413-
01A-930A-D, Issue 004-00, dated December 11, 2021 (CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-
00-0413-01A-930A-D). CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-00-0413-01A-930A-D specifies
procedures for removing and replacing the LLPs, and provides new life
limits for certain S/Ns of the LLPs.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require revising the ALS of the CFM LEAP-1A
ESM, as applicable to each affected engine model, and the operator's
existing approved CAMP to incorporate reduced life limits for certain
LLPs. This proposed AD also requires replacement of two LPT stage 4
disks.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 256 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA
estimates that 256 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry
would require revising the ALS of the CFM LEAP-1A ESM and the
operator's existing approved CAMP. The FAA estimates that zero
airplanes of

U.S. registry would require replacement of the LPT stage 4 disk.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revise ALS of Engine Manual and the  1 work-hour x $85 per hour               $0             $85         $21,760
 operator's existing approved CAMP.   = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to replace the LPT stage 4
disk:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace LPT Stage 4 disk...........  225 work-hours x $85 per           $129,000        $148,125              $0
                                      hour = $19,125.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

CFM International, S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2021-1183; Project
Identifier AD-2021-01193-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by March 4, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to CFM International, S.A. (CFM) LEAP-1A23,
LEAP-1A24, LEAP-1A24E1, LEAP-1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-
1A29, LEAP-1A29CJ, LEAP-1A30, LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, and
LEAP-1A35A model turbofan engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine
Compressor Section, and JASC Code 7250, Turbine Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by the detection of melt-related freckles
in the billet, which may reduce the life of certain compressor rotor
stages 6-10 spools, high pressure turbine (HPT) rotor interstage
seals, HPT rotor stage 2 disks, low pressure turbine (LPT) stage 1
disks, LPT stage 2 disks, LPT stage 3 disks, and LPT stage 4 disks.
The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent the failure of the high-
pressure compressor, HPT rotor, and LPT rotor. The unsafe condition,
if not addressed, could result in release of uncontained debris,
damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the applicable CFM
LEAP-1A Engine Shop Manual (the ESM) and the operator's existing
approved continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP) by
incorporating the following service information:
    (i) CFM High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-
11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated September 15, 2021; and
    (ii) CFM High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 007-00, dated September 15, 2021; and
    (iii) CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009-00, dated June 1, 2021.
    (2) Before the LPT stage 4 disk, P/N 362-039-520-0, with serial
numbers identified in Figure 1 to paragraph (g)(2) of this AD
(Figure 1) accumulates the cycles in Figure 1, or within 100 cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, remove
the affected LPT stage 4 disk from service and replace with a part
eligible for installation.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP18JA22.000

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) You may take credit for the action required by paragraph
(g)(1)(i) of this AD if the following service information was
incorporated into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the operator's
existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this AD: CFM
High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-
0B1B-C, Issue 009-00, dated July 26, 2021.
    (2) You may take credit for the action required by paragraph
(g)(1)(ii) of this AD if the following service information was
incorporated into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the operator's
existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this AD: CFM
High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C,
Issue 006-00, dated July 26, 2021.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. You may email your
request to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Mehdi Lamnyi,
Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact CFM
International, S.A., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D
Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(817) 222-5110.

    Issued on January 7, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-00509 Filed 1-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


<COMPANY FEDERAL REGISTER DOCUMENT SUBMISSION TEMPLATE  (7/1/2006)>

<EPA Registration Division contact: Shaja R. Brothers,<PHONE_NUMBER>>

<TEMPLATE:>

<Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) >

<7E7228>

<	EPA has received a pesticide petition 7E7228 from the Interregional
Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540 proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR
part 180 <by establishing a tolerance for residues of Forchlorfenuron
(KT-30) in or on the raw agricultural commodity Bushberry subgroup 13-B
(Aronia berry; Blueberry, highbush; Blueberry, lowbush; Currant,
buffalo; Chilean guava; Currant black, and Currant, red; Barberry,
european; Elderberry; Gooseberry; Cranberry, highbush; Honeysuckle,
edible; Huckleberry; Jostaberry; Juneberry; Currant; Salal; and
Buckthorn, sea) at 0.01 parts per million (ppm).  EPA has determined
that the petition contains data or information regarding the elements
set forth in section 408 (d)(2) of the FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully
evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether
the data supports granting of the petition. Additional data may be
needed before EPA rules on the petition.>

>

<	><

<A. Residue Chemistry>

<	1. Plant metabolism. The primary residue of forchlorfenuron is parent
material.  Three plant metabolism studies were conducted, one on grapes
(MRID #44394601), one on kiwifruit (MRID #44359501), and one on apples
(MRID #44394602), all showed parent material to be the primary residue.
There were two hydroxy metabolites in all > three radio label studies at
very low levels.  That is why the parent material is considered the
primary residue.

<	2. Analytical method. Two analytical methods, both based on high
performance liquid chromotography (HPLC) procedures have been developed.
 The first method used a visible ultraviolet (UV) detector, while the
second method used a mass spectrophotometer (MS) detector.  Since the MS
detector is capable of both qualitative as well as quantitative
measurement, it is the preferred method.  The lowest level of
quantification (LOQ) in blueberries was 0.01 ppm.>

<	3. Magnitude of residues. The magnitude of the residues in blueberries
is below the LOQ.  All analyzed samples had residue levels below
detectable levels.>

<B. Toxicological Profile

>

	A full battery of toxicology testing including studies of acute,
subchronic, chronic, oncogenicity, developmental, reproductive and
genotoxicity effects is available for KT-30 Technical active ingredient.
 The acute toxicity of KT-30 is low by all routes.  The lowest
subchronic study showed a no observable adverse effect level (NOAEL)
value of 16.8 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) obtained from the dog
90-day toxicity study.  Chronic studies in other animals indicated that
KT-30 is not carcinogenic.  The lowest chronic dietary NOAEL is 7
mg/kg/day from male rats fed KT-30 for 104 weeks.  KT-30 showed no
evidence of developmental toxicity in rats and rabbits.  In a rat
reproduction study, reproductive effects were only observed at
maternally toxic doses.  Finally, genetic toxicity studies indicated
that KT-30 was not genotoxic.  For the purpose of dietary risk analysis,
0.07 mg/kg/day is proposed for the chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD).  The cPAD is based on a chronic endpoint of 7 mg/kg/day, which
is the NOAEL for male rats from the chronic/oncogenicity feeding study
and with an uncertainty factor of 100.  No acute toxicity endpoint could
be identified and, therefore, an acute dietary risk assessment is
considered unnecessary.

