[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39462-39463]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16727]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75354; File Nos. SR-BATS-2015-37; SR-BYX-2015-25; SR-
EDGA-2015-19; SR-EDGX-2015-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; BATS Y-
Exchange, Inc.; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; and EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Changes, as Modified by Amendment No. 1,
Relating to Liquidity Requirements for Securities Admitted to Unlisted
Trading Privileges

July 2, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On May 5, 2015, BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS''); BATS Y-Exchange,
Inc. (``BYX''); EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''); and EDGX Exchange, Inc.
(``EDGX'') (each, an ``Exchange'' and, collectively, the ``Exchanges'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ proposed rule changes
to amend each Exchange's Rule 11.2, ``Securities Eligible for
Trading,'' to indicate that the Exchanges may determine not to
designate for trading any security admitted to unlisted trading
privileges that does not meet certain consolidated average daily
trading volume thresholds. On May 15, 2015, the Exchanges each filed
Amendment No. 1 to their respective proposals.\4\ The proposed rule
changes, as amended, were published for comment in the in the Federal
Register on May 22, 2015.\5\ The Commission received two comment
letters regarding the proposals.\6\ This order approves the proposed
rule changes, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ Each Amendment No. 1 amended and replaced its original
proposal in its entirety.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 74987 (May 18,
2015), 80 FR 29769 (``BATS Notice''); 74988 (May 18, 2015), 80 FR
29781 (``BYX Notice''); 74986 (May 18, 2015), 80 FR 29772 (``EDGA
Notice''); and 74985 (May 18, 2015), 80 FR 29778 (``EDGX Notice'').
    \6\ See letters to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, from
John A. McCarthy, General Counsel, KCG Holdings, Inc. (``KCG''),
dated June 12, 2015 (``KCG Letter'') available at http://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-byx-2015-25/byx201525-1.pdf; and from
Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel,
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (``SIFMA''),
dated June 15, 2015 (``SIFMA Letter'') available at http://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-bats-2015-37/bats201537-1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposals

    Each Exchange proposes to amend its rules by adding new paragraphs
(b), (c), and (d) to Rule 11.2.\7\ Proposed Rule 11.2(b) provides that
an Exchange may determine not to designate for trading any security
admitted to unlisted trading privileges on the Exchange when that
security's consolidated average daily volume is equal to or less than
2,500 shares during the preceding 90 calendar days.\8\ An Exchange may
begin trading a security that it had previously not designated for
trading pursuant to proposed Rule 11.2(b) if the security's
consolidated average daily trading volume exceeds 5,000 shares over any
90 calendar day period since the security was not designated for
trading.\9\ An Exchange would be required to notify its members at
least one trading day in advance of any securities it is making
unavailable for trading pursuant to proposed Rule 11.2(b), and of any
securities it is making available for trading pursuant to proposed Rule
11.2(c).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The existing provisions of Rule 11.2 will be included in
proposed subparagraph (a).
    \8\ See proposed Exchange Rule 11.2(b). Based on internal
statistics, the Exchanges anticipate that approximately 700
securities would meet this criterion.
    \9\ See proposed Exchange Rule 11.2(c).
    \10\ See proposed Exchange Rule 11.2(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Each Exchange would retain discretion over whether to determine not
to quote and trade securities that meet the criteria in proposed
Exchange Rules 11.2(b) and 11.2(c).\11\ In determining whether to
exercise its discretion under proposed Exchange Rules 11.2(b) and
11.2(c), an Exchange would consider such factors as member and investor
feedback, as well as whether other non-listing exchanges have decided
to cease quoting and trading in the affected securities.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed Exchange Rule 11.2(c).
    \12\ See BATS Notice, 80 FR at 29770; BYX Notice, 80 FR at
29782; EDGA Notice, 80 FR at 29773; and EDGX Notice, 80 FR at 29779.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchanges state that the proposals may facilitate an
improvement in market quality for the affected securities, which could
increase investor interest in trading these securities. In particular,
the Exchanges believe that concentrating the quoted liquidity in the
affected securities on the listing exchange will provide liquidity
providers with an incentive to quote more competitively on the listing
exchange, resulting in narrower bid-ask spreads and greater quoted
depth of book. Specifically, the Exchanges believe that liquidity
providers will have an incentive to quote more competitively because
concentrating the quoted liquidity on the listing exchange would: (i)
Reduce liquidity providers' risk of adverse selection when quoting in a
fragmented market; (ii) provide greater certainty of execution on the
one exchange at which liquidity providers are quoting; and (iii)
enhance competition for order book priority at the national best bid or
offer and throughout the depth of book. In addition, the Exchanges
state that concentrating liquidity on the listing exchange could
provide the listing exchange with flexibility to innovate with
alternative market structures, such as variable tick sizes or periodic
batch auctions, that currently are not possible under Regulation NMS
when multiple exchanges are quoting and trading the securities. The
Exchanges believe that such alternative market structures could further
enhance the market quality of the affected securities.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See BATS Notice, 80 FR at 29770-29771; BYX Notice, 80 FR at
29782-29783; EDGA Notice at 80 FR at 29773-29774; and EDGX Notice at
80 FR 29779-29780.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Comments Received

