[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56-60]
[FR Doc No: E9-31103]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0164-200916; FRL-9099-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Tennessee; Redesignation of
the Shelby County, Tennessee Portion of the Memphis, TN-Arkansas 1997
8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve a request submitted on
February 26, 2009, from the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution
Control Division, to redesignate the Tennessee portion of the bi-state
Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (hereafter
referred to as the ``bi-state Memphis Area'') to attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The
bi-state Memphis 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment area is composed
of Shelby County, Tennessee and Crittenden County, Arkansas. EPA's
approval of the redesignation request is based on the determination
that the bi-state Memphis Area has met the criteria for redesignation
to attainment set forth in the Clean Air Act (CAA), including the
determination that the bi-state Memphis Area has attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard. Additionally, EPA is approving a revision to the
Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP) including the 1997 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan for Shelby County, Tennessee that contains the
new 2006, 2009, 2017, and 2021 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs)
for nitrogen oxides (NOX ) and volatile organic compounds
(VOC) for Shelby County, Tennessee. This action also approves the
emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan (under the CAA
section 182(a)(1)). The State of Arkansas has submitted a similar
redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Arkansas portion of
this 1997 8-hour ozone area. EPA is taking action on Arkansas'
redesignation request, emissions inventory and maintenance plan through
a separate rulemaking action. On March 12, 2008, EPA issued a revised
8-hour ozone standard. EPA later announced on September 16, 2009, that
it may reconsider this revised ozone standard. The current action,
however, is being taken to address requirements under the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Requirements for the bi-state Memphis Area under the 2008
standard will be addressed in the future.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective February 3, 2010.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0164. All documents in the docket
are listed on thehttp://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information 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 electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane Spann or Twunjala Bradley,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Jane
Spann may be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic mail
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The telephone number for Ms. Bradley is (404)
562-9352 and the electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Background for the Actions?
II. What Actions Is EPA Taking?
III. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
IV. What Are the Effects of These Actions?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is the Background for the Actions?

    On February 26, 2009, the State of Tennessee, through TDEC,
submitted a request to redesignate Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of
the bi-state Memphis Area) to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, and for EPA approval of the Tennessee SIP revision containing
a maintenance plan for Shelby County, Tennessee. In an action published
on November 19, 2009 (74 FR 59943), EPA proposed to approve the
redesignation of Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of the bi-state
Memphis Area) to attainment. EPA also proposed approval of Tennessee's
plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour NAAQS as a SIP revision, including
the emissions inventory submitted pursuant to CAA section 182(a)(1);
and proposed to approve the NOx and VOC MVEBs for Shelby County that
were contained in the maintenance plan. In the November 19, 2009,
proposed action, EPA also provided information on the status of its
transportation conformity adequacy determination for the Shelby County
NOX and VOC MVEBs. EPA received no comments on the November
19, 2009, proposal. Additionally, in a separate notice, EPA has already
found the NOX and VOC MVEBs, as contained in Tennessee's
maintenance plan for Shelby County, adequate for the purposes of
transportation conformity. The MVEBs included in the maintenance plan
area as follows:

                Table 1--Shelby County VOC and NOX MVEBs
                      [Summer season tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Year                 2006       2009       2017       2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.........................     55.878     55.620     55.173     54.445
VOC.........................     25.216     27.240     18.323     13.817
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's adequacy public comment period on these MVEBs (as contained
in Tennessee's submittal) began on March 12, 2009, and closed on April
13, 2009. No comments were received during EPA's adequacy public
comment period. In a letter dated September 18, 2009, EPA informed the
State of Tennessee of its intent to make an affirmative adequacy
determination for the MVEBs contained in this maintenance plan for
Shelby County, Tennessee. On November 12, 2009 (74 FR 58277), EPA
published a Federal Register notice deeming the MVEBs for Shelby
County, Tennessee adequate for transportation conformity purposes. EPA
provided a separate adequacy posting for the MVEBs in association with
Crittenden County, Arkansas. The Crittenden County, Arkansas MVEBs (in
association with the bi-state Memphis Area) were found adequate through
a separate action published May 7, 2009 (74 FR 21356). As was discussed
in greater detail in the November 19, 2009, proposal, this
redesignation is for the 1997 8-hour ozone designations finalized in
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). Various aspects of EPA's Phase 1 8-hour
ozone implementation rule were challenged in court and on December 22,
2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
(DC Circuit Court) vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-
hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South Coast Air
Quality Management Dist. (SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006).
On June 8, 2007, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the DC
Circuit Court clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with
regard to those parts of the Rule that had been successfully
challenged. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to
classifications for areas currently classified under subpart 2 of title
I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour
attainment dates and the timing for emissions reductions needed for
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, remain effective. The June 8th
decision left intact the Court's rejection of EPA's reasons for
implementing the 8-hour standard in certain nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By limiting the vacatur, the Court let
stand EPA's revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-
backsliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been
successfully challenged. The June 8th decision affirmed the December
22, 2006, decision that EPA had improperly failed to retain measures
required for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding
provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review
requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification;
(2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment
areas; and (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9)
or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the contingency of an area not making
reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or
for failure to attain that NAAQS. The June 8th decision clarified that
the Court's reference to conformity requirements for anti-backsliding
purposes was limited to requiring the continued use of 1-hour MVEBs
until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity
determinations, which is already required under EPA's conformity
regulations. The Court thus clarified that 1-hour conformity
determinations are not required for anti-backsliding purposes.
    With respect to the requirement for transportation conformity under
the 1-hour standard, the Court in its June 8th decision clarified that
for those areas with 1-hour MVEBs in their 1-hour maintenance plans,
anti-backsliding requires only that those 1-hour budgets must be used
for 8-hour conformity determinations until replaced by 8-hour budgets.
To meet this requirement, conformity determinations in such areas must
continue to comply with the applicable requirements of EPA's conformity
regulations at 40 CFR Part 93. Shelby County, Tennessee has 1-hour
budgets and is currently using these budgets to demonstrate
transportation conformity until 1997 8-hour budgets are in place.
    For the above reasons, and those set forth in the November 19,
2009, proposal for the redesignation of Shelby County, Tennessee, EPA
does not believe that the Court's rulings alter any requirements
relevant to this redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation,
and do not prevent EPA from finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes
that the Court's December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions impose
no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of Shelby County,
Tennessee to attainment. Even in light of the Court's decisions,
redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation
provisions of the

CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.

II. What Actions Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is taking final action to approve Tennessee's redesignation
request and to change the legal designation of Shelby County, Tennessee
from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
bi-state Memphis 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment area is composed
of Shelby County, Tennessee and Crittenden County, Arkansas. The
redesignation request, maintenance plan and emission inventory in
association with the Arkansas portion of this Area will be addressed
through a separate, but coordinated action. In this action, EPA is also
approving Tennessee's 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for Shelby
County, Tennessee (such approval being one of the CAA criteria for
redesignation to attainment status), including the emissions inventory
which was submitted pursuant to CAA section 182(a)(1). The maintenance
plan is designed to help keep Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of the
bi-state Memphis Area) in attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
through 2021. These approval actions are based on EPA's determination
that Tennessee has demonstrated that Shelby County, Tennessee has met
the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in the CAA,
including a demonstration that the bi-state Memphis Area has attained
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. EPA's analyses of Tennessee's 1997 8-
hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan are described in
detail in the proposed rule published November 19, 2009 (74 FR 59943).
    Consistent with the CAA, the maintenance plan that EPA is approving
also includes 2006, 2009, 2017, and 2021 MVEBs for NOX and
VOC for Shelby County, Tennessee. In this action, EPA is approving
these NOX and VOC MVEBs for the purposes of transportation
conformity. For regional emission analysis years that involve years
prior to 2017, the new 2009 MVEB are the applicable budgets (for the
purpose of conducting transportation conformity analyses). For regional
emission analysis years that involve years prior to 2021, the new 2017
MVEB are the applicable budgets (for the purpose of conducting
transportation conformity analyses). For regional emission analysis
years that involve the year 2021 and beyond, the applicable budgets,
for the purpose of conducting transportation conformity analyses, are
the new 2021 MVEB. In practical terms, the 2006 MVEBs will not be used
in Shelby County, Tennessee because this action is being taken in 2009,
and there are MVEBs being established for the year 2009 which are
required to be used.

III. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

    EPA has determined that the bi-state Memphis Area has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard and has also determined that Tennessee has
demonstrated that all other criteria for the redesignation of Shelby
County, Tennessee (as part of the bi-state Memphis Area) from
nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS have been
met. See, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is also taking final
action to approve the maintenance plan for Shelby County, Tennessee as
meeting the requirements of sections 175A and 107(d) of the CAA, and
the emissions inventory as meeting the requirements of section
182(a)(1) of the CAA. Furthermore, EPA is approving the new
NOX and VOC MVEBs for the years 2006, 2009, 2017, and 2021
contained in Tennessee's maintenance plan for Shelby County because
these MVEBs are consistent with maintenance for the bi-state Memphis
Area. In the November 19, 2009, proposal to redesignate Shelby County,
Tennessee (as part of the bi-state Memphis Area), EPA described the
applicable criteria for redesignation to attainment and its analysis of
how those criteria have been met. The rationale for EPA's findings and
actions is set forth in the proposed rulemaking and summarized in this
final rulemaking.

IV. What Are the Effects of These Actions?

    Approval of the redesignation request changes the legal designation
of Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of the bi-state Memphis Area) from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, found at
40 CFR part 81. The approval also incorporates into the Tennessee SIP a
plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the bi-state
Memphis Area through 2021. The maintenance plan includes contingency
measures to remedy future violations of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
and establishes NOX and VOC MVEBs for the years 2006, 2009,
2017, and 2021 for Shelby County, Tennessee. Additionally, this action
approves the emissions inventory for this area pursuant to section
182(a)(1) of the CAA. The other portion of the bi-state Memphis Area is
Crittenden County, Arkansas. EPA is taking action on Arkansas'
redesignation request for Crittenden County Arkansas (as part of the
bi-state Memphis area) and the associated emissions inventory and
maintenance plan through a separate rulemaking action.