<	1. Acute toxicity.  These toxicity studies were run with KT-30
Technical as well as the end use formulation (ABG-3207 Plant Growth
Regulator).  The acute toxicity of KT-30 is low by all routes.  The
battery of acute toxicity studies place KT-30 into Toxicity Category
III.  KT-30 has low acute toxicity when administered orally, dermally or
via inhalation to rats.  It is not a skin irritant and is only a mild
eye irritant.  KT-30 is not a skin sensitizer.>

<	2. Genotoxicity. The genotoxic potential of KT-30 was studied in vitro
in bacteria and mammalian cells and in vivo in the unscheduled DNA
synthesis test.  The test systems assayed did not show any evidence of
genotoxicity except in the bacterial mutagenicity assay, strain TA1535,
without metabolic activation.  The weight of the evidence indicates that
KT-30 does not possess significant genotoxicity concerns.>

<

3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. Developmental effects of
KT-30 were studied in rats and rabbits and multigenerational effects on
reproduction were studied in rats.

Rat developmental.  In the developmental toxicity study conducted with

rats, KT-30 was administered by gavage at levels of 0, 100, 200, and 400
mg/kg/day.  The maternal and developmental NOAELs are 200 mg/kg/day
based on reduced body weights, body weight gain, food consumption, and
an increased incidence of alopecia in dams.  There were no developmental
effects.

ii.  Rabbit developmental.  In the rabbit developmental toxicity study,
gavage doses of 0, 25, 50, and 100 mg/kg/day were administered.
Maternal toxicity (decreased body weight and body weight gains) were
observed at 50 mg/kg/day and above.  The maternal NOAEL was 25 mg/kg/day
and the developmental NOAEL was 100 mg/kg/day.  There were no
developmental effects.

iii.  Reproduction.  In the rat reproduction study, KT-30 was
administered in the diet at levels of 0, 150, 2,000 and 7,500 ppm for
two generations.  There were no adverse effects of KT-30 on reproductive
success.  Parental toxicity consisted of clinical signs, inhibition of
body weight gain, reduced food consumption, and macroscopic and
microscopic effects in the kidney.  Reproductive toxicity in the highest
dose consisted of slightly reduced live litter sizes in the F2 litters.
In the pups, body weights and survival (late lactation period) were
reduced and at the high dose, pup mortality and emaciation were
increased.  The parental, pup and reproductive NOAELs were 150 ppm, 150
ppm and 2,000 ppm, respectively.>

<	4. Subchronic toxicity. Subchronic studies have been conducted with
KT-30 in the rat, mouse and dog.

i.  Rats.  KT-30 Technical was tested in rats in a 3-month study at
dietary levels of 0, 200, 1,000 and 5,000 ppm.  Observations were
decreased body weight, body weight gain and food efficiency.  The NOAEL
for males was 5,000 ppm (400 mg/kg/day) and in females was 1,000 ppm (84
mg/kg/day).

ii.  Mice.  A 13-week dietary toxicity study in mice was conducted at
dose levels of 0, 900, 1,800, 3,500 and 7,000 ppm.  Effects included
decreased body weight and food consumption, increased relative liver
weight and lymphocytic cell infiltration in the kidneys.  The NOAEL was
3,500 ppm (609 mg/kg/day in males and 788 mg/kg/day in females).

iii. Dogs.  A 13-week dietary toxicity study was conducted in beagle
dogs at dose levels of 0, 50, 500 and 5,000 ppm.  Effects included
decreased body weight gain, food consumption, and food efficiency.  The
NOAEL for both sexes was 500 ppm (16.8 mg/kg/day in males and 19.1
mg/kg/day in females).]

>

<	5. Chronic toxicity. KT-30 has been tested in chronic studies with
rats, mice and dogs.

i.  Rats.  In a 104-week combined chronic/oncogenicity study in rats,
KT-30 was administered in the diet at dose levels of 0, 150, 2,000 and
7,500 ppm.  Findings were decreased body weight and body
histopathological effects in the kidney.  No oncogenicity was found.
The NOAEL for this study was 150 ppm (7 mg/kg/day in males and 9
mg/kg/day in females).

Mice.  KT-30 was administered in the diet to mice for 78-weeks at dose

 levels of 0, 10, and 1,000 mg/kg/day.  Observations were decreased body
weight,  body weight gain, food consumption, increased kidney weights,
and incidence of chronic kidney histopathological lesions.  The NOAEL
for both sexes was 10 mg/kg/day.

iii.  Dogs.  In a 12-month study, KT-30 was administered in the diet
given to dogs at dose levels of 0, 150, 3,000 and 7,500 ppm.
Observations included reduced body weight, body weight gain, food
consumption, and various hematology changes.  The NOAEL for both sexes
was 3,000 ppm (87 mg/kg/day in males and 91 mg/kg/day in females).

iv.  Carcinogenicity.  KT-30 did not produce carcinogenicity in chronic
studies with rats or mice.  The oncogenicity classification of KT-30
will be “E” (no evidence of carcinogenicity for humans). >

<	6. Animal metabolism. A rat metabolism study indicated that KT-30 is
almost completely absorbed and most of the 14C-forchlorfenuron-derived
radioactivity is rapidly eliminated primarily via the urine.  The
majority of the metabolism of KT-30 was via hydroxylation of the phenyl
ring.  The sulfate conjugate of hydroxyl KT-30 was the major metabolite
excreted in the urine, accounting for as much as approximately 96% of
the urinary radioactivity.  Tissue residues accounted for less than 1%
of the administered dose at 168 hours post-dosing.>

<	7. Metabolite toxicology.  Metabolites occur at levels below 0.1 ppm
and, therefore, are below levels required to be assayed in animal
testing.>