    The Commission received two comment letters regarding the
proposals, both of which supported the proposals.\14\ One commenter
stated that the proposals were ``a reasonable approach to addressing
the persistent problem of trading illiquid securities in

a fragmented market.'' \15\ Another commenter stated that the market
quality of less liquid securities could be improved if their exchange
trading presence was concentrated on the listing exchange.\16\ Both
commenters expressed support for similar initiatives by other
exchanges, with one commenter encouraging other exchanges to consider
expanding the scope of less liquid securities that would be subject to
a concentrated trading threshold.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 6, supra. The KCG Letter was addressed to File No.
SR-BYX-2015-25, and the SIFMA Letter was addressed to File No. SR-
BATS-2015-37. Because the proposals are substantially similar, the
Commission believes it is appropriate to consider the comments with
respect to all of the proposals.
    \15\ KCG Letter at 1.
    \16\ See SIFMA Letter at 1-2.
    \17\ See SIFMA Letter at 2; KCG Letter at 3. While expressing
support for the current proposals, one commenter indicated that it
would oppose any proposal to establish concentrated exchange trading
for actively traded stocks. The commenter also stated that the
initiative to concentrate exchange trading must allow for the
continuation of off-exchange trading of illiquid securities which,
in the commenter's view, provides important supplementary benefits
to exchange trading. See SIFMA Letter at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter stated that by providing the primary listing exchange
with exclusivity in the quoting and trading of thinly-traded
securities, the proposals would allow the listing exchange to better
innovate its market structure for these securities, which likely would
lead to improved market quality for the securities.\18\ At the same
time, the commenter stated that that the voluntary nature of the
program should act as a check to assure that the listing exchange does
not abuse its monopoly position.\19\ The commenter noted, further, that
the proposals are an incremental market structure adjustment, unlike
other recent initiatives that the commenter characterized as being
larger in scope and potentially disruptive.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See KCG Letter at 2.
    \19\ See id.
    \20\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
changes, as amended, are consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\21\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule changes, as amended, are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\22\ which requires that the rules of the exchange be designed,
among other things, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposals will provide
transparency by signaling each Exchange's general intention to
voluntarily refrain from trading any security that does not meet the
consolidated average daily trading volume threshold established in Rule
11.2(b), and to continue to refrain from trading such a security until
the security satisfies the requirements of Rule 11.2(c). The proposals
also make clear that the Exchanges will retain discretion to quote and
trade the affected securities. \23\ In determining whether to exercise
this discretion, the Exchanges have represented that they will consider
such factors as member and investor feedback, and whether other non-
listing exchanges have decided to cease quoting and trading the
affected securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Rule 11.2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that each Exchange is required to notify its
members at least one trading day in advance of any securities that it
is making unavailable for trading pursuant to Rule 11.2(b), and of any
securities it is making available for trading pursuant to Rule
11.2(c).\24\ The Commission notes, further, that the Exchanges believe
that the proposals potentially could enhance the market quality of the
affected securities, and that the commenters similarly supported the
proposals as a step toward improving the market quality of less liquid
securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Exchange Rule 11.2(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\25\ that the proposed rule changes (File Nos. SR-BATS-2015-37; SR-
BYX-2015-25; SR-EDGA-2015-19; and SR-EDGX-2015-21), as amended, are
approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-16727 Filed 7-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53656-53657]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21019]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0543; FRL-8889-01-OLEM]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements (HWIR) Contaminated
Media, EPA ICR No. 1775.09, OMB Control No. 2050-0161

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``Hazardous Remediation
Waste Management Requirements (HWIR) Contaminated Media'' (Renewal),
(EPA ICR No. 1775.09, OMB Control No. 2050-0161) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). Before doing so, the EPA is
soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed
information collection as described in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. This
is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
April 30, 2022. 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.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 29, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OLEM-2018-0543, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to rcra-

