[Federal Register: May 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 93)]
[Notices]
[Page 28026-28030]
[DOCID:fr15my06-45]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8169-8; EPA-HQ-OA-2005-0003]

Report on ECOS-EPA Performance-Based Environmental Programs:
Proposed Initial Implementation Actions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice seeks public comment about proposed actions
resulting from a collaborative effort between EPA and representatives
from the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS). ECOS and EPA have
developed a series of action recommendations to: identify, develop, and
implement incentives for top environmental performers that are part of
state and federal performance-based environmental programs; facilitate
the integration of performance based programs into EPA and State
Agencies; and enhance marketing and outreach of performance based
programs. Today's recommended actions build on preliminary ideas that
EPA provided for public comment on August 4, 2005 (70 FR 44921), and a
public meeting held in Chicago, IL on October 19, 2005.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-
2005-0003 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Administrator Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room B-102,
1301 Constitution Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m.
4:30 p.m. M-F), special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-2005-
0003. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information

claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
http://www.regulations.gov, or via e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is

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

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center,

EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The 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
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Office of Administrator Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert D. Sachs, Performance
Incentives Division, Office of the Administrator, Mailcode 1808T,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington,
DC 20460, phone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    Today's notice applies to you if you are interested in issues
regarding performance-based environmental programs, and state and
federal roles regarding such programs.

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

    1. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

    On June 26, 2000, The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
launched the National Environmental Performance Track program
(Performance Track). The program is designed to recognize and encourage
top environmental performers who go beyond regulatory requirements to
attain levels of environmental performance and management that benefit
the environment. The program design was published in the Federal
Register on July 6, 2000 (65 FR 41655). On April 22, 2004, EPA
published a final rule that established certain regulatory incentives
for Performance Track members (69 FR 21737). On May 17, 2004, EPA
published a number of changes to the program, including the creation of
a Corporate Leader designation (69 FR 27922). On April 4, 2006 (71 FR
16862), EPA published a final rule with certain provisions applying to
Performance Track Facilities that included alternatives for self-
inspections of certain types of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) units. Additional information on Performance Track, including
up-to-date member information and program criteria, can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack.

    The program's current membership includes about 400 members from 46
states and Puerto Rico and represents virtually every major
manufacturing sector as well as public sector facilities at the
Federal, State, and local levels. Since the inception of the program,
Performance Track members report that they have collectively reduced
their water use by more than 1.9 billion gallons--enough to meet the
water needs of Atlanta, Georgia for more than two weeks. Members have
conserved close to 9,000 acres of land and have increased their use of
recycled materials by more than 120,000 tons.
    In addition to EPA, more than 20 states have active state-level
performance-based environmental programs, and an additional five states
are currently developing programs. Nine states established programs
before 2000, with the first program being implemented in 1995. The
combined number of participants in these state programs is greater than
800. Many of these programs include dual membership with Performance
Track at some level, while some exceed the federal program's criteria.
    The fundamental goal of performance-based environmental programs is
to achieve environmental results greater than those achieved through
traditional regulatory approaches. As such, these programs tend to
focus on environmental outcomes such as reduced emissions, generating
fewer tons of hazardous waste, or lower discharges of toxics to water,
rather than operationally-based output measures such as the number of
inspections or permits issued. These programs are designed to provide
operational flexibility for the purpose of allowing high performers to
focus their resources on improving their environmental performance
beyond regulatory requirements. They also provide opportunities for
State and Federal regulators, as well as the regulated community, to
more strategically target their financial and human resources in order
to produce better overall environmental results.

III. Proposed Initial Implementation Actions

Introduction

    During the past year, staff from the Environmental Council of the
States (ECOS) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
collaborated on three workgroups that sought to improve the
effectiveness and enhance the value of the National Environmental

Performance Track (Performance Track) program, as well as similar state
performance-based environmental programs. State and EPA representatives
participated in workgroups which covered incentives, state integration,
and outreach and recruiting. Information about, and recommendations
from, the two workgroups on integration and incentives were highlighted
in an August 2005 Federal Register Notice (70 FR 44921). The third
workgroup on outreach and recruiting, which met on an informal basis,
also offered recommendations and these are included here as well. This
document identifies the initial actions the collective workgroups
recommend for EPA and the states to take to work towards improved
performance-based programs. These recommendations are intended to
encourage environmental performance beyond regulatory requirements; no
actions will be undertaken that could pose a threat to public health
and the environment, or in any way weaken existing environmental laws.
    As an overarching measure, the workgroups recommend that the ECOS
President and EPA Administrator express their support for the
workgroups' planned actions via some type of formal communication. More
specifically, this report recommends a series of actions be taken that
the workgroups believe will improve the implementation of performance-
based environmental programs, resulting in greater protection to human
health and the environment beyond those which can be achieved through
traditional regulatory efforts alone. To ensure that these
recommendations are effectively implemented, the performance-based
programs to which these recommendations apply should be able to
demonstrate measurable environmental results, include a process for
evaluating the extent to which they are achieving environmental
outcomes, provide a mechanism for removal of members that fail to meet
established compliance criteria, and provide meaningful information on
how such programs can be improved over time (similar to the
``continuous improvement'' philosophy embodied in environmental
management systems). Finally, the three individual workgroups recommend
that the ECOS and EPA performance-based program workgroup members
continue to work collaboratively in a combined workgroup to implement
these recommendations for Performance Track and state performance-based
environmental programs.

Background

    In 2004, the Environmental Council of the States conducted a survey
to determine the extent of state support for performance-based
environmental programs. The information ECOS gathered served as the
basis for its report issued in January 2005 (ECOS Report). The ECOS
Report acknowledged wide state support for such performance-based
programs and their important role in supplementing traditional
regulatory approaches to achieve greater environmental protection and
encourage facilities to go beyond compliance. The ECOS Report also
recommended that EPA take action in four areas: (1) Support state
environmental performance-based programs and state efforts to work with
Performance Track; (2) assure program support from all EPA program
offices; (3) provide better incentives to participants faster; and (4)
conduct more strategic marketing and education of performance-based
environmental programs.
    Beginning in January 2005, two ``formal'' workgroups (incentives
and integration), comprised of state and EPA representatives, worked to
develop specific recommendations that will lead to the outcomes
envisioned in areas 1 through 3 in the ECOS Report. Recommendations
from a third ``informal'' workgroup addressing area 4 (marketing and
education) began later and also are included here. This Report focuses
on the recommendations that the three workgroups propose initially be
taken to meet the goals cited by ECOS.
    EPA solicited public comment on the activities and preliminary
recommendations of the incentives and integration workgroups in an
August 2005 Federal Register Notice, (70 FR 44921). In addition, EPA
held a public meeting in Chicago on October 19, 2005, to solicit
additional input. Comments received and EPA's Response to Comments are
available in the Federal Government Docket System number: EPA-HQ-OA-
2005-0003 at http://www.regulations.gov/.