<	8. Endocrine disruption.  No special studies to investigate the
potential for endocrine effects of KT-30 have been performed.  However,
as summarized above, a large and detailed toxicology data base exists
for the compound including studies in all required categories.  These
studies include acute, sub-chronic, chronic, developmental, and
reproductive toxicology studies, including detailed histology and
histopathology of numerous tissues, including endocrine organs,
following repeated or long-term exposures.  These studies are considered
capable of revealing endocrine effects.  The results of all of these
studies show no evidence of any endocrine-mediated effects and no
pathology of the endocrine organs.  Consequently, it is concluded that
KT-30 does not possess estrogenic or endocrine disrupting properties.>

<C. Aggregate Exposure>

<	1. Dietary exposure. The dietary exposure assessment was conducted by
Environs for foods containing forchlorfenuron: CAS Number: 68157-60-8
(KT-30).>

<	i. Food. Reference is made to a document that shows a Dietary Exposure
Assessment that was conducted for KIM-C1 by ENVIORNS, looking at a
number of crops, one of which was blueberries.  This work was done for
KIM-C1 in connection with an EUP that KIM-C1 obtained for development of
efficacy data on the crops listed below.  A reference dose (RfD) was
calculated using the most sensitive species data available from the
toxicological testing.  The calculated RfD of 0.08 mg/kg/day was used to
calculate the impact of the estimated residue levels with results from
treatment of the total acreage of all crops included in the EUP.  Making
the same risk exposure calculations, it was shown that there was no
significant impact on reducing the RfD by using almonds, apples,
blueberries, figs, grapes, kiwifruit, pears, and plums in aggregate.
Combining the RfD consumption from the group of crops with that of
apples would exceed 1% of the reference dose only slightly if the total
acreage of all crops were treated.  (This study is referenced in the
Notice of Filing published in EPA: Federal Register: Forchlorfenuron;
Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition… [FR. DOC 04-7651 Filed
4-6-04].>

<	ii. Drinking Water. The very low use rate of KT-30, i.e., 10 grams
active ingredient (a.i.) or less per acre if used constantly for 20
years would apply less than a pound of KT-30 per acre during that 20
year period.  Computer modeling, using the conservative pesticide root
zone model (PRZM) means of analysis has shown that no KT-30 would reach
ground water, even in sandy loam soils.  The results of this risk
analysis supported an unambiguous conclusion of “essentially zero risk
to ground water” even under reasonable worst-case assumptions.
Concentrations are not predicted to exceed 15 to 20 ppb of KT-30 in the
soil in the upper soil horizons, even following yearly applications for
as long as 30 years.  No secondary exposure is anticipated as a result
of contamination of drinking water.>

<	2. Non-dietary exposure. No non-dietary exposure is expected since
KT-30 is not anticipated to be found in the drinking water.  This
material does not translocate in plants and thus secondary exposure
through plants growing in soil receiving KT-30 is not anticipated.  The
extremely low application rates will not result in significant buildup
in the environment.  Data indicate that any parent material of KT-30
left in the soil will be strongly bound to soil particles and will not
move.>

<D. Cumulative Effects>

<	There are no cumulative effects expected since KT-30 is not taken up
by plants from the soil.  It slowly degrades to mineral end points.  Its
low use rates and infrequent applications are not conducive to buildup
in the environment.>

<E. Safety Determination>

<	1. U.S. population. As pointed out above in dietary exposure-food, the
percentage of the RfD consumed by treating the subject crop represents
only 1% of the estimated safe level for the most sensitive segment of
the population, non-nursing infants.>

<	2. Infants and children. No developmental, reproductive or fetotoxic
effects have been associated with KT-30.  The calculation of safety
margins with respect to these segments of the population were taken into
consideration in the TMRC estimates with respect to the risk associated
with the percentage of the reference dose being consumed.>

<F. International Tolerances>

<	There is no Codex maximum residue level established for KT-30.
However, KT-30 is registered for use on grapes and kiwifruit in the
U.S., and on other crops in Japan, Chile, Italy, Mexico, and South
Africa. >


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on August 6, 2003

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-1999-6206

________________________________________________________________________
______________

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    US Airways, Inc.          filed   7/24/03  to:

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

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between a point or points in the United States and Manchester, United
Kingdom.

Applicant rep:   Joel Stephen Burton,<PHONE_NUMBER>   DOT Analyst:
Gerald Caolo,<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted

The above action was effective when taken:   August 6, 2003, through
August 6, 2005

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 United Kingdom.

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)

_________________________

Remarks:  We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of
the 15-day answer period with the consent of all parties served.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

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

(See Reverse Side)

2

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:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of 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 the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations and with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security;1 and

(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.

									             06/2003

 US Airways currently uses this authority to operate daily service
between Philadelphia and Manchester.

1 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, inform
its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI 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.


[Federal Register: August 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 152)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 45609-45610]
[DOCID:fr06au08-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 388

[Docket No. RM06-23-000]

Critical Energy Information Infrastructure

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the final regulations
(Docket No. RM06-23-000) which were published in the Federal Register
of Wednesday, November 14, 2007. The final rule document amended
regulations for gaining access to critical energy infrastructure
information (CEII).

DATES: Effective Date: August 6, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey H. Kaplan, Office of the
General Counsel, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 202-502-
8305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final regulations that are the subject of these corrections
amended 18 CFR 388.109 and affect the Commission's fees for records
requests.

Need for Correction

    As published, the final regulations contained errors which involved
the removal of subparagraphs from 18 CFR 388.109(b). These
subparagraphs contain critical information addressing fees for records
requests.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 388

    Confidential business information, Freedom of information.