[email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Vyas, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov. Out of an abundance of caution for members of the
public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room is closed
to the public, with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide
remote customer service via email, phone and webform. For further
information about the EPA's public docket, Docket Center services and
the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The
EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal
Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
requires EPA to establish a national regulatory program to ensure that
hazardous wastes are managed in a manner protective of human health and
the environment. Under this program, EPA regulates newly generated
hazardous wastes, as well as hazardous remediation wastes (i.e.,
hazardous wastes managed during cleanup). Hazardous remediation waste
management sites must comply with all parts of 40 CFR part 264 except
subparts B, C, and D. In place of these requirements, they need to
comply with performance standards based on the general requirement
goals in these sections, which are codified at 40 CFR 264.1(j).
    Under 40 CFR 264.1(j), owners/operators of remediation waste
management sites must develop and maintain procedures to prevent
accidents. These procedures must address proper design, construction,
maintenance, and operation of hazardous remediation waste management
units at the site. In addition, owners/operators must develop and
maintain a contingency and emergency plan to control accidents that
occur. The plan must explain specifically how to treat, store, and
dispose of the hazardous remediation waste in question, and must be
implemented immediately whenever fire, explosion, or release of
hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents that could threaten
human health or the environment. In addition, the Remedial Action Plan
streamlines the permitting process for remediation waste management
sites to allow cleanups to take place more quickly.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are the private sector, as well as State, Local, or Tribal
governments.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (RCRA section
3004(u)).
    Estimated number of respondents: 183.
    Frequency of response: One-time.
    Total estimated burden: 6,361 hours per year. Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $399,803 (per year), which includes $350,307
in annualized labor and $49,496 in annualized capital or operation &
maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The burden hours are likely to stay
substantially the same.

    Dated: September 10, 2021.
Carolyn Hoskinson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2021-21019 Filed 9-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


                             Supporting Statement
                                      for
                        Information Collection Request

             Control of Evaporative Emissions from New and In-Use
                    Portable Gasoline Containers (Renewal)

                                EPA ICR 2213.05

                              Compliance Division
                   Office of Transportation and Air Quality
                          Office of Air and Radiation
                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                      PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

1.	Identification of the Information Collection

(a)	Title and Number of Information Collection.

 	"Control of Evaporative Emissions from New and In-Use Portable Gasoline Containers (Renewal)", ICR 2213.05, OMB 2060-0597.

(b)	Short Characterization.

	Under regulations promulgated on February 26, 2007 (72 FR 8428; 40 CFR Part 59, Subpart F), manufacturers of new portable gasoline containers from 0.25 to 10.0 gallons in capacity are required to obtain certificates of conformity with the Clean Air Act. The rule applies to containers manufactured on or after January 1, 2009 (manufacturers and importers were given until June 30, 2009 and wholesale distributors until December 31, 2009 to dispose of stocks manufactured before January 1, 2009). Certificates are valid from the effective date until the end of the production period, to a maximum of five years. This ICR covers the burdens associated with the applications for certification and the required annual reports of successful warranty claims, based on experience during the prior three years of the program. The applications are processed by the Compliance Division (CD), Office of Transportation and Air Quality, EPA. In essence, an application is in support of an emission limitation of 0.3 grams per gallon per day for the mandated five-year useful life of the container. Applicants submit test results conducted in accordance with the regulations, maintenance instructions and warranty information given to the purchasers, copies of the labels, and other information listed in section 4(b).  Applications are submitted in no fixed format, although EPA did work with industry informally on application questions and provided non-confidential versions of acceptable received applications ("FOIA applications") as examples to other potential applicants. Applications are submitted electronically as a part of the EPA's Verify certification information system.

	The previous ICR authorization was based on an estimated eight respondents for 179 hours and $21,668 in costs, including $12,552 in capital and O&M costs per year.

      The burdens in this ICR are based on experience administering the program from January 1, 2013, through December, 2015. Currently, there are seventeen active EPA certificates of conformity issued to eight different companies. All certificates were issued for five years. Annual warranty reports were due July 1.  The portable gasoline container companies have not experienced any emission related warranty claims, so no warranty reports have been received to date.  The main changes from the previous ICR authorization are the following: updating the agency burden estimate, labor costs, and the number of respondents and responses.  The current request estimates eight respondents for 250 hours and $32,419.45 in costs, including $20,452 for capital and O&M costs, including the costs of conducting tests, annually.

2.	Need for and Use of the Collection

(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection.

Statutory authority for the portable gasoline container controls is found in Sections 183(e) and 111 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. sections 7511b(e) and 7414. The EPA is required under Section 183(e) of the Clean Air Act (Act) to regulate Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions from the use of consumer and commercial products.  Pursuant to Section 183(e)(3), the EPA published a list of consumer and commercial products and a schedule for their regulation on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15264).  Consumer products were included in Group I of the list, and standards were promulgated on September 11, 1998.  In the Administrator's judgment, VOC emissions from the use of consumer products contribute to ground-level ozone formation in ozone non-attainment areas. Portable gasoline containers are a consumer product which has been shown to be deficient in preventing VOCs in the form of fuel vapors from being emitted into the air.  The certification program for portable gasoline containers was promulgated in 2007 (72 FR 8533; February 26, 2007).  The regulations appear in 40 CFR Part 59, Subpart F (40 CFR §§ 59.600 - 59.699).