Initial Implementation Actions

1. Incorporate Performance Track and State Performance-Based
Environmental Programs Into EPA-State Planning, Budgeting, and
Accountability Processes
    States and EPA recognize that performance-based environmental
programs are an important and necessary tool in encouraging
environmental performance beyond regulatory requirements, and not a
tool to roll-back or lower environmental compliance. They further
recognize that integration of performance-based programs into the
various planning, budgeting, and accountability systems will facilitate
their use. As such, we recommend that EPA take the following actions to
support Performance Track and/or state performance-based environmental
programs:
    A. Add specific language to the Agency's ``National Environmental
Performance Partnership System'' (NEPPS) national guidance to encourage
the inclusion of appropriate state-run performance-based environmental
programs in Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs), Performance
Partnership Grants (PPGs), and/or state-EPA workplans when and where
such programs are in keeping with Federal and State priorities and
strategic goals. For compliance-related activities, EPA is engaged with
the States in addressing where it may be appropriate to recognize and/
or provide resource flexibility for alternative approaches to achieving
compliance. [February-May 2006]
    B. Include text that supports integration of Performance Track and
state performance-based program activities into EPA and State Agency
planning documents; e.g., Strategic Plans, Regional Plans, and National
Program Guidances. [FY 2006]
    C. Educate EPA NEPPS regional coordinators and state performance-
based program contacts on ways to integrate performance-based
environmental programs into the EPA-State planning and budgeting
processes. [FY 2006]
     Conduct a workshop in Denver on January 23, 2006, in
conjunction with the Innovations Symposium. [Completed, approximately
80 participants attended]
     Work with those states that did not attend the pre-
symposium workshop to ensure they have a working knowledge of the
content. [Ongoing]
     Partner with a select number of states to integrate
performance-based environmental programs into the EPA-State planning
and budgeting processes for FY07; these will serve as models in future
years for other interested states. [February-April 2006]
    D. EPA will pilot, with one or two states, a review of the state's
performance-based program under Element 13 of the State Review

Framework \1\ that was developed jointly by EPA and ECOS. To be
eligible for this pilot, the state(s) compliance assurance program must
have had a successful review under Elements 1-12 of the Framework. EPA
will work collaboratively with the pilot state(s) in the development
and review of the proposal. EPA will provide the pilot state(s) with a
timely and definitive response as to whether the proposals are
successful. A successful performance-based program review under Element
13 could result in a state receiving recognition or resource
flexibility credit in the context of their compliance assurance
program. The preferred nature of the credit would be identified by the
state(s) in their proposal, would be determined during the review
process, and could include a spectrum of recognition and resource
flexibility credit for performance-based programs that provide
alternative approaches for assuring and exceeding compliance.
[Currently under development]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The State Review Framework incorporates twelve mandatory
elements, based on criteria found in long standing policy agreed to
by EPA and states. A thirteenth optional element is included in this
structure to allow states the opportunity to discuss alternative and
innovative approaches to compliance. (For more information see:
http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/resources/publications/data/systems/air/2005conf/framework2.pdf
).

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

    E. Performance-based environmental programs have been used in
certain instances to address specific national, state, or regional
environmental challenges. Use of such performance-based programs should
be encouraged on a broader scale in cases where a state wants to
include language in its work plans to describe how its performance-
based program will be used to address a state or regional environmental
challenge.
     Develop guidance for FY07 on how states can count
reductions achieved through Performance Track or similar state
performance-based environmental programs toward the goals of national
initiatives such as the reduction in priority chemicals under the
Resource Conservation Challenge. [September 2006]
     Partner with the EPA Region 3 Chesapeake Bay Program to
develop guidelines providing states within the watershed with credit
for the nutrient reductions achieved via performance-based programs.
[FY 2006]
     Encourage the use of ``Challenge Commitments.'' Some EPA
National Programs and Regional Offices working with their partner
states have already implemented, or are in the process of identifying
and implementing, Challenge Commitments in the areas of reductions in
greenhouse gases, priority chemicals, air emissions, and energy use.
[Ongoing]
2. Prioritize and Implement High Value Incentives in the Near Term
    EPA will expand its efforts to work with interested states to
implement expedited permitting, enhance recognition, and facilitate the
use of existing flexibilities for members of Performance Track and
state performance-based environmental programs. As part of this effort,
EPA and the states will work to communicate effectively with each
other, as well as with the public. This will be accomplished through
the use of outreach materials targeted at educating staff and the
public about performance-based environmental programs and the
development of tools that help to expedite the implementation of
particular incentives. The combined ECOS-EPA performance-based program
workgroup (referenced earlier in this report) intends to track interest
and adoption of individual incentives among state and federal program
members, as well as to seek and consider appropriate public input.
Consistent with program criteria for maintaining membership in
performance-based programs, incentives will not result in a net
reduction in environmental performance and protection of human health
and the environment.