V. Final Action

    After evaluating Tennessee's redesignation request, EPA is taking
final action to approve the redesignation and change the legal
designation of Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of the bi-state
Memphis Area) from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA is addressing the redesignation request, emission
inventory and maintenance plan for Crittenden County, Arkansas (as a
portion of the bi-state Memphis Area) in a separate but coordinated
action. Through this action, EPA is also approving into the Tennessee
SIP, the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Shelby County,
Tennessee, which includes the new NOX MVEBs of 55.878 tons
per day (tpd) for 2006, 55.620 tpd for 2009, 55.173 tpd for 2017, and
54.445 tpd for 2021; and new VOC MVEBs of 25.216 tpd for 2006, 27.240
tpd for 2009, 18.323 tpd for 2017, and 13.817 tpd for 2021. These new
MVEBs were found adequate through a previous action (74 FR 58277).
Within 24 months from the effective date of EPA's adequacy finding for
the MVEBs, the transportation partners will need to demonstrate
conformity to the new NOX and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR
93.104(e). Additionally, EPA is approving the emissions inventory for
the Shelby County pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the CAA.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 5, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection and Air pollution control.

    Dated: December 22, 2009.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. Section 52.2220(e) is amended by adding a new entry at the end of
the table for ``8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for Shelby County,
Tennessee'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                EPA-Approved Tennessee Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Applicable
   Name of non-regulatory SIP        geographic or      State effective    EPA approval date      Explanation
            provision             nonattainment area         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 * * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance plan     Memphis, Shelby     February 26, 2009.  January 4, 2010
 for the Shelby County,            County.                                 [Insert citation
 Tennessee Area.                                                           of publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  81.343, the table entitled ``Tennessee-Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)'' is amended by revising the entry for ``Memphis, TN-AR:
Shelby County,'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.343  Tennessee.

* * * * *

                                                 Tennessee-Ozone
                                                [8-hour standard]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Designation a                       Category/classification
        Designated area        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Date \1\              Type               Date\1\                Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 * * * * * * *
Memphis, TN-AR: Shelby County.  January 4, 2010..  Attainment.........
                                                 * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Effective April 15, 2008.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-31103 Filed 12-31-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25644-25646]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10485]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0423; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-095-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede two existing airworthiness directives
(AD) that apply to all Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER)
Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190 airplanes. The existing ADs currently require
revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to introduce limitations for
the use of auxiliary power unit (APU) bleed and to prohibit dispatch
with a failed air management system (AMS) controller card. Since we
issued those ADs, we have determined that replacing the controller
processor modular cards of the AMS is necessary. This proposed AD would
add a requirement for replacing the AMS controller processor module
with one containing new software, and would require a new AFM revision.
We are proposing this AD to prevent the possibility of a right-hand
(RH) engine compressor stall after the APU becomes the active bleed
source for the left side, which may result in an engine failure; and to
prevent the intermittent communication failure between the AMS
controller cards and both secondary power distribution assemblies
(SPDAs), which could lead to the loss of automatic activation of the
engine inlet ice protection system when flying in icing conditions,
which could result in ice accretion in the engine inlet and subsequent
dual engine failure.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 15, 2012.

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
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--
12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--BRASIL; telephone +55 12
3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12 3927-7546; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.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: Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-227-
2768; 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-2012-0423; Directorate
Identifier 2011-NM-095-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

    On March 16, 2010, we issued AD 2010-07-04, Amendment 39-16248 (75
FR 14333, March 25, 2010), and on August 13, 2010, we issued AD 2010-
18-01, Amendment 39-16414 (75 FR 52238, August 25, 2010). Those ADs
required actions intended to address an unsafe condition on EMBRAER
Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190 airplanes.
    Since we issued AD 2010-07-04, Amendment 39-16248 (75 FR 14333,
March 25, 2010) and AD 2010-18-01, Amendment 39-16414 (75 FR 52238,
August 25, 2010), the Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o
Civil (ANAC), which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued
Brazilian ADs 2011-05-01 and 2011-05-02, both dated May 9, 2011
(referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    This [ANAC] AD results from the possibility of loss of automatic
activation of the engine inlet ice protection system when flying in
ice condition. Even though the failure is announced by the caution
messages ``A-I Eng 1 Fail'' [and] ``A-I Eng 2 Fail'', if the engines
inlet ice protection system is not manually activated, ice may
accrete in the engine inlet and causes engine to shut down.
    Also there is the possibility of right hand (RH) engine
compressor to stall after the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) becomes the
active bleed source for the left side, following left hand (LH)
engine failure, under a condition where both engines are close to
idle, the APU is running, and the APU bleed button is pushed in
(automatic position).

    The required action includes replacing the AMS controller processor
module with one containing new software and revising the Limitations
section of the AFM. You may obtain further information by examining the
MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin 170-21-0049, dated November 29,
2010 (for Model ERJ 170 airplanes); Service Bulletin 190-21-0035, dated
November 29, 2010 (for Model ERJ 190 airplanes); and Service Bulletin
190LIN-21-0016, dated February 23, 2011 (for Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ
airplanes). The actions described in this service information are
intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 253 products of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2010-07-04, Amendment 39-16248
(75 FR 14333, March 25, 2010), and AD 2010-18-01, Amendment 39-16414
(75 FR 52238, August 25, 2010), that are retained in this proposed AD
take about 1 work-hour per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per
work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the currently
required actions is $85 per product.
    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the new basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $35
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 $30,360, or $120 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 that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this 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 removing Amendment 39-16248 (75 FR
14333, March 25, 2010) and

Amendment 39-16414 (75 FR 52238, August 25, 2010), and adding the
following new AD:

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-
2012-0423; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-095-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 15, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2010-07-04, Amendment 39-16248 (75 FR
14333, March 25, 2010); and AD 2010-18-01, Amendment 39-16414 (75 FR
52238, August 25, 2010).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE, and -100 SU
airplanes; Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 SU, and -200 STD airplanes;
Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100 IGW airplanes;
and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes;
certificated in any category; all serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 21: Air
Conditioning.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of the possible loss of
automatic activation of the engine inlet ice protection system. We
are issuing this AD to prevent the possibility of a right-hand (RH)
engine compressor stall after the auxiliary power unit (APU) becomes
the active bleed source for the left side, which may result in an
engine failure; and to prevent the intermittent communication
failure between the air management system (AMS) controller cards and
both secondary power distribution assemblies (SPDAs) which could
lead to the loss of automatic activation of the engine inlet ice
protection system when flying in icing conditions, which could
result in ice accretion in the engine inlet and subsequent dual
engine failure.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Restatement of Requirements of AD 2010-07-04, Amendment 39-16248
(75 FR 14333, March 25, 2010): Revise Limitations Section of Airplane
Flight Manual (AFM)

    For airplanes equipped with AMS controller cards having part
number (P/N) 1001050-1-YYY or 1001050-2-YYY containing software
version Black Label 08 or lower installed: Within 10 days after
April 9, 2010, (the effective date of AD 2010-07-04, Amendment 39-
16248 (75 FR 14333, March 25, 2010)), revise the Limitations section
of the AFM to include the following statement. This may be done by
inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. Doing the actions required
by paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this
paragraph.

    Dispatch with the message `RECIRC SMK DET FAIL' displayed on the
ground is prohibited unless troubleshooting action confirms the
message has not been triggered due to a failure of an AMS controller
card.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:  When a statement identical
to that in paragraph (g) of this AD has been included in the general
revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted into the
AFM, and the copy of this AD may be removed from the AFM.

(h) Restatement of Requirements of AD 2010-18-01, Amendment 39-16414
(75 FR 52238, August 25, 2010): Revise Limitations Section of AFM

    For all airplanes: Within 14 days after September 9, 2010, (the
effective date of AD 2010-18-01, Amendment 39-16414 (75 FR 52238,
August 25, 2010)), revise the Limitations section of the applicable
AFM to include the information in EMBRAER Operational Bulletin 170-
001/09, Revision 1, dated February 10, 2010, as specified in the
operational bulletin. This operational bulletin introduces
limitations for the use of APU bleed. Doing the actions required by
paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this
paragraph.

    Note 2 to paragraph (h) of this AD:  This may be done by
inserting a copy of EMBRAER Operational Bulletin 170-001/09,
Revision 1, dated February 10, 2010, into the AFM. When this
operational bulletin has been included in general revisions of the
AFM, the general revisions may be inserted in the AFM, provided the
relevant information in the general revision is identical to that in
the operational bulletin, and the operational bulletin can be
removed.

(i) New Requirement of This AD: Load Software or Replace AMS Controller
Module

    Within 3,300 flight hours after the effective date of this AD:
Replace existing Hamilton Sundstrand AMS controller processor
modules (slots 18 and 25) P/N 1001050-1-YYY, 1001050-2-YYY, 1001050-
3-YYY, or 1001050-4-YYY, with a new or serviceable AMS controller
processor module containing software version Black Label--11, or
later approved version of the software, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-21-0049,
dated November 29, 2010 (for Model ERJ 170 airplanes); EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 190-21-0035, dated November 29, 2010 (for Model ERJ
190 airplanes); or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-21-0016, dated
February 23, 2011 (for Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes).

(j) Definition

    For purposes of this AD, ``later approved version of the
software,'' is defined as software having Design Approval Holder
(DAH) design changes that have been approved after the publication
of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-21-0049, dated November 29, 2010
(for Model ERJ 170 airplanes); EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-21-0035,
dated November 29, 2010 (for Model ERJ 190 airplanes); and EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 190LIN-21-0016, dated February 23, 2011 (for Model
ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes).

(k) New Requirement of This AD: Revise Limitations Section of AFM

    After doing the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD,
before further flight, revise the Limitation Section of the
applicable AFM by removing the limitation required by paragraph (g)
and the revision required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Cindy
Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) 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.

(m) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI Brazilian ADs 2011-05-01 and AD 2011-05-02, both
dated May 9, 2011; and the service information specified in
paragraphs (m)(1), (m)(2), and (m)(3) of this AD; for related
information.
    (1) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-21-0049, dated November 29,
2010.
    (2) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-21-0035, dated November 29,
2010.
    (3) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-21-0016, dated February 23,
2011.

    Dated: Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23, 2012.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-10485 Filed 4-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 2217]
[FR Doc No: C1-2016-31670]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 888

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1205]

Orthopedic Devices; Reclassification of Pedicle Screw Systems,
Henceforth To Be Known as Thoracolumbosacral Pedicle Screw Systems,
Including Semi-Rigid Systems

Correction

    In rule document 2016-31670 beginning on page 96366 in the issue of
Friday, December 30, 2016, make the following correction:
    On page 96372, in the second column, in the 25th, 51st, and 67th
lines, and in the third column, in the tenth line, ``June 28, 2018''
should read ``July 1, 2019''.