      The information in the application is needed to insure that the emission standard will be met during the useful life of the container and that the certified containers comply with the labeling, warranty, and other requirements of the regulations. The information is sufficient to allow the manufacturer to aggregate containers of like design into one emission family.  This saves the manufacturer the expense of testing models of similar but not identical design.  The information is also detailed enough to allow subsequent recertification when a certificate has expired ("carry over"), where design and emissions characteristics are virtually unchanged.

	The record keeping requirements are likewise in support of a demonstration that the emissions family certified will meet the emissions standard in the regulation. The records specified are to be provided to EPA upon request.

      The annual warranty reports are needed to assure that the containers survive normal use and provide EPA important information on the success of its certification program, weaknesses therein, or examples or patterns of noncompliance.  Cans showing excessive warranty claims could be candidates for in-use testing by EPA.  Although EPA does not have the authority to recall portable gasoline containers, the warranty information along with possible in-use testing by EPA could be used as grounds to withhold subsequent certification or to enter into an enforcement action under the Clean Air Act.

(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Information.

	Agency personnel will use the information collected to:

 Determine if a manufacturer's portable gasoline containers meet the emission standard when new;

 Allow the agency to issue a certificate of conformity to the manufacturer so that they can market the approved containers;

 Allow the agency to issue carry-over certificates from a previous production period  instead of doing new tests, but only if the emission-data from the previous production period remains the appropriate emission-data unit;
 Allow the agency to issue certificates to the manufacturer for containers that are substantially similar to the tested prototype and waive the testing process required for a new design ("carry across");

 Provide information to the agency to indicate that the portable gasoline containers are meeting the standard in-use; and

 Provide information to the agency that a portable gasoline container design is not meeting the standard in-use and provide a basis on which to reject a manufacturer's application for that design in subsequent model years or take other appropriate action.

3.	Non-duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

(a)	Non-duplication.

	The information collected includes product and manufacturing specifications, testing documentation, and successful warranty claims.  Similar information is collected by the state of California and approximately 13 other states that have adopted the California Portable Gasoline Container regulation.  However, the California regulation is different in several key areas that make the information unsuitable for information collection required by the Federal rule.  These are all due to the following differences in the standards and certification requirements in the two rules:

 The test fuel and the temperature cycles used in the Federal program are more in keeping with nationwide ambient temperatures and fuels, while those required in the California regulation are more suitable to California fuels and ambient conditions.

 The Federal rule requires the reporting of successful warranty claims concerning fuel containers sold as certified under the rule.  While the California regulation does require that the manufacturer issue warranties, it does not require them to report on the outcomes of successful claims against them.

These differences make the California data unsuitable for the Federal rule on fuel containers.

 	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

      An announcement soliciting public comment on this ICR will be published in the Federal Register. A copy of the draft ICR was placed in the docket. No comments were received.

(c)	Consultations

	For this renewal, EPA will consult the following individual(s):

Organization			Name					Phone Number

Scepter USA.			Phil Monckton<PHONE_NUMBER>

No Spill, LLC			Tom Cray<PHONE_NUMBER>

Testing Services Group	Andy Meloney<PHONE_NUMBER>

These manufacturers and testing laboratories have been consulted in previous renewals for portable gasoline containers. For example, Testing Services Group has previously commented on contract costs for testing and application preparation that was particularly helpful.

(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection.

	Certificates of conformity are issued for the production period of the models covered in the emissions family, not to exceed five years. All certificates to date have been issued for five years.  However, when a fuel container design is a "carried over" or a new version of a container that is substantially similar to a current container ("carry across"), the amount of new information required is substantially reduced.  Warranty reports are required by regulation to be submitted annually.

(e)	General Guidelines.

	This ICR adheres to the guidelines for Federal data requesters, as provided at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2), with the exception that the regulation requires that records concerning the application for certification be maintained for 5 years (except for routine testing data for 1 year).  The five-year requirement is consistent with the maximum production period and the consequent five-year duration of certificates. The retention is necessary to allow the agency to adequately monitor compliance. Information on successful warranty claims is required for the preceding model by July 1 of the following year.  There is no requirement to report unsuccessful claims against container warranties. There is no requirement by EPA for the manufactures to retain that information beyond the extent necessary to report it annually.

(f)	Confidentiality.