0
Accordingly, 18 CFR part 388 is corrected by making the following
correcting amendment:

PART 388--INFORMATION AND REQUESTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 388 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301-305, 551, 552 (as amended), 553-557, 41
U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
2. Section 388.109(b) is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),
(b)(3), (b)(4) and (b)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  388.109  Fees for record requests.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Definitions: For the purpose of paragraph (b) of this section.
    (i) Commercial use request means a request from or on behalf of one
who seeks information for a use or purpose that furthers commercial
trade, or profit interests as these phrases are commonly known or have
been interpreted by the courts in the context of the Freedom of
Information Act.
    (ii) Educational institution refers to a preschool, a public or
private elementary or secondary school, an institution of graduate
higher education, an institution of undergraduate higher education, an
institution of professional education, and an institution of vocational
education, which operates a program of scholarly research.
    (iii) Noncommercial scientific institution refers to an
installation that is not operated on a commercial basis and which is
operated solely for the purpose of conducting scientific research the
results of which are not intended to promote any particular product or
industry.
    (iv) Representatives of the news media refers to any person
actively gathering news for an entity that is organized and operated to
publish or broadcast news to the public. The term news means
information that is about current events that would be of current
interest to the public. Examples of news media entities include
television or radio stations broadcasting to the public at large, and
publishers of periodicals (but only in those instances when the
periodicals can qualify as disseminations of ``news'') who make their
products available for purchase or subscription by the general public.
These examples are not intended to be all-inclusive. Moreover, as
traditional methods of news delivery evolve (e.g. electronic
dissemination of newspapers through telecommunication services), such
alternative media may be included in this category. A freelance
journalist may be regarded as working for a news organization if the
journalist can demonstrate a solid basis for expecting publication
through that organization, even though the journalist is not actually
employed by the news organization. A publication contract would be the
clearest proof, but the Commission may also look to the past
publication record of a requester in making this determination.
    (2) Fees. (i) If documents are requested for commercial use, the
Commission will charge the employee's hourly pay rate plus 16% for
benefits for document search time and for document review time, and 15
cents per page for duplication. Commercial use requests are not
entitled to two hours of free search time or 100 free pages of
reproduction of documents.
    (ii) If documents are not sought for commercial use and the request
is made by an educational or non-commercial scientific institution,
whose purpose is scholarly or scientific research, or a representative
of the news media, the Commission will charge 15 cents per page for
duplication. There is no charge for the first 100 pages.
    (iii) For a request not described in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) or (ii)
of this section, the Commission will charge the employees hourly pay
rate plus 16 percent for benefits for document search and 15 cents per
page for duplication. There is no charge for the first 100 pages of
reproduction and the first two hours of search time will be furnished
without charge.
    (iv) The Director, Office of External Affairs, will normally
provide documents by regular mail, with postage prepaid by the
Commission. However, the requester may authorize special delivery, such
as express mail, at the requester's own expense.
    (v) The Commission, or its designee, may establish minimum fees
below which no charges will be collected, if it determines that the
costs of routine collection and processing of the fees are likely to
equal or exceed the amount of the fees. If total fees assessed by
Commission staff for a Freedom of Information Act request are less than
the appropriate threshold, the Commission may not charge the
requesters.

    (vi) Payment of fees must be by check or money order made payable
to the U.S. Treasury.
    (vii) Requesters may not file multiple requests at the same time,
each seeking portions of a document or documents, solely in order to
avoid payment of fees. When the Commission reasonably believes that a
requester, or a group of requesters acting in concert, is attempting to
break a request down into a series of requests for the purpose of
evading assessment of fees, or otherwise reasonably believes that two
or more requests constitute a single request, the Commission may
aggregate any such requests accordingly. The Commission will not
aggregate multiple requests on unrelated subjects from a requester.
Aggregated requests may qualify for an extension of time under Sec.
388.110(b).
    (3) Fees for unsuccessful search. The Commission may assess charges
for time spent searching, even if it fails to locate the records, or if
records located are determined to be exempt from disclosure. If the
Commission estimates that search charges are likely to exceed $25, it
will notify the requester of the estimated amount of search fees,
unless the requester has indicated in advance willingness to to pay
fees as high as those anticipated. The requester can meet with
Commission personnel with the object of reformulating the request to
meet his or her needs at a lower cost.
    (4) Interest--notice and rate. The Commission will assess interest
charges on an unpaid bill starting on the 31st day following the day on
which the billing was sent. Interest will be at the rate prescribed in
31 U.S.C. 3717 and will accrue from the date of the billing.
    (5) Advance payments. The Commission will require a requester to
make an advance payment, i.e., payments before work is commenced or
continued on a request, if:
    (i) The Commission estimates or determines that allowable charges
that a requester may be required to pay are likely to exceed $250. The
Commission will notify the requester of the estimated cost and either
require satisfactory assurance of full payment where the requester has
a history of prompt payment of fees, or require advance payment of
charges if a requester has no history of payment; or
    (ii) A requester has previously failed to pay a fee charged in a
timely fashion. The Commission will require the requester to pay the
full amount owed plus any applicable interest, and to make an advance
payment of the full amount of the estimated fee before the Commission
will begin to process a new request or a pending request from that
requester. When the Commission requires advance payment or an agreement
to pay under this paragraph, or under Sec.  388.108(a)(5), the
administrative time limits prescribed in this part will begin only
after the Commission has received the required payments, or agreements.
* * * * *

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-18040 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 163 (Thursday, August 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47721-47723]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0107; Notice 2]

Notice of Denial of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming
Model Year 2014-2018 Chevrolet Cheyenne Trucks Are Eligible for
Importation

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for determination of import eligibility.