Expedite Permitting

    A. Where states are the lead permitting authority, EPA will partner
with interested states to give Performance Track facilities priority
placement in the state permitting queue. Georgia, Indiana, Texas,
Oregon, and other states are either in the process of implementing, or
have already implemented, expedited permitting initiatives. To
facilitate identification of Performance Track facilities eligible for
and interested in expedited priority permitting, EPA will provide
states with lists of the permits held by Performance Track member
facilities. Where EPA is the lead permitting authority, and a member of
a state performance-based program seeks expedited permitting, the state
shall inform EPA of the facility's eligibility for this initiative.
[Ongoing]
    B. EPA will reach out to States that did not attend the pre-
symposium workshop in Denver, Colorado, on January 23, 2006, to inform
them of the workshop's content and to enlist their participation in
expediting permitting. [February-May 2006]
    C. EPA will issue state and regional NPDES permitting authorities a
one-permit credit, applied to their backlogged, priority NPDES permits,
when they expedite review of a NPDES permit re-issuance or modification
for a Performance Track facility under competitive pressure. EPA is
also developing an ongoing ``tickler list'' of Performance Track
facility NPDES permits that will expire within the next 9-12 month
period to encourage states to consider, at their discretion, expediting
re-issuance of the permits. (Note: A state would receive credit for
facilities that are members of its own performance-based program as
part of the strategy for addressing priority permits that they submit
to EPA.) [Currently underway]
    D. EPA will be conducting workshops for permit authorities and
facilities on how to draft flexible air permits and use flexible air
permitting techniques within existing standards and regulations (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5/meta/m5279.html
). While any permitted

facility interested in working with permitting authorities to obtain a
flexible air permit will be eligible, EPA plans to give priority
assistance to Performance Track facilities. [Currently under
development]
    E. EPA will share information with states on expedited processes
that have been successfully used in states, work to establish expedited
processes for air permitting in states where they do not currently
exist, and conduct pilots using innovative components such as
electronic permitting to facilitate expedited permitting processes. EPA
will then share the lessons learned from these pilot efforts. [March-
December 2006]

Enhance Recognition

    F. EPA will, and interested States are encouraged to, provide
congratulatory letters either together or individually to new members
of Performance Track and state performance-based environmental
programs. These letters will encourage the facility to apply to its
respective state or federal program counterpart. [Semi-annually, at
conclusion of Performance Track application rounds]
    G. EPA and States will work together to collect and publicize state
program or Performance Track member success stories in the monthly
Performance Track newsletter. [Ongoing]
    H. States and EPA will coordinate recognition ceremonies when
appropriate and EPA will communicate to relevant states when EPA
conducts recognition ceremonies in their area. [Ongoing]

Facilitate Existing Flexibilities

    I. EPA will collect and publicize examples of flexibility available
through existing guidance and regulations and, in coordination with
permitting authorities and state performance-based program contacts,
encourage performance-based program facilities to utilize them where
appropriate. [Ongoing]
    Some examples include:
     The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency developed a
Stationary Source Synthetic Minor permit for IBM: Under this permit, in
return for meeting lower emissions limits for specified HAPs than
otherwise required, IBM is eligible for simpler emissions calculations
and recordkeeping. The IBM permit reduces the frequency of calculating
and recording emissions from monthly (12-month rolling averages) to
annually (total calendar year calculations).
     Permitting approach for Steele County, MN, indirect
dischargers: Under the CWA pretreatment program, the POTW serves as the
permitting authority for its indirect dischargers. In the Steele County
project, in return for meeting a 20% effluent reduction goal for
specified metals, participating indirect dischargers are eligible for
reduced frequency of monitoring.
    J. EPA will document examples of Performance Track facilities that
have reached agreement with state permitting authorities to reduce
their NPDES effluent monitoring frequencies, consistent with existing
EPA policy, while maintaining a high degree of confidence in their
monitoring data. EPA will publicize and share these facilities'
experiences with Performance Track and state performance-based
environmental program members so that other facilities may consider
these approaches in consultation with their permitting authorities.
[February-June 2006]
3. Improve State/EPA Coordination of Strategic Marketing and Education
of Performance-Based Programs.
    To improve marketing, outreach, and recruitment coordination, ECOS
and EPA will take the following steps:
    A. EPA and states will share program branding strategies to
increase information sharing, idea generation, and learning from other
programs. [Ongoing]
    B. Interested states and EPA's Performance Track staff will sponsor
a one-day workshop to focus specifically on marketing, outreach, and
recruitment. The workshop will highlight the importance of these
functions and how to improve coordination. [May 11, 2006]
    C. EPA and states will explore the possibility of developing a
brochure, fact sheet, and/or slide presentation materials that states
can customize for outreach purposes. In addition, EPA will produce
standard language about Performance Track and state performance-based
programs that interested states may use in their publications.
[Ongoing]
    D. EPA and states will develop an online catalog identifying those
sectors that may be of greatest interest for recruitment each year by
EPA and states. Sample criteria for selection of sector candidates
include a strong economic presence or high profile, significant
progress in improving environmental performance, or opportunities for
engaging facilities in efforts to address priority environmental
problems. [Ongoing]
4. Continue Work of ECOS/EPA Performance-Based Environmental Program
Workgroup
    ECOS and EPA workgroup members will continue to work
collaboratively to implement the recommendations for Performance Track
and state performance-based environmental programs. The workgroup will
be led by the chair of the ECOS Cross-media Committee and EPA's
Director of the National Center for Environmental Innovation, with
members drawn from State and EPA program offices, Performance Track,
and state performance-based environmental programs. The workgroup will
meet on a regular basis to sustain focus and energy, and will report
periodically to the ECOS President, EPA Administrator, and EPA's
Innovation Action Network (IAN), comprised of the Agency's Deputy
Assistant and Associate Administrators, Deputy Regional Administrators,
and the Co-chairs of the ECOS Cross-media Committee. In addition,
workgroup reports will be shared with state performance program staff
and through regular EPA/state monthly calls.

    Dated: May 10, 2006.
Robert S. Benson,
Acting Director, Office of Business and Community Innovation.
[FR Doc. E6-7333 Filed 5-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 110 (Monday, June 8, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35024-35026]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12157]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0557; Project Identifier AD-2020-00541-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018-15-04, which applies to certain General Electric Company (GE) CF6-
80A, CF6-80A1, CF6-80A2, CF6-80A3, CF6-80C2A1, CF6-80C2A2, CF6-80C2A3,
CF6-80C2A5, CF6-80C2A5F, CF6-80C2A8, CF6-80C2B1, CF6-80C2B1F, CF6-
80C2B2, CF6-80C2B2F, CF6-80C2B4, CF6-80C2B4F, CF6-80C2B5F, CF6-80C2B6,
CF6-80C2B6F, CF6-80C2B6FA, CF6-80C2B7F, CF6-80C2D1F, CF6-80C2L1F, and
CF6-80C2K1F model turbofan engines. AD 2018-15-04 requires ultrasonic
inspection (UI) of high-pressure turbine (HPT) stage 1 and stage 2
disks. Since we issued AD 2018-15-04, GE determined the need to expand
the population of affected disks. This proposed AD would retain the
required inspections while expanding the population of affected disks.
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 July 23,
2020.