      Any information submitted to EPA for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to EPA regulations at 40 CFR 2.201 Part 2, as stated explicitly in the regulations (40 CFR §59.695). The section sets forth how to make confidentiality claims and how documents raising confidentiality issues will be handled.

 	Sensitive Questions.

	This collection does not involve matters of a sensitive nature.

4.	The Respondents and the Information Requested

(a)	Respondents/SIC and NAICS Codes.

	Respondents to this information collection are manufacturers of portable gasoline containers. They fall within standard industrial classification (SIC) 3411 and within the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code of 332431 (metal can manufacturing) or SIC 3089, NAICS 326199 (all other plastic product manufacturing).

(b)	Information Requested.

	(i)	Data items.

	The required data items are specifically enumerated in the regulations (40 CFR §59.623):

            (a) Describe the emission family's specifications and other basic parameters of the emission controls. List each distinguishable configuration in the emission family. Include descriptions and part numbers for all detachable components such as spouts and caps.

            (b) Describe and explain the method of emission control.

            (c) Describe the products you selected for testing and the reasons for selecting them.

            (d) Describe the test equipment and procedures that you used, including any special or alternate test procedures you used (see §59.650).

            (e) List the specifications of the test fuel to show that it falls within the required ranges specified in §59.650.

            (f) Include the maintenance and use instructions and warranty information you will give to the ultimate purchaser of each new portable gasoline container (see §59.613).

            (g) Describe your emission control information label (see §59.615).

            (h) State that your product was tested as described in the application (including the test procedures, test parameters, and test fuels) to show you meet the requirements of this subpart.

            (i) Present emission data to show your products meet the applicable emission standards. Where applicable, §§59.626 and 59.627 may allow you to submit an application in certain cases without new emission data.

            (j) Report all test results, including those from invalid tests or from any other tests, whether or not they were conducted according to the test procedures of §§59.650 through 59.653. We may ask you to send other information to confirm that your tests were valid under the requirements of this subpart.

            (k) Unconditionally certify that all the products in the emission family comply with the requirements of this subpart, other referenced parts of the CFR, and the Clean Air Act.

            (l) Include estimates of U.S.-directed production volumes.

            (m) Include the information required by other sections of this subpart.

            (n) Include other relevant information, including any additional information requested by EPA.

            (o) Name an agent for service located in the United States. Service on this agent constitutes service on you or any of your officers or employees for any action by EPA or otherwise by the United States related to the requirements of this subpart.

	An additional reporting requirement is listed in 40 CFR §59.628(e):

            (e) Send us an annual warranty report summarizing successful warranty claims by emission family under §59.612, including the reason for the claim. You must submit the report by July 1 for the preceding calendar year.

There is also a one-to-one correspondence between the recordkeeping requirements and the requirements listed in the regulations (40 CFR §59.628):

            (a) Organize and maintain the following records:

            (1) A copy of all applications and any other information you send us.

            (2) Any of the information we specify in §59.623 that you were not required to include in your application.

            (3) A detailed history of each emission-data unit. For each emission-data unit, include all of the following:

            (i) The emission-data unit's construction, including its origin and buildup, steps you took to ensure that it represents production containers, any components you built specially for it, and all the components you include in your application for certification.

            (ii) All your emission tests, including documentation on routine and standard tests, as specified in §§59.650 through 59.653, and the date and purpose of each test.

            (iii) All tests to diagnose emission-control performance, giving the date and time of each and the reasons for the test.

            (iv) Any other relevant events or information.

            (4) Production figures for each emission family divided by assembly plant.

            (5) If you identify your portable gasoline containers by lot number or other identification numbers, keep a record of these numbers for all the containers you produce under each certificate of conformity.

            (b) Keep data from routine emission tests (such as test cell temperatures and relative humidity readings) for one year after we issue the associated certificate of conformity. Keep all other information specified in paragraph (a) of this section for five years after we issue your certificate.

            (c) Store these records in any format and on any media, as long as you can promptly send us organized, written records in English if we ask for them. You must keep these records readily available. We may review them at any time.

            (d) Send us copies of any maintenance instructions or explanations if we ask for them.

	By implication, the annual report of successful warranty claims includes a requirement to keep records of such claims on a yearly basis until July 1 of the following year.

	(ii)	Respondent Activities.

	The applications are in no set format but generally follow the enumerated application requirements specified in §59.623 (see 4(b)(i) above).  The respondent will have to document gasoline container specifications in detail, such as physical size, shapes, materials, quality of component fit, and production methods, in submitting its application(s) for certification. The respondent will also perform tests and keep records on them.  The respondent must collect and keep information on successful warranty claims for annual reporting.  The respondent must also retain records on the units produced, apply serial numbers to individual containers, and track the serial numbers to their certificates of conformity.  Many of these activities are performed in the production of any modern consumer product, but clearly some of the information is uniquely required by the gasoline container regulation.