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

SUMMARY: Diversified Vehicle Services, Inc. (DVS or Petitioner) has
petitioned NHTSA for a decision that model year (MY) 2014-2018
Chevrolet Cheyenne Trucks (TKs), which were not originally manufactured
to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards
(FMVSS), are eligible for importation into the United States. In its
petition, DVS claims that these vehicles are eligible for import
because they are substantially similar to Chevrolet Silverado TKs
originally manufactured for sale in the United States and certified by
their manufacturer as complying with all applicable FMVSS, and because
they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
This document announces the denial of DVS's petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Mazurowski, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    A motor vehicle that was not originally manufactured to conform to
all applicable FMVSS may be eligible for import into the United States
if NHTSA determines that the motor vehicle is: (1) Substantially
similar to a motor vehicle originally manufactured for importation into
and certified for sale in the United States, (2) of the same model year
as the model of the motor

vehicle to which it is being compared, and (3) capable of being readily
altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS. See 49 U.S.C.
30141(a)(1)(A).\1\ If NHTSA determines that a nonconforming vehicle is
import eligible, any such nonconforming vehicle imported into the
United States must be modified into conformance and certified as
conforming by a registered importer before it is sold or otherwise
released from the custody of the registered importer. 49 U.S.C.
30146(a)(1); 49 CFR 592.6.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This provision was codified at 15 U.S.C. 1397(c)(3)(A) prior
to the 1994 recodification of the transportation laws.
    \2\ A registered importer is an importer that has registered
with NHTSA under 49 CFR part 592 and is therefore authorized to
modify and then certify imported vehicles as compliant with all
applicable FMVSS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitions for import eligibility decisions may be submitted by
either manufacturers or registered importers and must comply with the
requirements set forth in 49 CFR 593.6. A petition based on the
existence of a substantially similar conforming vehicle manufactured
for import and certified for sale in the United States must include,
among other things, ``[d]ata, views and arguments demonstrating that
the vehicle [which is the subject of the petition] is substantially
similar to the vehicle identified by the petitioner'' as a comparison
vehicle. Id. Sec.  593.6(a)(4). The petition also must include, with
respect to each of the FMVSS applicable to the comparison vehicle,
``data, views, and arguments demonstrating that the vehicle [which is
the subject of the petition] either was originally manufactured to
conform to such standard, or is capable of being readily modified to
conform to such standard.'' Id. Sec.  593.6(a)(4).
    As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice of each
petition that it receives in the Federal Register and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation based on the petition, its review of any
comments received, and the agency's own analysis. NHTSA will grant a
petition for import eligibility if it ``determines that the petition
clearly demonstrates that the vehicle model is eligible for
importation'' and will deny the petition if it ``determines that the
petition does not clearly demonstrate that the vehicle model is
eligible for importation.'' 49 CFR 593.7(e)-(f). NHTSA then publishes
its decision and the reasons for it in the Federal Register. Id.

II. Summary of Petition

    DVS, a registered importer located in Indianapolis, Indiana, has
petitioned NHTSA to decide whether nonconforming MY 2014-2018 Chevrolet
Cheyenne TKs (the Subject Vehicles) are eligible for importation into
the United States. Petitioner contends the Subject Vehicles are
substantially similar to MY 2014-2018 Chevrolet Silverado TKs (the
Comparison Vehicles) sold in the United States and certified by their
manufacturer as conforming to all applicable FMVSS. The Chevrolet
Cheyenne is a pick-up truck manufactured by General Motors (GM) for
sale in Mexico. GM does not sell Cheyenne pick-up trucks in the United
States.
    DVS's petition requests an import eligibility decision for five
separate model years (MY 2014-2018) of the Subject Vehicles, but it
does not distinguish between these different model years, does not
state that it included a vehicle from each of these five model years in
its analysis, and does not state that it compared each model year of
the Subject Vehicles to the same model year of the Comparison
vehicles.\3\ The petition includes no representations and states no
factual basis for any representations regarding the similarity of the
different model years of either the Subject Vehicles or the Comparison
Vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NHTSA previously granted DVS permission to temporarily
import multiple 2015 Chevrolet Cheyenne vehicles for purposes of
preparing its petition. See 49 CFR 571.5(l). Nothing in DVS's
petition suggests that its analysis involves any model year of the
Subject Vehicles other than these 2015 Chevrolet Cheyenne vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner nonetheless asserts it compared the Subject Vehicles to
the Comparison Vehicles and ``believe[s]'' they are substantially
similar in that the Subject Vehicles comply with ``the great majority
of the standards'' to which the Comparison Vehicles are certified.
Petitioner states that it further ``believe[s]'' that the Subject
Vehicles are capable of being readily modified to conform to all
remaining standards.'' Petitioner states that these beliefs are ``based
on information obtained during a detailed inspection of the [Subject
Vehicles] for which this determination is sought'' and that it
``reviewed all available parts, service, and sales literature in order
to thoroughly compare the two vehicles.'' Petitioner provides no
details regarding its ``detailed inspection'' and does not identify any
of the ``parts, service, and sales literature'' it reviewed.
    Specifically, Petitioner claims that, based on this comparison, it
determined that the Subject Vehicles, as originally manufactured,
conform to: FMVSS Nos. 102, Transmission Shift Position Sequence,
Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect; 103, Windshield
Defrosting and Defogging Systems; 104, Windshield Wiping and Washing
Systems; 106, Brake Hoses; FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and
Associated Equipment; FMVSS No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims; 111,
Rearview Mirrors; 113, Hood Latch System; 114, Theft Protection and
Rollaway Prevention; 116, Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids; 118, Power-
Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel System; 119, New Pneumatic
Tires; 124, Accelerator Control Systems; 126, Electronic Stability
Control Systems; 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; 138, Tire Pressure
Monitoring Systems; 201, Occupant Protection in Interior Impact; 202,
Head Restraints; 203, Impact Protection for Driver from Steering
Control; 204, Steering Control Rearward Displacement; 205, Glazing
Materials; 206, Door Locks and Door Retention Components; 207, Seating
Systems; 208, Occupant Crash Protection; 209, Seat Belt Assemblies;
210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages; 212, Windshield Mounting; 213,
Child Restraint Systems; 214, Side Impact Resistance; 216, Roof Crush
Resistance; 219, Windshield Zone Intrusion; 301, Fuel System Integrity;
and 302, Flammability of Interior Materials. Petitioner also states the
Subject Vehicles comply with 49 CFR part 541, Anti-Theft/Parts Marking
Requirements; and 49 CFR part 565, VIN Requirements.
    Petitioner states that the Subject Vehicles, as built, are
noncompliant with FMVSS No. 101, Controls and Displays, but contends
that they can readily be conformed to this standard with replacing the
faceplate for the instrument cluster with one that includes the word
``BRAKE.'' Petitioner additionally states that a reference and
certification label will be added to the left front door post area to
meet the requirements of 49 CFR part 567, Certification Requirements.
Petitioner states that the Subject Vehicles have a gross vehicle weight
rating ``GVWR range of 6,800-7,200 lbs.,'' but provides no information
regarding the GVWR of the Comparison Vehicles, as required by the
applicable regulations. See 49 CFR 593.6(a)(1).