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 General
Electric Company, 1 Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH 45215, United States;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website:
www.ge.com. 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 on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0557; 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. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Stevenson, Aerospace Engineer,
ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:
(781) 238-7132; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites 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-2020-0557;
Project Identifier AD-2020-00541-E'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM 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 FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
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 Scott Stevenson, Aerospace 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.

Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2018-15-04, Amendment 39-19336 (83 FR 43739,
August 28, 2018), (``AD 2018-15-04''), for certain GE CF6-80A, CF6-
80A1, CF6-80A2, CF6-80A3, CF6-80C2A1, CF6-80C2A2, CF6-80C2A3, CF6-
80C2A5, CF6-80C2A5F, CF6-80C2A8, CF6-80C2B1, CF6-80C2B1F, CF6-80C2B2,
CF6-80C2B2F, CF6-80C2B4, CF6-80C2B4F, CF6-80C2B5F, CF6-80C2B6, CF6-
80C2B6F, CF6-80C2B6FA, CF6-80C2B7F, CF6-80C2D1F, CF6-80C2L1F, and CF6-
80C2K1F model turbofan engines. AD 2018-15-04 requires a UI of HPT
stage 1 and 2 disks. AD 2018-15-04 resulted from an uncontained failure
of a HPT stage 2 disk that resulted in a fire. The FAA issued AD 2018-
15-04 to prevent failure of the HPT stage 1 and the HPT stage 2 disks,
uncontained HPT disk release, damage to the engine, and damage to the
airplane.

Actions Since AD 2018-15-04 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2018-15-04, GE determined that additional
serial-numbered HPT stage 1 and stage 2 disks should be included in the
population of affected disks. GE therefore issued revisions to its
service information to include the additional affected disks.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed GE CF6-80C2 Service Bulletin (SB) 72-1562 R04,
dated May 29, 2019. The SB describes procedures for UI of CF6-80C2
turbofan engine HPT stage 1 and 2 disks. The FAA also reviewed GE CF6-
80A SB 72-0869 R02, dated May 29, 2019. The SB describes procedures for
UI of CF6-80A turbofan engine HPT stage 2 disks. This service
information is reasonably available because the interested parties have
access to it through their normal course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain all the requirements of AD 2018-15-
04. This proposed AD would expand the population of affected disks to
include additional serial-numbered HPT stage 1 and stage 2 disks.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 1,512 engines
installed on airplanes, of U.S. registry.
    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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultrasonic Inspection of HPT disk.  10 work-hours x $85    $0...................            $850      $1,285,200
                                     per hour = $850.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace CF6-80C2 HPT Stage 1 disk..........  0.25 work-hours x $85 per hour =           $799,700     $799,721.25
                                              $21.25.
Replace CF6-80C2 HPT Stage 2 disk..........  0.25 work-hours x $85 per hour =            364,600      364,621.25
                                              $21.25.
Replace CF6-80A HPT Stage 2 disk...........  0.25 work-hours x $85 per hour =            344,000      344,021.25
                                              $21.25.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 has 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 the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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 removing Airworthiness Directive AD
2018-15-04, Amendment 39-19336 (83 FR 43739, August 28, 2018), and
adding the following new AD:

General Electric Company: Docket No. FAA-2020-0557; Project
Identifier AD-2020-00541-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 23,
2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-15-04, Amendment 39-19336 (83 FR 43739,
August 28, 2018).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to General Electric Company (GE) CF6-80A, CF6-
80A1, CF6-80A2, CF6-80A3, CF6-80C2A1, CF6-80C2A2, CF6-80C2A3, CF6-
80C2A5, CF6-80C2A5F, CF6-80C2A8, CF6-80C2B1, CF6-80C2B1F, CF6-
80C2B2, CF6-80C2B2F, CF6-80C2B4, CF6-80C2B4F, CF6-80C2B5F, CF6-
80C2B6, CF6-80C2B6F, CF6-80C2B6FA, CF6-80C2B7F, CF6-80C2D1F, CF6-
80C2L1F, and CF6-80C2K1F model turbofan engines with high-pressure
turbine (HPT) disks with serial numbers listed in Tables 1 and 2 of
Appendix A in GE CF6-80C2 Service Bulletin (SB) 72-1562 R04, dated
May 29, 2019; and Table 1 of Appendix A in GE CF6-80A SB 72-0869
R02, dated May 29, 2019.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an uncontained failure of an HPT stage 2
disk. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HPT stage
1 disk (CF6-80C2 engines) and the HPT stage 2 disk (CF6-80C2 and
CF6-80A engines). The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could
result in an uncontained HPT disk release, 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) After the effective date of this AD, perform an ultrasonic
inspection for cracks in HPT stage 1 and 2 disks on the CF6-80C2
turbofan engine at each piece-part exposure using the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 3.A.(2), in GE CF6-80C2 SB 72-1562 R04,
dated May 29, 2019.
    (2) After the effective date of this AD, perform an ultrasonic
inspection for cracks in HPT stage 2 disks on the CF6-80A turbofan
engine at each piece-part exposure using the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 3.A.(2), in GE CF6-80A SB 72-0869 R02, dated
May 29, 2019.
    (3) If any disk fails the inspection required by paragraphs
(g)(1) and (2) of this AD, replace the disk before further flight.

(h) Non-Required Actions

    The reporting requirements specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraphs 3.A.(2)(c) and 3.A.(2)(f), of CF6-80C2 SB
72-1562 R04, dated May 29, 2019, are not required by this AD.

(i) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, ``piece-part exposure'' of the HPT
stage 1 or stage 2 disk is separation of that HPT disk from its
mating rotor parts within the HPT rotor module (thermal shield and
HPT stage 1 and stage 2 disk, respectively).