5.	The Information Collected--Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management.

(a)	Agency Activities.

	 During the renewal period the most significant portion of EPA's activity for the gasoline container regulation will be spent reviewing new applications and renewal applications.  Other activities include processing exceptions and answering questions concerning details of the testing and certification requirements, including researching the answers and communicating by email and telephone. Submissions to change or modify the application for certification after EPA approval of the application (sometimes called a "running change") must also be reviewed for possible impacts and manufacturers' evaluations thereof. A part of this process involves determining if "carry over" or "carry across" of data from a previous model year or addition of a new container model to an existing emissions family is appropriate or if instead new testing will be required. EPA has the right to select a number of containers for testing to confirm that the cans are indeed meeting the emissions standards, but no confirmatory testing burden is anticipated in this estimate. EPA will also be reviewing the annual submissions of successful warranty claims and processing exemption requests.

(b)	Collection Methodology and Management.

	Applicants submit their applications for certification in the document module of EPA's Verify information system. All Verify users go through an initial registration process that includes submission of basic information and assignment of a manufacturer code.  It is anticipated that warranty reports will also be submitted through the Verify document module, with no set format.

(c)	Small Entity Flexibility.

	There are several provisions available for small and larger entity flexibility in the regulations. Hardship deadline extensions for compliance with the standard are available where, due to circumstances neither foreseeable nor preventable, compliance would jeopardize the solvency of the company. Exemptions are for up to one year and are renewable. There are also exemptions for containers intended only for export, used for the sole purpose of testing, competition, or for national security. As with other certification programs, small as well as larger manufacturers have recourse to carry over emission data from a previous production year. They may also request to use alternative testing methods or emissions data already collected using other procedures. The portable gasoline container program currently collects no certification fees.

(d)	Collection Schedule.

	The portable gasoline container regulation applies to all gasoline containers as defined in the regulations manufactured on or after January 1, 2009.  Information collections are on a production period basis, five years in all cases so far.  Warranty reports are on a calendar year basis, with reports due July 1 for the previous calendar year.

6.	Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

	These estimates represent the average annual burden that will be incurred by the affected industry during the three-year period beginning on September 30, 2016, with a margin for error.

(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden.

	The previous ICR, 2213.04, estimated 179 hours and $ $9,116 in labor hours and labor costs and $12,552 in startup capital and O&M costs, for a total of $21,668 per year for eight estimated respondents, assuming a total of two applications per year.

	This ICR estimates 250.4 labor hours from eight manufacturers. This figure primarily reflects the following adjustments: we conservatively ask authorization to cover five applications per year, and because warranty violations have not been reported so far, the labor associated with annual warranty reports is decreased. In addition, the number of manufacturers covered remains at 8.
      This ICR does not include the costs of developing products that comply with the Clean Air Act, only the burdens of making the showing to EPA that they do. TSG, which does nearly all of the contract work, states that it charges under $2,000 for application preparation and submission and under $5,000 for testing work. Because the facility does a wide variety of testing, including for these clients, it is difficult to allocate these contracted costs among labor, capital, and O&M.

	This ICR uses $7,500 per application cost for new applications, allocated approximately one third to labor and two thirds to the contractor's remaining O&M costs, following the Regulatory Impact Analysis and the prior ICR.  Carry-over applications only require labor costs, with no testing (O&M) costs.

 Estimating Respondent Costs.

      (i) Estimating Labor Costs

      Rates for managers, mechanical engineer technicians, and administrative staff are from the May 2015 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates http:// http:// http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_326100.htm#11-0000 and http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_332400.htm#00-0000). With an overhead multiplier of 1.31, these are $77.21, $41.12, and $24.39, respectively. Applying these figures to the application, warranty, and record keeping labor totals above, the total labor cost is $ $11,967.55.

      (ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

      The prior ICR included a one-time startup cost estimate of $519 per year for ten new manufacturer applicants. The current ICR assumes one new manufacturer with the startup cost allocated proportionately. We assume $6,000 in O&M costs for testing, for 3.4 new applications per year, for a total O&M cost of $ $20,400 per year for the industry.

 (c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost.

	  The program is now in place and the considerable startup efforts are in the past. One hour per application by a GS 13, Step 10, EPA employee is estimated for review of the portable gasoline container certifications. There are no secretarial or database management costs, as these are too small to differentiate from the much larger Verify baseline as part of the motor vehicle certification IC.  The EPA employee cost is $86.96 per certification review. The EPA labor estimate is based on Office of Personnel Management SALARY TABLE 2015-base (https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2015/GS.pdf ). For five applications per year the estimated annual Agency burden is $434.80.  We anticipate nominal effort in eliciting and reviewing warranty action reports, which to date have included only notice of no warranty actions, estimated at an average of one hour for each of a maximum of 8 reports per year for a total of $695.68. The current estimate includes no new hardship and national security exemption determinations. The agency total is therefore ten hours and $1,130.48.