III. Public Comments

    A Notice of Receipt of DVS's Petition was published in the Federal
Register for public comment for a period of 30 days. 85 FR 81268 (Dec.
15, 2020). One public comment was submitted in response to the Notice
of Receipt. GM,

the manufacturer of both the Subject Vehicles and the Comparison
Vehicles, commented that;

    GM does not recommend that these vehicles be granted eligibility
for importation into the United States. The owners of these vehicles
will find it very difficult or impossible to get safety-critical
repairs in the US.

GM further explained in its comment that its dealers in the US are only
authorized to service US-designated vehicles under the terms of their
existing franchise agreements, and that the Vehicle Identification
Number (VIN) will not be recognized by the GM Multiple Diagnostic
Interface (MDI) tool used at a US GM dealership.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A copy of the comment submitted by GM may be found at docket
ID: NHTSA-2020-0107-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. NHTSA's Analysis

    A petition to determine import eligibility must include all
information required under the applicable authorities and must also
include data, views, and arguments demonstrating the conclusions
advanced by the petition. DVS's petition fails to meet these
requirements because it does not include sufficient supporting
information and relies almost exclusively on unsupported conclusory
allegations. The petition fails to distinguish between five different
model years of the Subject Vehicles and Comparison Vehicles or even
confirm that DVS compared vehicles of the same model year. See 49
U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A)(iii). The petition also fails to provide ``the
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of '' the Comparison Vehicles. 49
CFR 593.6(a)(1). The petition does not provide adequate ``[d]ata, views
and arguments demonstrating'' that the Comparison Vehicles are
``substantially similar'' to the Subject Vehicles. Id. Sec.
593.6(a)(4). The petition also fails to provide, ``[w]ith respect to
each Federal motor vehicle safety standard'' applicable to the
Comparison Vehicles, ``data, views, and arguments demonstrating'' that
the Subject Vehicles either were ``originally manufactured to conform
to such standard, or [are] capable of being readily modified to conform
to such standard.'' Id. Sec.  593.6(a)(5).
    As the basis for its assertion that the Subject Vehicles are
compliant with the FMVSS identified above, Petitioner simply repeats
the statement that the ``MX-Cheyenne complies with the requirements of
this standard and is identical to the U.S.-vehicle with respect to
those requirements'' following a reference to each of these standards.
Petitioner offers no factual or analytical support for any of these
conclusory assertions. For two of the standards (FMVSS No. 138 (tire
pressure monitoring systems) and FMVSS No. 208 (occupant crash
protection)), Petitioner identifies various components by part number
and states that the Subject Vehicles and the Comparison Vehicles employ
identical components. Petitioner did not submit any parts catalogs or
any other technical resource for any model year of either the Subject
Vehicles or the Comparison Vehicles to verify these assertions and
fails to explain why the usage of identical parts would demonstrate
that the Subject Vehicles, as built, were compliant with these
standards. For FMVSS No. 214 (side impact resistance), Petitioner
states that it ``removed the interior trim on a door of [a Subject
Vehicle] and confirm[ed] that the vehicle is originally equipped with
door beams to comply with the requirements of this standard.'' This
level of examination and analysis does not demonstrate compliance for
the Subject Vehicles because meeting the performance requirements of
FMVSS No. 214 requires far more than the existence of door beams. See
49 CFR 571.214.
    As part of its analysis of DVS's petition, NHTSA requested
additional information from GM, the manufacturer of both the Subject
Vehicles and the Comparison Vehicles.\5\ In response to NHTSA's
question regarding the compliance of the Subject Vehicles with FMVSS
requirements, GM explained that the Subject Vehicles, as built, fail to
conform with the speedometer and odometer display requirements in FMVSS
No. 101 (controls and displays), the tire placard requirements in FMVSS
No. 110 (tires and rims), the language visibility requirements of FMVSS
No. 135 (brake systems), and the passenger air bag telltale and visor
warning requirements in FMVSS No. 208 (occupant crash protection). This
information directly contradicts Petitioner's assertion that the
Subject Vehicles, as built, were compliant with these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A copy of GM's response may be found at docket ID: NHTSA-
2020-0107-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In regard to the Subject Vehicles, GM also explained that tire
pressure monitoring systems (TPMS) are not required in Mexico, and each
imported vehicle would therefore have to be checked to verify that it
had an optional FMVSS No. 138 compliant TPMS installed at the time of
manufacture. This information directly contradicts Petitioner's
assertion that all Subject Vehicles, as built, are equipped with a
FMVSS No. 138 compliant TPMS. Finally, GM explained that there is a
unique engine and manual transmission combination available for the
Subject Vehicles in Mexico, and that GM has no documentation
demonstrating compliance of vehicles so equipped with FMVSS No. 102
(transmission shift position sequence), FMVSS No. 114 (rollaway
prevention), and FMVSS No. 124 (accelerator control). Petitioner
provided no information regarding this particular engine and
transmission combination, no basis for identifying its presence or
absence in the Subject Vehicles, and no information regarding whether
Subject Vehicles with this unique engine and transmission combination
could be modified to conform with the relevant FMVSS.

V. NHTSA's Decision

    Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the Subject Vehicles are
substantially similar to the Comparison Vehicles, failed to demonstrate
that its comparison of the Subject Vehicles to the Comparison Vehicles
involved vehicles of the same model year, and failed to demonstrate
that the Subject Vehicles are either compliant with or capable of being
readily altered to comply with all applicable FMVSS. The petition is
therefore denied. Pursuant to 49 CFR 593.7(e), NHTSA will not consider
a new petition covering the models that are the subject of this
decision until at least three months from the date of this notice of
denial.