[FR Doc. C1-2016-31670 Filed 1-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14158-14161]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0158; Project Identifier AD-2022-00199-R;
Amendment 39-21971; AD 2022-06-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Restricted Category Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2021-15-52
which applied to various restricted category helicopters originally
manufactured by Bell Textron Inc. with a certain main rotor hub strap
pin (pin) installed. AD 2021-15-52 required removing certain outboard
pins from service and prohibited installing them on any helicopter.
This AD expands the applicability to all affected pins, regardless if
they are outboard or inboard. This AD also requires inspecting the
removed pin for any deformation and if it is deformed, removing the
mating strap fitting (fitting) from service. This AD was prompted by
the discovery that AD 2021-15-52 inadvertently limited its
applicability to only outboard pins when, in fact, all pins are subject
to the unsafe condition and the determination that a deformed pin may
have damaged the fitting. Finally, this AD updates the current type
certificate holder information as reflected in the type certificate
data sheet (TCDS) and expands the applicability of AD 2021-15-52. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective March 16, 2022.
    The FAA must receive any comments on this AD by April 28, 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 final rule, contact Bell
Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX, 76101; telephone (450)
437-2862 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected]; or at https://www.bellflight.com/support/contact-support. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. 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-2022-0158; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kuethe Harmon, Safety Management
Program Manager, Certification & Program Management Section, DSCO
Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued Emergency AD 2021-15-52 on July 6, 2021, and it
published as a Final rule; request for comments on July 29, 2021 as
Amendment 39-21664 (86 FR 40779) (AD 2021-15-52). AD 2021-15-52 applied
to the following restricted category helicopters originally
manufactured by Bell Textron Inc., with an outboard pin part number (P/
N) 204-012-104-005 with a serial number (S/N) prefix ``FNFS''
installed:
     Rotorcraft Development Corporation Model HH-1K
helicopters;
     Robinson Air Crane Inc.; Rotorcraft Development
Corporation; and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc., Model TH-1F helicopters;
     Bell Textron Inc.; Overseas Aircraft Support, Inc. (type
certificate previously held by JTBAM, Inc.); and Rotorcraft Development
Corporation Model TH-1L helicopters;
     Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., Model UH-1A helicopters;
     International Helicopters, Inc.; Overseas Aircraft
Support, Inc.; Red Tail Flying Services, LLC; Richards Heavylift Helo,
Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; Southwest Florida Aviation
International, Inc. (helicopters with an SW204 or SW204HP designation
are Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc., Model UH-1B
helicopters); and WSH, LLC (type certificate previously held by San
Joaquin Helicopters), Model UH-1B helicopters;
     Bell Textron Inc.; Overseas Aircraft Support, Inc.;
Rotorcraft Development Corporation; Smith Helicopters; and West Coast
Fabrications Model UH-1E helicopters;
     AST, Inc.; California Department of Forestry; Robinson Air
Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; and Tamarack
Helicopters, Inc., Model UH-1F helicopters;
     Arrow Falcon Exporters Inc.; Global Helicopter Technology,
Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC; JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC;
Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC; Overseas Aircraft Support, Inc.; Richards
Heavylift Helo, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; Southwest
Florida Aviation International, Inc. (helicopters with an SW205
designation are Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc., Model
UH-1H helicopters); and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc., Model UH-1H
helicopters;
     Bell Textron Inc.; Overseas Aircraft Support, Inc.; and
Rotorcraft Development Corporation Model UH-1L helicopters; and
     Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; and Rotorcraft Development
Corporation Model UH-1P helicopters.
    AD 2021-15-52 was prompted by a fatal accident of a Model 212
helicopter in which the affected pin sheared off during flight,
resulting in the main rotor blade and the main rotor head detaching
from the helicopter. The pin had accumulated only 20 total hours time-
in-service (TIS). An inspection of a different Model 212 helicopter
revealed that another pin installed, and made by the same manufacturer
and with the same S/N prefix, was deformed; this pin had accumulated
only 29 total hours TIS. Failure of a pin could result in the main
rotor blade detaching from the helicopter and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.

Actions Since AD 2021-15-52 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2021-15-52, it was discovered that the word
``outboard'' was inadvertently included in the AD's applicability,
resulting in the possibility that corrective actions for the inboard
pin may not be accomplished. This AD also updates the current type
certificate holder information, as reflected in the TCDS, for Model UH-
1B helicopters and adds Model SW205A-1 to the applicability because an
affected pin can also be installed on Model SW205A-1 helicopters.
Additionally, the FAA determined, after further review of the related
service information, that inspecting the affected pin for any deformity
and removing the fitting P/N 212-010-103-ALL or 204-012-103-ALL from
service is required to address the unsafe condition. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type designs.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Bell Alert Service Bulletins (ASBs) UH-1H-21-21
and UH-1H-II-21-31, each Revision A and dated July 22, 2021. The ASBs
specify removing all P/N 204-012-104-005 pins with an S/N prefix
``FNFS'' before further flight. The ASBs also specify inspecting
removed pins for deformation and scrapping the fitting, P/N 212-010-
103-ALL or 204-012-103-ALL, if the pin is deformed. The ASBs also
specify that, although the investigation is still in progress, removing
these pins from service is required. The ASBs state that these pins may
not have been manufactured in accordance with the engineering design
requirements and may therefore shear as a result of this
nonconformance.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires, before further flight, removing from service each
pin P/N 204-012-104-005 with an S/N prefix ``FNFS'' and inspecting it
for any deformation. If there is any deformation, this AD also requires
removing the fitting from service before further flight. Finally, this
AD prohibits installing the affected pin on any helicopter as of the
effective date of this AD.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this AD to be an interim action. If final action
is later

identified, the FAA might consider further rulemaking.