 	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

The following assumptions were used to estimate the respondent universe and total burden and costs for industry to comply with the various requirements of the rule.
::	We estimate eight (8) manufactures of gasoline containers for the domestic market. This manufacturer estimation is consistent with the prior ICR renewal. There are currently eight manufacturers that have applied for certificates.
::	 We conservatively anticipate 17 applications in the next five years, or 3.4 applications a year.
::	 We expect  the majority of the applications we receive over the next five years to require testing. We, therefore, anticipate a moderate level of testing for each manufacturer over the next five years. This estimate may be reduced in the next ICR if updates information reduces the expected testing we anticipate for PFC's.
::	Manufactures will continue to contract for testing services and most certificate application preparation.
(e)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables
	(i)	Respondent Tally
RESPONDENTS
8
BURDEN HOURS
250.4
LABOR COST
$11,967.55
OPERATING COST
$20,400
CAPITALIZED COST
$ 52
TOTAL COST
$32,419.55

	(ii)	Agency Tally

EMPLOYEES
1
STARTUP
$0
LABOR HOURS
13
LABOR COST
$ 1,130

(f)     Reasons for Change in Burden
	The program is now mature and startup costs have largely already been incurred. No warranty violation reports have been received, so warranty report applications are expected to be less time consuming. The number of manufacturers is remains at eight and we do not anticipate an increase in new entrants. The increase in anticipated costs is due to the increase in applications from the addition of two emission families. We have adjusted the labor expected for respondents according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates for the 2015 model year and we are now using a labor cost modifier also offered by BLS. Finally, we have increased the anticipated cost of contracting a portable gasoline container emission test to reflect the current market rate.

(g)    Burden Statement

      The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 31.3 hours respondent.  Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 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; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 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.  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 numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0118, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center 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 Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov .  Use this site to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  Once in the system, select "search," then key in the docket ID number identified above.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0118 and OMB Control Number 2060-0597 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 121 (Monday, June 26, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41308-41312]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13430]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1209; Project Identifier AD-2023-00632-T;
Amendment 39-22456; AD 2023-11-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Model
382, 382B, 382E, 382F, 382G, and 382J airplanes; and Model C-130A, HP-
C-130A, EC-130Q, 282-44A-05 (C-130B), C-130B, and C-130H airplanes.
This AD was prompted by a report indicating a quality audit found aft
fuselage sloping

longerons manufactured with an overaged condition. This AD requires a
conductivity check on certain aft fuselage sloping longerons and
applicable on-condition actions. This AD also limits the installation
of certain aft fuselage sloping longerons under certain conditions. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 11, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 11,
2023.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by August 10, 2023.

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 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.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2023-1209; 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.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
Company, Airworthiness Office, Dept. 6A0M, Zone 0252, Column P-58, 86 S
Cobb Drive, Marietta, GA 30063; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 770-494-
5445; email [email protected].
     You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at
regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2023-1209.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Caplan, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA has received a report indicating a quality audit found aft
fuselage sloping longerons manufactured with an overaged condition
(i.e., understrength). The FAA determined this occurred because the
longerons were not properly checked for conductivity and hardness
during manufacturing and consequently were exposed to excessive hot
forming temperatures, which reduced the material strength properties of
the longeron. An aft fuselage sloping longeron manufactured with an
overaged condition would reduce the static strength of the longeron
below limit load (i.e., maximum load to be expected in service). If
both aft fuselage sloping longerons are understrength, the structural
integrity of the airplane would be reduced below limit load, which
could lead to failure of both longerons. This condition, if not
addressed, could result in loss of the airplane. 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 has determined the
unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in
other products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382-53-69, dated April 12, 2023, for Lockheed Martin
Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company (Lockheed) Model 382,
382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G airplanes; and Model C-130A, HP-C-130A, EC-
130Q, 282-44A-05 (C-130B), C-130B, and C-130H airplanes. This service
information specifies procedures for reviewing the airplane maintenance
records to determine if the left or right aft fuselage sloping
longeron, having part number (P/N) 342986-( ), has been replaced on or
after December 31, 2012, and applicable on-condition actions. The on-
conditions actions include doing a conductivity check on any replaced
longeron or any longeron for which it cannot be conclusively determined
that it has not been replaced; and doing a Rockwell hardness test if
the conductivity measurements exceed certain values specified in the
service information.
    The FAA reviewed Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382J-53-004, dated March 27, 2023, for Lockheed Model 382J
airplanes. This service information specifies procedures for doing a
conductivity check on any aft fuselage sloping longeron having P/N
342986-13/-14/-19/-20 and applicable on-condition action. The on-
condition action includes doing a Rockwell hardness test if the
conductivity measurements exceed certain values specified in the
service information.
    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.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information already described, except as discussed under ``Differences
Between this AD and the Service Information.'' This AD also limits the
installation of aft fuselage sloping longerons under certain
conditions.