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Joseph Kolly,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2021-18357 Filed 8-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14101-14105]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05350]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and
Disapprovals

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC Approvals and Disapprovals. In December
2013, there were three applications approved. This notice also includes
information on eight applications, two approved in November 2012, one
approved in August 2013, and five approved in November 2013,
inadvertently left off the November 2012, August 2013, and November
2013 notices, respectively. Additionally, four approved amendments to
previously approved applications are listed.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly notice, as appropriate, of PFC
approvals and disapprovals under the provisions of the Aviation Safety
and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. 101-508) and Part 158 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). This notice is
published pursuant to paragraph d of Sec.  158.29.

PFC Applications Approved

    PUBLIC AGENCY: City of Chicago Department of Aviation, Chicago,
Illinois.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-26-C-00-ORD.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $2,484,000.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: November 1, 2038.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: December 1, 2038.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: Air taxi.
    DETERMINATION: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Chicago O'Hare International Airport.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND USE:
O'Hare School sound insulation program--noise abatement modifications,
St. Tarcissus School.
    DECISION DATE: November 2, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Hanson, Chicago Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: City of Atlanta Department of Aviation, Atlanta,
Georgia.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 12-14-C-00-ATL.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $24,355,000.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2023.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: December 1, 2023.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: Air taxi/
commercial operators when enplaning revenue passengers in limited,
irregular, special service air taxi/commercial operations such as air
ambulance services, student instruction, and non-stop sightseeing
flights, that begin and end at the airport and are concluded within a
25-mile radius of the airport.
    DETERMINATION: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Hartsfield--Jackson Atlanta International Airport.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND

USE AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: North deicing facility. Runway 10/28 bridge
and taxiway SG bridge deck visual enhancements.
    DECISION DATE: November 29, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Seritt, Atlanta Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: Broward County Aviation Department, Dania Beach,
Florida.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-13-C-00-FLL.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $50,899,175.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2031.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: February 1, 2032.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: Non-scheduled/
on-demand air carriers.
    DETERMINATION: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND USE AT A
$3.00 PFC LEVEL:
    Loading bridges, phase II.
    Rehabilitation of runway 9L/27R (design only).
    Aircraft rescue and firefighting truck 210 replacement.
    Disabled passenger lift replacement.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PARTIALLY APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND
USE AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: In-line explosives detection system baggage
system.
    DETERMINATION: Partially approved for collection and use. In
accordance with Sec.  158.15(b)(6), the duty free concession storage
area in Terminal 2 is not PFC eligible. Further, in accordance with
Sec.  158.15(b)(2), the air carrier operations space is not PFC
eligible. However, according to the PFC application, the costs of these
relocations are not included in the PFC amount requested for this
project so the PFC amount of the project is not being reduced as a
result of the ineligible areas. In addition, the FAA found a
mathematical error in the estimate for the baggage system in Terminal 4
and is reducing the approved PFC amount accordingly.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PARTIALLY APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND
USE AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Hardstand operation equipment.
    DETERMINATION: Partially approved for collection and use. In
accordance with Sec.  158.15(b)(2), the air stair component is not PFC
eligible.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWN PROJECT: Noise monitors.
    DATE OF WITHDRAWAL: August 16, 2013.
    DECISION DATE: August 26, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Moore, Orlando Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>
    PUBLIC AGENCY: State of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-05-C-00-HNL.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $301,094,938.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: July 1, 2026.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: None.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT HONOLULU
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (HNL) AND USE AT HNL AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Runway
08R/26L pavement rehabilitation.
    Runway 04R/22L pavement rehabilitation.
    Install runway 04L/22R lighting system.
    Loading bridge replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    Construct new Mauka concourse.
    Aircraft parking apron--Mauka concourse.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT HNL AND
USE AT HNL AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL:
    Second level roadway improvements--Overseas Terminal.
    Shuttle bus stations between gates 6 and 62--terminal improvements.
    Roof canopy replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT HNL AND
USE AT HILO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ITO) AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct
aircraft rescue and firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT HNL AND
USE AT KONA INTERNATIONAL AT KEAHOLE AIRPORT (KOA) AT A $4.50 PFC
LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT HNL FOR
FUTURE USE AT KAHULUI AIRPORT (OGG) AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Land
acquisition.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT HNL AND USE
AT HNL, ITO, KOA, OGG, AND LIHUE AIRPORT (LIH) AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL:
PFC administrative costs.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWN PROJECTS: Taxiway Z structural
improvements at HNL.
    Runway 08L/26R widening at HNL.
    DATE OF WITHDRAWAL: July 19, 2013/
    DECISION DATE: November 22, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Wong, Honolulu Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: State of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-05-C-00-OGG.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $85,385,132.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: July 1, 2026.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: None.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT OGG AND
USE AT HNL AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Runway 08R/26L pavement
rehabilitation.
    Runway 04R/22L pavement rehabilitation.
    Install runway 04L/22R lighting system.
    Loading bridge replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    Construct new Mauka concourse.
    Aircraft parking apron--Mauka concourse.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT OGG AND
USE AT HNL AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Second level roadway improvements--
Overseas Terminal.
    Shuttle bus stations between gates 6 and 62--terminal improvements.
    Roof canopy replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT OGG AND
USE AT ITO AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.