Justification for Immediate Adoption and Determination of the Effective
Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and
comment procedures for rules when the agency, for ``good cause,'' finds
that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking
comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA
authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days,
upon a finding of good cause.
    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies foregoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because an affected pin was involved in a fatal accident in which the
pin sheared off during flight, resulting in the main rotor blade and
the main rotor head detaching from the helicopter. That pin had
accumulated only 20 total hours TIS. An additional investigation
revealed that another pin installed on a different helicopter and made
by the same manufacturer and with the same S/N prefix was deformed.
This pin had accumulated only 29 total hours TIS. The wording in AD
2021-15-52 could have caused an inboard pin with the same part number
and S/N prefix, which is subject to the same unsafe condition, to be
left in service. Failure of an affected pin could occur at any time
without any previous indication, which could result in the failure of
parts critical to the control of the helicopter. Thus, an urgent unsafe
condition exists and corrective actions must be accomplished before
further flight.
    Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B). In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less
than 30 days, for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo
notice and comment.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments
about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0158 and Project Identifier AD
2022-00199-R'' 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 final rule 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 final rule.

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 AD 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 AD, 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 AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Kuethe
Harmon, Safety Management Program Manager, Certification & Program
Management Section, DSCO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division,
FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177. Any commentary that
the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be
placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and
comment, RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 529 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this AD.
    Replacing up to four pins takes about 20 work-hours and parts cost
about $1,756 for four pins for an estimated cost of up to $3,456 per
helicopter, and up to $1,828,224 for the U.S. fleet.
    Replacing up to 4 fittings takes about 2 work-hours and parts cost
about $14,400 for an estimated cost of up to $14,570 per helicopter,
and up to $7,707,530 for the U.S. fleet.
    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD
may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2021-15-52, Amendment 39-21664
(86 FR 40779, July 29, 2021); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

2022-06-05 Various Restricted Category Helicopters: Amendment 39-
21971; Docket No. FAA-2022-0158; Project Identifier AD-2022-00199-R.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 16, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2021-15-52, Amendment 39-21664 (86 FR 40779,
July 29, 2021).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following various restricted category
helicopters with a main rotor hub strap pin (pin) part number 204-
012-104-005 with a serial number prefix ``FNFS'' installed:
    (1) Model HH-1K helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Rotorcraft Development Corporation;
    (2) Model SW205A-1 helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Southwest Florida Aviation
International, Inc.;
    (3) Model TH-1F helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Robinson Air Crane Inc.; Rotorcraft
Development Corporation; and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc.;
    (4) Model TH-1L helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Bell Textron Inc.; Overseas Aircraft
Support, Inc. (type certificate previously held by JTBAM, Inc.); and
Rotorcraft Development Corporation;
    (5) Model UH-1A helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc.;
    (6) Model UH-1B helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to International Helicopters, Inc.;
Overseas Aircraft Support, Inc.; Red Tail Flying Services, LLC;
Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation;
Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc.; and WSH, LLC (type
certificate previously held by San Joaquin Helicopters);
    Note 1 to paragraph (c)(6): Helicopters with an SW204 or SW204HP
designation are Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc.,
Model UH-1B helicopters.
    (7) Model UH-1E helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Bell Textron Inc.; Overseas Aircraft
Support, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; Smith
Helicopters; and West Coast Fabrications;
    (8) Model UH-1F helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to AST, Inc.; California Department of
Forestry; Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development
Corporation; and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc.;
    (9) Model UH-1H helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc.; Global
Helicopter Technology, Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC; JJASPP
Engineering Services LLC; Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC; Overseas
Aircraft Support, Inc.; Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc.; Rotorcraft
Development Corporation; Southwest Florida Aviation International,
Inc., and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc.;
    Note 2 to paragraph (c)(9): Helicopters with an SW205
designation are Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc.,
Model UH-1H helicopters.
    (10) Model UH-1L helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Bell Textron Inc.; Overseas Aircraft
Support, Inc.; and Rotorcraft Development Corporation; and
    (11) Model UH-1P helicopters; current type certificate holders
include but are not limited to Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; and
Rotorcraft Development Corporation.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code: 6200, Main Rotor
System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a fatal accident in which a pin sheared
off during flight, which resulted in the main rotor blade and the
main rotor head detaching from the helicopter. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address this unsafe condition and prevent loss of control
of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight after the effective date of this AD,
remove from service any pin that is identified in the introductory
text of paragraph (c) of this AD and inspect it for any deformity.
If the pin is deformed, remove from service the mating strap fitting
(P/N 212-010-103-ALL or 204-012-103-ALL).
    (2) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install any pin
that is identified in the introductory text of paragraph (c) of this
AD on any helicopter.

(h) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, DSCO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, 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 DSCO Branch, send it to
the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
Information may be emailed 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

    For more information about this AD, contact Kuethe Harmon,
Safety Management Program Manager, Certification & Program
Management Section, DSCO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone
(817) 222-5198; email [email protected].