(j) 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 (k)(1) of this AD. You may email your
request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Scott Stevenson,
Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
General Electric Company, 1 Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH 45215,
United States; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website: www.ge.com. 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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on June 1, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-12157 Filed 6-5-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 251 (Tuesday, December 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79712-79714]
[FR Doc No: 2013-31239]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 19b-1, OMB Control No. 3235-0354, SEC File No. 270-312.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Section 19(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'')
(15 U.S.C. 80a-19(b)) authorizes the Commission to regulate registered
investment company (``fund'') distributions of long-term capital gains
made more frequently than once every twelve months. Accordingly, rule
19b-1 under the Act (17 CFR 270.19b-1) regulates the frequency of fund

distributions of capital gains. Rule 19b-1(c) states that the rule does
not apply to a unit investment trust (``UIT'') if it is engaged
exclusively in the business of investing in certain eligible securities
(generally, fixed-income securities), provided that: (i) The capital
gains distribution falls within one of five categories specified in the
rule \1\ and (ii) the distribution is accompanied by a report to the
unitholder that clearly describes the distribution as a capital gains
distribution (the ``notice requirement'').\2\ Rule 19b-1(e) permits a
fund to apply to the Commission for permission to distribute long-term
capital gains that would otherwise be prohibited by the rule if the
fund did not foresee the circumstances that created the need for the
distribution. The application must set forth the pertinent facts and
explain the circumstances that justify the distribution.\3\ An
application that meets those requirements is deemed to be granted
unless the Commission denies the request within 15 days after the
Commission receives the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 270.19b-1(c)(1).
    \2\ The notice requirement in rule 19b-1(c)(2) supplements the
notice requirement of section 19(a) [15 U.S.C. 80a-19(a)], which
requires any distribution in the nature of a dividend payment to be
accompanied by a notice disclosing the source of the distribution.
    \3\ Rule 19b-1(e) also requires that the application comply with
rule 0-2 [17 CFR 270.02] under the Act, which sets forth the general
requirements for papers and applications filed with the Commission
pursuant to the Act and rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff estimates that zero funds will file an application
under rule 19b-1(e) each year. The staff understands that if a fund
files an application it generally uses outside counsel to prepare the
application. The cost burden of using outside counsel is discussed
below. The staff estimates that, on average, a fund's investment
adviser would spend approximately 4 hours to review an application,
including 3.5 hours by an assistant general counsel at a cost of $467
per hour and 0.5 hours by an administrative assistant at a cost of $72
per hour, and the fund's board of directors would spend an additional 1
hour at a cost of $4,500 per hour, for a total of 5 hours.\4\ Thus, the
staff estimates that the annual hour burden of the collection of
information imposed by rule 19b-1(e) would be approximately five hours
per fund, at a cost of $6173.50.\5\ Because the staff estimates that,
each year, zero funds will file an application pursuant to rule 19b-
1(e), the total burden for the information collection is 0 hours at a
cost of $0.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The estimate for assistant general counsels is from SIFMA's
Management & Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry 2012,
modified by Commission staff to account for an 1800-hour work-year
and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee
benefits and overhead. The estimate for administrative assistants is
from SIFMA's Office Salaries in the Securities Industry 2012,
modified by Commission staff to account for an 1800-hour work-year
and multiplied by 2.93 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee
benefits and overhead. The estimate for the board of directors as a
whole is derived from estimates made by the staff regarding typical
board size and compensation that is based on information received
from fund representatives and publicly available sources.
    \5\ This estimate is based on the following calculations:
$1634.50 (3.5 hours x $467 = $1634.50) plus $36 (0.5 hours x $72 =
$36) plus $4500 equals $6173.50 (cost of one application).
    \6\ This estimate is based on the following calculation:
$6173.50 (cost of one application) multiplied by 0 applications = $0
total cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff estimates that there is no hour burden associated
with complying with the collection of information component of rule
19b-1(c). Although Commission staff estimates that there is no hour
burden associated with rule 19b-1, the staff is requesting an hour
burden of one hour for administrative purposes.
    As noted above, Commission staff understands that funds that file
an application under rule 19b-1(e) generally use outside counsel to
prepare the application.\7\ The staff estimates that, on average,
outside counsel spends 10 hours preparing a rule 19b-1(e) application,
including eight hours by an associate and two hours by a partner.
Outside counsel billing arrangements and rates vary based on numerous
factors, but the staff has estimated the average cost of outside
counsel as $450 per hour, based on information received from funds,
intermediaries, and their counsel. The staff therefore estimates that
the average cost of outside counsel preparation of the rule 19b-1(e)
exemptive application is $4,500.\8\ Because the staff estimates that,
each year, zero funds will file an application pursuant to rule 19b-
1(e), the total annual cost burden imposed by the exemptive application
requirements of rule 19b-1(e) is estimated to be $0.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This understanding is based on conversations with
representatives from the fund industry.
    \8\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 10
hours multiplied by $450 per hour equals $4,500.
    \9\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: $4,500
multiplied by 0 (funds) equals $0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission staff estimates that there are approximately 3,361
UITs \10\ that may rely on rule 19b-1(c) to make capital gains
distributions. The staff estimates that, on average, these UITs rely on
rule 19b-1(c) once a year to make a capital gains distribution.\11\ In
most cases, the trustee of the UIT is responsible for preparing and
sending the notices that must accompany a capital gains distribution
under rule 19b-1(c)(2). These notices require limited preparation, the
cost of which accounts for only a small, indiscrete portion of the
comprehensive fee charged by the trustee for its services to the UIT.
The staff believes that as a matter of good business practice, and for
tax preparation reasons, UITs would collect and distribute the capital
gains information required to be sent to unitholders under rule 19b-
1(c) even in the absence of the rule. The staff estimates that the cost
of preparing a notice for a capital gains distribution under rule 19b-
1(c)(2) is approximately $50. There is no separate cost to mail the
notices because they are mailed with the capital gains distribution.
Thus, the staff estimates that the capital gains distribution notice
requirement imposes an annual cost on UITs of approximately
$168,050.\12\ The staff therefore estimates that the total cost imposed
by rule 19b-1 is $168,050 ($168,050 plus $0 (total cost associated with
rule 19b-1(e)) equals $168,050).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 2013 Investment Company Fact Book, Investment Company
Institute, available at http://www.ici.org/pdf/2013_factbook.pdf.
    \11\ The number of times UITs rely on the rule to make capital
gains distributions depends on a wide range of factors and, thus,
can vary greatly across years and UITs. UITs may distribute capital
gains biannually, annually, quarterly, or at other intervals.
Additionally, a number of UITs are organized as grantor trusts, and
therefore do not generally make capital gains distributions under
rule 19b-1(c), or may not rely on rule 19b-1(c) as they do not meet
the rule's requirements.
    \12\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 3361
UITs multiplied by $50 equals $168,050.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information

Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100
F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: December 24, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-31239 Filed 12-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 25, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 36)]
[Notices]
[Page 8611-8612]
[DOCID:fr25fe09-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activity Seeking OMB Approval

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request
the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) revision of a current
information collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day
comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of
information was published on October

31, 2008, vol. 73, no. 212, pages 65004-65005. The information kept is
used by the FAA as proof that non-Federal navigation facilities are
maintained within certain specified tolerances.

DATES: Please submit comments by March 27, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Mauney at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

    Title: Procedures for Non-Federal Navigation Facilities.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0014.
    Form(s): FAA Forms 6030-1, 6030-17, 6790-4, 6790-5.
    Affected Public: An estimated 2,413 respondents.
    Frequency: This information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden Per Response: Approximately 13.72 hours
per response.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 33,116 hours annually.
    Abstract: The non-Federal navigation facilities are electrical/
electronic aids to air navigation which are purchased, installed,
operated, and maintained by an entity other than the FAA and are
available for use by the flying public. These aids may be located at
unattended remote sites or airport terminals. The information kept is
used by the FAA as proof that the facility is maintained within certain
specified tolerances.
Addresses: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should he
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to oira_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20503.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of
the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 18, 2009.
Carla Mauney,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. E9-3913 Filed 2-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62088-62092]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24451]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 95

[Docket No. 31399; Amdt. No. 562]

IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts miscellaneous amendments to the required
IFR (instrument flight rules) altitudes and changeover points for
certain Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes for which a
minimum or maximum en route authorized IFR altitude is prescribed. This
regulatory action is needed because of changes occurring in the
National Airspace System. These changes are designed to provide for the
safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace under instrument
conditions in the affected areas.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, December 2, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg 29, Room 104, Oklahoma
City, OK 73125. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This amendment to part 95 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) amends, suspends, or revokes IFR
altitudes governing the operation of all aircraft in flight over a
specified route or any portion of that route, as well as the changeover
points (COPs) for Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes as
prescribed in part 95.

The Rule

    The specified IFR altitudes, when used in conjunction with the
prescribed changeover points for those routes, ensure navigation aid
coverage that is adequate for safe flight operations and free of
frequency interference. The reasons and circumstances that create the
need for this amendment involve matters of flight safety and
operational efficiency in the National Airspace System, are related to
published aeronautical charts that are essential to the user, and
provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. In
addition, those various reasons or circumstances require making this
amendment effective before the next scheduled charting and publication
date of the flight information to assure its timely availability to the
user. The effective date of this amendment reflects those
considerations. In view of the close and immediate relationship between
these regulatory changes and safety in air commerce, I find that notice
and public procedure before adopting this amendment are impracticable
and contrary to the public interest and that good cause exists for
making the amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 95

    Airspace, Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2021.
Thomas J. Nichols,
Aviation Safety, Flight Standards Service, Manager, Standards Section,
Flight Procedures & Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures
Division.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, part 95 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part
95) is amended as follows effective at 0901 UTC, December 2, 2021.

PART 95--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44719, 44721.

0
2. Part 95 is amended to read as follows:

              Revisions to IFR Altitudes & Changeover Point
            [Amendment 562, Effective Date December 2, 2021]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               FROM                           TO                 MEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Sec.   95.1001 Direct Routes--U.S. Color Routes
         Sec.   95.20 Red Federal Airway R4 Is Amended To Delete
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHENA, AK NDB....................  BEAR CREEK, AK NDB......         5000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     FROM                                         TO                        MEA          MAA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Sec.   95.3000 Low Altitude RNAV Routes
                                 Sec.   95.3407 RNAV Route T407 Is Added To Read
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIOUX FALLS, SD VORTAC........................  FFORT, SD WP..........................         3600        17500
FFORT, SD WP..................................  FARGO, ND VOR/DME.....................        *4500        17500
    *3800--MOCA
FARGO, ND VOR/DME.............................  GRAND FORKS, ND VOR/DME...............         2700        17500
GRAND FORKS, ND VOR/DME.......................  WUBED, MN WP..........................         2600        17500
WUBED, MN WP..................................  U.S. CANADIAN BORDER..................         2500        17500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               FROM                           TO                 MEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Sec.   95.6001 Victor Routes--U.S
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6015 VOR Federal Airway V15 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABERDEEN, SD VOR/DME.............  BISMARCK, ND VOR/DME....        *5000
    *3700--MOCA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6044 VOR Federal Airway V44 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORISTELL, MO VORTAC.............  MOODS, IL FIX...........         2700
SPEAK, MD FIX....................  SEA ISLE, NJ VORTAC.....        *7000
    *2000--GNSS MEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6045 VOR Federal Airway V45 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLUEFIELD, WV VOR/DME............  CHARLESTON, WV VOR/DME..         6000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6059 VOR Federal Airway V59 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PULASKI, VA VORTAC...............  SOFTY, WV FIX...........         6400
SOFTY, WV FIX....................  BECKLEY, WV VOR/DME.....        #6000
    #BECKLEY R-161 UNUSABLE
BECKLEY, WV VOR/DME..............  WARDO, WV FIX...........         5100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6136 VOR Federal Airway V136 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWELL, TN FIX....................  *VOLUNTEER, TN VORTAC...         3000
    *5000--MCA VOLUNTEER, TN
     VORTAC, E BND
VOLUNTEER, TN VORTAC.............  AUBRY, TN FIX...........
                                   W BND...................         5000
                                   E BND...................         6000
AUBRY, TN FIX....................  *PITTE, TN FIX..........         6000
    *8000--MCA PITTE, TN FIX, E
     BND
PITTE, TN FIX....................  SNOWBIRD, TN VORTAC.....         8000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6173 VOR Federal Airway V173 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPINNER, IL VORTAC...............  PEOTONE, IL VORTAC......         4500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Sec.   95.6181 VOR Federal Airway V181 Is Amended To Delete
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GRAND FORKS, ND VOR/DME..........  HUMBOLDT, MN VORTAC.....         2600
HUMBOLDT, MN VORTAC..............  ZOMTA, MN WP............         2800
ZOMTA, MN WP.....................  U.S. CANADIAN BORDER....         2800
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6206 VOR Federal Airway V206 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
KIRKSVILLE, MO VORTAC............  OTTUMWA, IA VOR/DME.....         3100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6258 VOR Federal Airway V258 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BECKLEY, WV VOR/DME..............  ZOOMS, WV FIX...........     UNUSABLE
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sec.   95.6266 VOR Federal Airway V266 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTH BOSTON, VA VORTAC..........   LAWRENCEVILLE, VA             #*3000
                                    VORTAC.
    *2000--MOCA
    *2300--GNSS MEA
    #LAWRENCEVILLE R-269
     UNUSABLE, USE SOUTH BOSTON R-
     086
LAWRENCEVILLE, VA VORTAC.........  FRANKLIN, VA VORTAC.....     UNUSABLE
FRANKLIN, VA VORTAC..............  *SUNNS, NC FIX..........     UNUSABLE
    *5000--MCA SUNNS, NC FIX, SE
     BND
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6270 VOR Federal Airway V270 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BINGHAMTON, NY VOR/DME...........  DELANCEY, NY VOR/DME....
                                   W BND...................         4500
                                   E BND...................         4800
DELANCEY, NY VOR/DME.............  *ACOVE, NY FIX..........         6300
    *8000--MRA
ACOVE, NY FIX....................  *ATHOS, NY FIX..........         6300
  *6000--MCA ATHOS, NY FIX, W BND
ATHOS, NY FIX....................  CHESTER, MA VOR/DME.....         4500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Sec.   95.6271 VOR Federal Airway V271 Is Amended To Delete
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MANISTEE, MI VOR/DME.............  ESCANABA, MI VOR/DME....        *3000
    *2100--MOCA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6273 VOR Federal Airway V273 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FALLZ, NJ FIX....................  HUGUENOT, NY VOR/DME....         3200
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Sec.   95.6285 VOR Federal Airway V285 Is Amended To Delete
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHITE CLOUD, MI VOR/DME..........  MANISTEE, MI VOR/DME....        #4000
    #WHITE CLOUD R-332 TO
     MANISTEE UNUSABLE EXCEPT FOR
     AIRCRAFT EQUIPPED WITH
     SUITABLE RNAV SYSTEM WITH
     GPS
    MANISTEE R-156 TO WHITE
     UNUSABLE EXCEPT FOR AIRCRAFT
     EQUIPPED WITH SUITABLE RNAV
     SYSTEM WITH GPS
MANISTEE, MI VOR/DME.............  TRAVERSE CITY, MI VOR/          #2800
                                    DME.
    #MANISTEE R-057 TO COP
     UNUSABLE EXCEPT FOR AIRCRAFT
     EQUIPPED WITH SUITABLE RNAV
     SYSTEM WITH GPS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6412 VOR Federal Airway V412 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
REDWOOD FALLS, MN VOR/DME........  FLYING CLOUD, MN VOR/DME        *4000
    *2800--MOCA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6433 VOR Federal Airway V433 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRIDGEPORT, CT VOR/DME...........  *PAWLING, NY VOR/DME....         3000
    *5700--MCA PAWLING, NY VOR/
     DME, NW BND
PAWLING, NY VOR/DME..............  *CYPER, NY FIX..........
                                   SE BND..................         6100
                                   NW BND..................        10000
    *15000--MRA
CYPER, NY FIX....................  *PETER, NY FIX..........      **10000
    *10000--MCA PETER, NY FIX, NW
     BND
    *10000--MCA PETER, NY FIX, SE
     BND
    **6100--GNSS MEA
PETER, NY FIX....................  *ROCKDALE, NY VOR/DME...     #**10000
    *10000--MCA ROCKDALE, NY VOR/
     DME, SE BND
    **6100--GNSS MEA
#ROCKDALE R-127 UNUSABLE BELOW
 10000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   95.6438 Alaska VOR Federal Airway V438 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORT YUKON, AK VORTAC............  *UVALL, AK FIX..........        10000
    *10000--MCA UVALL, AK FIX, SE
     BND
UVALL, AK FIX....................  DEADHORSE, AK VOR/DME...
                                   NW BND..................         2300
                                   SE BND..................        10000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sec.   95.6489 VOR Federal Airway V489 Is Amended To Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUGUENOT, NY VOR/DME.............  *WEARD, NY FIX..........       **4000
    *15000--MCA WEARD, NY FIX, NE
     BND
    **3500--MOCA
WEARD, NY FIX....................  *FILPS, NY FIX..........      **15000
    *15000--MRA
    *15000--MCA FILPS, NY FIX, NE
     BND