    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT OGG AND
USE AT KOA AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT OGG FOR
FUTURE USE AT OGG AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Land acquisition.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT OGG AND USE
AT HNL, ITO, KOA, OGG, AND LIH AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: PFC administrative
costs.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWN PROJECTS: Taxiway Z structural
improvements at HNL.
    Runway 08L/26R widening at HNL.
    DATE OF WITHDRAWAL: July 19, 2013/
    DECISION DATE: November 22, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Wong, Honolulu Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: State of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-05-C-00-KOA.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $26,963,726.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: July 1, 2026.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: None.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT KOA AND
USE AT HNL AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Runway 08R/26L pavement
rehabilitation.
    Runway 04R/22L pavement rehabilitation.
    Install runway 04L/22R lighting system.
    Loading bridge replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    Construct new Mauka concourse.
    Aircraft parking apron--Mauka concourse.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT KOA AND
USE AT HNL AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Second level roadway improvements--
Overseas Terminal.
    Shuttle bus stations between gates 6 and 62--terminal improvements.
    Roof canopy replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT KOA AND
USE AT ITO AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT KOA AND
USE AT KOA AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT KOA FOR
FUTURE USE AT OGG AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Land acquisition.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT KOA AND USE
AT HNL, ITO, KOA, OGG, AND LIH AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: PFC administrative
costs.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWN PROJECTS: Taxiway Z structural
improvements at HNL.
    Runway 08L/26R widening at HNL.
    DATE OF WITHDRAWAL: July 19, 2013/
    DECISION DATE: November 22, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Wong, Honolulu Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: State of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-05-C-00-LIH.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $17,975,817.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: July 1, 2026.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: None.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT LIH AND
USE AT HNL AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Runway 08R/26L pavement
rehabilitation.
    Runway 04R/22L pavement rehabilitation.
    Install runway 04L/22R lighting system.
    Loading bridge replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    Construct new Mauka concourse.
    Aircraft parking apron--Mauka concourse.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT LIH AND
USE AT HNL AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Second level roadway improvements--
Overseas Terminal.
    Shuttle bus stations between gates 6 and 62--terminal improvements.
    Roof canopy replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT LIH AND
USE AT ITO AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT LIH AND
USE AT KOA AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT LIH FOR
FUTURE USE AT OGG AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Land acquisition.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT LIH AND USE
AT HNL, ITO, KOA, OGG, AND LIH AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: PFC administrative
costs.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWN PROJECTS: Taxiway Z structural
improvements at HNL.
    Runway 08L/26R widening at HNL.
    DATE OF WITHDRAWAL: July 19, 2013/
    DECISION DATE: November 22, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Wong, Honolulu Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: State of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 13-03-C-00-ITO.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $17,975,817.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: July 1, 2026.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: None.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT ITO AND
USE AT HNL AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Runway 08R/26L pavement
rehabilitation.
    Runway 04R/22L pavement rehabilitation.
    Install runway 04L/22R lighting system.
    Loading bridge replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    Construct new Mauka concourse.
    Aircraft parking apron--Mauka concourse.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT ITO AND
USE AT HNL AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Second level roadway improvements--
Overseas Terminal.
    Shuttle bus stations between gates 6 and 62--terminal improvements.

    Roof canopy replacement--Overseas Terminal.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT ITO AND
USE AT ITO AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT ITO AND
USE AT KOA AT A $4.50 PFC LEVEL: Construct aircraft rescue and
firefighting facility.
    Install access control and closed circuit television.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT ITO FOR
FUTURE USE AT OGG AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: Land acquisition.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AT ITO AND USE
AT HNL, ITO, KOA, OGG, AND LIH AT A $3.00 PFC LEVEL: PFC administrative
costs.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWN PROJECTS: Taxiway Z structural
improvements at HNL.
    Runway 08L/26R widening at HNL.
    DATE OF WITHDRAWAL: July 19, 2013/
    DECISION DATE: November 22, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Wong, Honolulu Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: Monterey Peninsula Airport District, Monterey,
California.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 14-19-C-00-MRY.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $925,000.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: May 1, 2015.
    CLASSES OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S:
    (1) Non-scheduled/on-demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31;
and (2) commuters or small certificated air carriers filing Department
of Transportation (DOT) Form T-100.
    DETERMINATION: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that each of the
approved classes accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual
enplanements at Monterey Peninsula Airport.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND USE:
Acquire one standard police vehicle--security improvement.
    Improve runway safety area, runway 10R/28L--phase 4.
    DECISION DATE: December 3, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil Kumar, San Francisco Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: Jackson County Airport Authority, Medford, Oregon.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 14-11-C-00-MFR.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $1,082,418.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: September 1, 2025.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: August 1, 2026.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: Air taxi/
commercial operators when enplaning revenue passengers in limited,
irregular, special service air taxi/commercial operations such as air
ambulance services, student instruction, and non-stop sightseeing
flights, that begin and end at the airport and are concluded within a
25-mile radius of the airport.
    DETERMINATION: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Rogue Valley International--Medford Airport.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND USE:
    Rehabilitate taxiway C design.
    Rehabilitate taxiway B/C construction.
    Snow removal equipment (rotary plow).
    Rehabilitate taxilanes.
    Rehabilitate runway 14/32.
    Relocate perimeter fencing.
    PFC administration.
    DECISION DATE: December 10, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trang Tran, Seattle Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PUBLIC AGENCY: County of Delta, Escanaba, Michigan.
    APPLICATION NUMBER: 14-09-C-00-ESC.
    APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC LEVEL: $4.50.
    TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED IN THIS DECISION: $134,671.
    EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 2014.
    ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION DATE: November 1, 2016.
    CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC'S: None.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTS APPROVED FOR COLLECTION AND USE:
Airport layout plan update.
    Runway 9/27 rehabilitation.
    Environmental study.
    Westland mitigation.
    Acquire easements.
    Obstruction removal.
    Construct taxiway lighting.
    Install supplemental wind cone.
    Design and construct snow removal equipment building.
    Design and construct perimeter fence.
    Rehabilitate taxiways.
    Rehabilitate runway 18/36.
    Runway safety improvements, runway 18/36.
    Apron rehabilitation.
    Taxiway B widening and taxiway C rehabilitation.
    DECISION DATE: December 19, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Porter, Detroit Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

                                           Amendments to PFC Approvals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Original         Amended
                                     Amendment       Original         Amended        estimated       estimated
    Amendment No. city, state      approved date   approved net    approved net     charge exp.     charge exp.
                                                    PFC revenue     PFC revenue        date            date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-08-C-02-GCC Gillette, WY.....         12/3/13        $813,164        $793,843        11/01/14        01/01/14
10-04-C-01-CEC Crescent City, CA         12/4/13         $96,221         $75,221        07/01/18        10/01/14
07-04-C-01-RAP Rapid City, SD...         12/4/13      $1,401,088        $728,665        09/01/08        02/01/08
07-05-C-01-LAWTON, OK...........        12/17/13        $357,888        $566,166        04/01/09        04/01/09
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 6, 2014.
Joe Hebert,
Manager, Financial Analysis and Passenger Facility Charge Branch.
[FR Doc. 2014-05350 Filed 3-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P