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on March 8, 2022.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-05379 Filed 3-10-22; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 4, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62646-62648]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26269]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84670; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2017-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 2 To Proposed Rule Change To Introduce Cboe
Market Close, a Closing Match Process for Non-BZX Listed Securities
Under New Exchange Rule 11.28

November 28, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that on October 4, 2018, the Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (now known
as Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.) (``BZX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change as described in Item I
below, which Item has been prepared by the Exchange and is reproduced
below verbatim in Section I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change seeks to adopt Cboe Market Close, a
closing match process for non-BZX Listed Securities. On January 17,
2018, after consideration of the record for the proposed rule change,
the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority,\3\ approved the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1 (``Approval Order'').\4\ On January 31, 2018, pursuant
to Commission Rule of Practice 430,\5\ NYSE Group, Inc. (``NYSE'') and
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') each filed petitions for
review of the Approval Order. Pursuant to Commission Rule of Practice
431(e), the Approval Order is stayed by the filing with the Commission
of a notice of intention to petition for review.\6\ On March 1, 2018,
the Commission issued a scheduling order, pursuant to Commission Rule
of Practice 431, granting the petitions for review of the Approval
Order and providing until March 22, 2018 for any party or other person
to file a written statement in support of or in opposition to the
Approval Order.\7\ In statements filed with the Commission, two parties
stated, among other arguments, that Cboe Market Close would cause BZX
to violate Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.\8\ BZX subsequently filed
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change to address this comment.
Because of this change, the Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 200.30 3(a)(12).
    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 82522, 83 FR 3205 (January 23,
2018).
    \5\ 17 CFR 201.430.
    \6\ 17 CFR 201.431(e). See Letter from Secretary of the
Commission to Christopher Solgan, Assistant General Counsel, Cboe
Global Markets, Inc., dated January 24, 2018 (providing notice of
receipt of notices of intention to petition for review of delegated
action and stay of order), available at https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/batsbzx/2018/sr-batsbzx-2017-34-letter-from-secretary-to-cboe.pdf.
    \7\ See Exchange Act Release No. 82794, 83 FR 9561 (March 6,
2018). On March 16, 2018, the Office of Secretary, acting by
delegated authority, issued an order on behalf of the Commission
granting a motion for an extension of time to file statements on or
before April 12, 2018. See Exchange Act Release No. 82896, 83 FR
12633 (Mar. 22, 2018).
    \8\ See NYSE Statement in Opposition to the Division's Order
Approving a Rule to Introduce Cboe Market Close, at 31-34 (April 12,
2018); Statement of the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC in Opposition to
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, to Introduce Cboe Market Close, at 26 (April 12,
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Amendment No. 2 to SR-BatsBZX-2017-34

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or the ``Exchange'') is filing
this Partial Amendment No. 2 to SR-BatsBZX-2017-34, which was
originally filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') on May 5, 2017 (the ``Proposal''). The Proposal was
published for comment in the Federal Register on May 22, 2017, and
approved by the Division of Trading and Markets pursuant to delegated
authority on January 17, 2018.\9\ On January 24, 2018, the Commission
stayed the Proposal,\10\ and the Proposal is currently pending
Commission review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80683 (May 16,
2017), 82 FR 23320 (May 22, 2017) (Notice); 82522 (January 7, 2018),
83 FR 3205 (January 23, 2017) (Approval Order) (SR-BatsBZX-2017-34).
    \10\ See Letter from Secretary of the Commission to Christopher
Solgan, Assistant General Counsel, Cboe Global Markets, Inc., dated
January 24, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Proposal seeks to introduce the Cboe Market Close, an
innovative closing match process for non-BZX Listed Securities that is
designed to match buy and sell Market-On-Close (``MOC'') orders at the
official closing price for such security published by the primary
listing market. The Exchange proposed the Cboe Market Close in response
to interest from market participants, particularly buy-side firms, who
seek an alternative to participation on the primary listing market's
closing auction while still receiving an execution at the official
closing price. The Exchange continues to believe that the proposed
functionality promotes the maintenance of a free and open market
because it would increase competition for order flow at the close,
which is highly concentrated at the primary listing markets today,
without impacting price discovery.
    The purpose of this amendment is to amend the Proposal at
Interpretations and Policies .04 to BZX Rule 11.28, which would be a
new rule that provides for the handling of short sale MOC orders that
are designated for participation in the Cboe Market Close.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to reject short sale MOC orders
entered pursuant to BZX Rule 11.28 in order to comply with its
obligations under Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.\11\ MOC orders marked
short exempt are not subject to the short sale circuit breaker
restrictions under Regulation SHO, and would

therefore be accepted for participation in the Cboe Market Close.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