    *15000--MCA FILPS, NY FIX, SW
     BND
    **6000--MOCA
    **7000--GNSS MEA
FILPS, NY FIX....................  *SAGES, NY FIX..........      **15000
    *15000--MCA SAGES, NY FIX, NE
     BND
    *15000--MCA SAGES, NY FIX, SW
     BND
    **6400--MOCA
    **7000--GNSS MEA
SAGES, NY FIX....................  *CYPER, NY FIX..........      **15000
    *15000--MRA
    *15000--MCA CYPER, NY FIX, NE
     BND
    *15000--MCA CYPER, NY FIX, SW
     BND
    **6100--GNSS MEA
CYPER, NY FIX....................  *AGNEZ, NY FIX..........      **15000
    *15000--MRA
    *15000--MCA AGNEZ, NY FIX, SW
     BND
    *15000--MCA AGNEZ, NY FIX, NE
     BND
    **6300--GNSS MEA
AGNEZ, NY FIX....................  *ALBANY, NY VORTAC......      **15000
    *13300--MCA ALBANY, NY
     VORTAC, SW BND
    **6200--GNSS MEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     FROM                                         TO                        MEA          MAA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Sec.   95.7001 Jet Routes
                                Sec.   95.7042 Jet Route J42 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEXARKANA, AR VORTAC..........................  MEMPHIS, TN VORTAC....................        18000        45000
MEMPHIS, TN VORTAC............................  NASHVILLE, TN VORTAC..................        18000        45000
NASHVILLE, TN VORTAC..........................  FOUNT, KY FIX.........................        18000        45000
FOUNT, KY FIX.................................  TONIO, KY FIX.........................       *20000        35000
    *18000--GNSS MEA
TONIO, KY FIX.................................  BECKLEY, WV VOR/DME...................        18000        35000
BECKLEY, WV VOR/DME...........................  MONTEBELLO, VA VOR/DME................        18000        41000
    #BECKLEY R-091 UNUSABLE
MONTEBELLO, VA VOR/DME........................  GORDONSVILLE, VA VORTAC...............        18000        41000
GORDONSVILLE, VA VORTAC.......................  NOTTINGHAM, MD VORTAC.................        18000        45000
NOTTINGHAM, MD VORTAC.........................  *GRACO, MD FIX........................        18000        35000
    *10000--MRA
GRACO, MD FIX.................................  WOODSTOWN, NJ VORTAC..................        18000        45000
WOODSTOWN, NJ VORTAC..........................  ROBBINSVILLE, NJ VORTAC...............        18000        45000
ROBBINSVILLE, NJ VORTAC.......................  HARTFORD, CT VOR/DME..................        18000        45000
HARTFORD, CT VOR/DME..........................  PUTNAM, CT VOR/DME....................        18000        45000
PUTNAM, CT VOR/DME............................  BOSTON, MA VOR/DME....................        18000        45000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7107 Jet Route J107 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DUPREE, SD VOR/DME............................  HUMBOLDT, MN VORTAC...................        21000        45000
HUMBOLDT, MN VORTAC...........................  U.S. CANADIAN BORDER..................        18000        45000
U.S. CANADIAN BORDER..........................  U.S. CANADIAN BORDER..................        18000        45000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7150 Jet Route J150 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GORDONSVILLE, VA VORTAC.......................  NOTTINGHAM, MD VORTAC.................        18000        45000
NOTTINGHAM, MD VORTAC.........................  *GRACO, MD FIX........................        18000        35000
    *10000--MRA
GRACO, MD FIX.................................  WOODSTOWN, NJ VORTAC..................        18000        45000
WOODSTOWN, NJ VORTAC..........................  COYLE, NJ VORTAC......................        18000        45000
COYLE, NJ VORTAC..............................  HAMPTON, NY VORTAC....................        18000        45000
HAMPTON, NY VORTAC............................  MONTT, NY FIX.........................            #
    #UNUSABLE
MONTT, NY FIX.................................  MARCONI, MA VOR/DME...................            #
    #UNUSABLE
MARCONI, MA VOR/DME...........................  STOOL, MA FIX.........................            #
    #UNUSABLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Sec.   95.7174 Jet Route J174 Is Amended To Read in Part
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SNOW HILL, MD VORTAC..........................  YAZUU, NJ FIX.........................        18000        45000
YAZUU, NJ FIX.................................  HAMPTON, NY VORTAC....................     UNUSABLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7191 Jet Route J191 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROBBINSVILLE, NJ VORTAC.......................  DAVYS, NJ FIX.........................        18000        45000
DAVYS, NJ FIX.................................  SMYRNA, DE VORTAC.....................        18000        33000
SMYRNA, DE VORTAC.............................  PATUXENT, MD VORTAC...................        18000        45000
PATUXENT, MD VORTAC...........................  HUBBS, VA FIX.........................        18000        45000
HUBBS, VA FIX.................................  HOPEWELL, VA VORTAC...................        18000        22000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7193 Jet Route J193 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WILMINGTON, NC VORTAC.........................  COFIELD, NC VORTAC....................        18000        45000
COFIELD, NC VORTAC............................  HARCUM, VA VORTAC.....................        18000        29000
HARCUM, VA VORTAC.............................  HUBBS, VA FIX.........................        18000        28000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7222 Jet Route J222 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROBBINSVILLE, NJ VORTAC.......................  KENNEDY, NY VOR/DME...................        18000        45000
KENNEDY, NY VOR/DME...........................  CAMBRIDGE, NY VOR/DME.................        18000        31000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7225 Jet Route J225 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEDAR LAKE, NJ VOR/DME........................  KENNEDY, NY VOR/DME...................        18000        45000
KENNEDY, NY VOR/DME...........................  PROVIDENCE, RI VOR/DME................        18000        45000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.7515 Jet Route J515 Is Amended To Delete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FARGO, ND VOR/DME.............................  HUMBOLDT, MN VORTAC...................        18000        45000
HUMBOLDT, MN VORTAC...........................  U.S. CANADIAN BORDER..................        18000        45000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          AIRWAY SEGMENT                                          CHANGEOVER POINTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                FROM                               TO                 DISTANCE                 FROM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Sec.   95.8003 VOR Federal Airway Changeover Point
                                   V266 IS AMENDED TO DELETE CHANGEOVER POINT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTH BOSTON, VA VORTAC.............  LAWRENCEVILLE, VA VORTAC....           38  SOUTH BOSTON
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Sec.   95.8005 Jet Routes Changeover Points
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    J42 Is Amended To Delete Changeover Point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEMPHIS, TN VORTAC..................  NASHVILLE, TN VORTAC........          119  MEMPHIS
BEKLEY, WV VOR/DME..................  MONTEBELLO, VA VORDME.......           56  BECKLEY
                                     J174 Is Amended To Add Changeover Point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SNOW HILL, MD VORTAC................  HAMPTON, NY VORTAC..........          106  SNOW HILL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   J193 Is Amended To Delete Changeover Point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COFIELD, NC VORTAC..................  HARCUM, VA VORTAC...........           36  COFIELD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     J503 Is Amended To Add Changeover Point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEATTLE, WA VORTAC..................  PRINCETON, CA VORTAC........          108  SEATTLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2021-24451 Filed 11-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P