19b-4 and Exhibit 1 Changes
    1. The Exchange proposes to add the following sentences to the
purpose section of the Proposal at the end of the first paragraph on
page 8 of the 19b-4 and page 21 of the Exhibit 1:
    All short sale MOC orders designated for participation in the Cboe
Market Close must be identified as ``short'' or ``short exempt''
pursuant to Exchange Rule 11.19(a).\12\ MOC orders marked short will be
rejected so as to maintain compliance with the Exchange's obligations
under Rule 201 of Regulation SHO in the event a short sale circuit
breaker is triggered and the official closing price determined by the
primary listing market is not above the national best bid. MOC orders
marked short exempt, which are not subject to short sale circuit
breaker restrictions under Regulation SHO, will be accepted and
processed in accordance with the proposed rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Exchange Rule 11.19(a) provides that all short sale orders
shall be identified as ``short'' or ``short exempt'' when entered
into the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Exchange proposes to add the following paragraphs to the
basis section of the Proposal immediately prior to the Exchange's
statement on burden on competition on page 14 of the 19b-4 and page 28
of the Exhibit 1:
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed language relating to
short sale handling is consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder. Rules 201(b)(1)(i) and (ii) of Regulation SHO
generally require that trading centers such as the Exchange establish,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to: (i) Prevent the execution or display of a short sale order
of a covered security at a price that is less than or equal to the
current national best bid (``price restriction'') if the price of that
covered security decreases by 10% or more from the covered security's
closing price; \13\ and (ii) impose this price restriction for the
remainder of the day and the following day.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The closing price is as determined by the listing market
for the covered security as of the end of regular trading hours on
the prior day.
    \14\ This price restriction applies when a national best bid for
the covered security is calculated and disseminated on a current and
continuing basis by a plan processor pursuant to an effective
national market system plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Cboe Market Close contemplates the pairing of MOC orders at the
MOC Cut-Off Time of 3:35 p.m. ET, and the ultimate execution of those
orders at the official closing price determined by the closing auction
of the primary listing market at 4:00 p.m. ET. As a result, it is
possible that a short sale MOC order paired at the MOC Cut-off Time
would not be eligible for execution at the ultimate execution price
determined by the primary listing market when the closing auction is
conducted. Should a short sale circuit breaker be triggered due to a
10% decline in the price of the security from the previous day's
closing price, a short sale MOC order executed at 4 p.m. ET would be
required to be executed above the national best bid. MOC orders paired
in the Cboe Market Close, however, are entitled to an execution at the
official closing price, which may be lower than, equal to, or above the
national best bid. Thus, it is possible that the eventual execution of
a short sale MOC order at 4 p.m. ET may violate the requirements of
Rule 201(b)(1). Specifically, it would be a violation of Regulation SHO
to execute a short sale MOC order at the official closing price if a
short sale circuit breaker is triggered, either before or after the MOC
Cut-off Time, and the official closing price is less than or equal to
the national best bid.
    To prevent this result and maintain compliance with Rule 201 of
Regulation SHO, the Exchange is proposing to reject all short sale MOC
orders that are designated for participation in the Cboe Market Close.
Rejecting short sale MOC orders will ensure that the Exchange is able
to execute the MOC orders that are accepted and paired at the MOC Cut-
off Time as contemplated by the Cboe Market Close. Furthermore,
rejecting these orders would ensure that market participants are
provided an opportunity to enter any short interest on the primary
listing market, which may be able to re-price such interest to a
permitted price if a short sale circuit breaker has been triggered.\15\
The Exchange therefore believes that the proposed handling of short
sale MOC orders is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See e.g., New York Stock Exchange LLC Rule 7.16(f)(5)(A),
which permits the re-pricing of short sale orders during the
duration of the short sale circuit breaker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Rule 201(b)(1)(iii)(B) of Regulation SHO provides that
the Rule 201 policies and procedures described above must be reasonably
designed to permit the execution or display of a short sale order of a
covered security marked ``short exempt'' without regard to whether the
order is at a price that is less than or equal to the current national
best bid. As a result, MOC orders marked short exempt are not subject
to the short sale price restrictions of Regulation SHO, and may be
executed without regard to whether such execution is at a price that is
less than or equal to the current national best bid. The Exchange
therefore proposes to provide that orders marked short exempt will be
accepted by the System. The Exchange will pair and execute these orders
in the same manner as other MOC orders designated for participation in
the Cboe Market Close.

II. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the Exchange Act. Comments may
be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BatsBZX-2017-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsBZX-2017-34. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
    Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or
edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish

to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-BatsBZX-2017-34, and should be submitted on or before December 26,
2018.

    By the Commission.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-26269 Filed 12-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 13 (Friday, January 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2976-2977]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1015]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0232; FRL-9510-7]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Metal Coil Surface
Coating Plants (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 20,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2011-0232, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA,

725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Compliance Assessment
and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2223A,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0232, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to either submit or view public comments, access
the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1957.06, OMB Control Number 2060-0487.
    ICR Status: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants were proposed
on July 18, 2000, promulgated on June 10, 2002, and amended on March
17, 2003. These standards apply to each facility operating a coil
coating line and that is a major source of hazardous air pollutants
(HAPs). This coil coating line is a process and the collection of
equipment used to apply an organic coating to the surface of a metal
coil that is less than 0.15 millimeters (0.006 inches) thick.
    Abstract: Owners or operators must submit notification reports upon
construction or reconstruction of any metal coil surface coating plant.
Semiannual reports for periods of operation during which the emission
limitation has exceeded, or reports certifying that no exceedances have
occurred, also are required. Owners and operators must submit
notification reports upon the construction, reconstruction, or
modification of any metal coil surface coating plant. Also, required is
a one-time-only initial notification for new and reconstructed sources.
Owners or operators of metal coil surface coating plants subject to the
rule must maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file
for at least five years following the date of such measurements,
maintenance reports, and records.
    All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In
the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are
sent directly to the EPA regional office. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS, as
authorized in section 112 and 114(a) of the Clean Air Act. The required
information consists of emissions data and other information that have
been determined to be private.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for EPA's
regulations listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, are
identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information estimated to average 119
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose and provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information. All
existing ways will have to adjust to comply with any previously
applicable instructions and requirements that have subsequently
changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Metal coil surface coating plants.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 89.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, weekly, annually, semiannually,
and occasionally.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 19,901.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,618,874, which includes $1,615,226
in labor costs, $0 in capital/startup costs, and $3,648 in operation
and maintenance (O&M) costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours in
this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two
considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the past
three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years; and (2) the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative
or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall
burden. However, there is an increase in the total labor and Agency
costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens.
This increase is not due to any program changes. The change in cost
estimates reflects updated labors rates available from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-1015 Filed 1-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P