Difference Between This AD and the Service Information

    The effectivity of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert
Service Bulletin A382J-53-004, dated March 27, 2023, is limited to
Model 382J airplanes, serial numbers 5854, 5889, 5894, and 5956.
However, the applicability of this AD includes all Model 382J
airplanes. Because the affected aft fuselage sloping longerons are
rotable parts, the FAA has determined that these parts could later be
installed on airplanes that were initially delivered with acceptable
longerons, thereby subjecting those airplanes to the unsafe condition.
    Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment
Instructions of the referenced service information describe procedures
for submitting all conductivity and hardness inspection results to
Lockheed to determine further action, the service information does not
specify a corrective action. This AD does not require reporting
inspection results. Instead this AD requires, depending on the
conductivity and hardness test results, repairing using a method
approved by the Manager, East Certification Branch, FAA.

Impact on Intrastate Aviation in Alaska

    In light of the heavy reliance on aviation for intrastate
transportation in Alaska, the FAA fully considered the effects of this
AD (including costs to be borne by affected operators) from the
earliest possible stages of AD development. This AD is based on those

considerations, and was developed with regard to minimizing the
economic impact on operators to the extent possible, consistent with
the safety objectives of this AD. In any event, the Federal Aviation
Regulations require operators to correct an unsafe condition identified
on an airplane to ensure operation of that airplane in an airworthy
condition. The FAA has determined in this case that the requirements
are necessary and the indirect costs would be outweighed by the safety
benefits of the AD.

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 forgoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because numerous understrength aft fuselage sloping longerons have been
found on military airplanes of the same type design, and it is likely
that understrength longerons are also installed on in-service
airplanes. The possibility of both longerons being understrength
violates fail-safe design. If both aft fuselage sloping longerons are
understrength, the structural integrity of the airplane would be
reduced below limit load, which could lead to failure of both
longerons. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in loss
of the airplane. Also, the compliance time for the required action is
shorter than the time necessary for the public to comment and for
publication of the final rule. 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-2023-1209 and Project Identifier AD-
2023-00632-T at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, 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
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 Fred
Caplan, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College
Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].
Any commentary that the FAA receives that 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 notice and comment,
RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 40 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Records Review (36 airplanes).........  1 work-hours x $85 per                $0             $85          $3,060
                                         hour = $85.
Conductivity Check (4 Model 382J        10 work-hour x $85 per                 0             850           3,400
 airplanes).                             hour = $850.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of the
applicable records review or conductivity check. The FAA has no way of
determining the number of aircraft that might need on-condition
actions:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conductivity Check and Hardness Test..........  20 work-hour x $85 per hour =                 $0          $1,700
                                                 $85.
Hardness Test (Model 382J airplanes)..........  10 work-hour x $85 per hour =                  0             850
                                                 $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition repair specified in this AD.

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2023-11-10 Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
Company: Amendment 39-22456; Docket No. FAA-2023-1209; Project
Identifier AD-2023-00632-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 11, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (2) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
Company Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, 382G, and 382J airplanes.
    (2) The airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (xi)
of this AD, type certificated in the restricted category.
    (i) LeSEA Model C-130A airplanes (transferred from Central Air
Services, Inc.), Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) A34SO, Revision
1.
    (ii) T.B.M., Inc., Model C-130A airplanes, TCDS A39CE, Revision
3.
    (iii) Western International Aviation, Inc., Model C-130A
airplanes, TCDS A33NM.
    (iv) USDA Forest Service Model C-130A airplanes, TCDS A15NM,
Revision 4.
    (v) Snow Aviation International, Inc., Model C-130A airplanes,
TCDS TQ3CH, Revision 1.
    (vi) International Air Response (transferred from Rogers
Helicopters, Inc., and Heavylift Helicopters Inc.) Model C-130A
airplanes, TCDS A31NM, Revision 3.
    (vii) Heavylift Helicopters, Inc., Model C-130B airplanes, TCDS
A35NM, Revision 1.
    (viii) Hawkins & Powers Aviation, Inc., Model HP-C-130A
airplanes, TCDS A30NM, Revision 1.
    (ix) Coulson Aviation (USA), Inc., Model EC-130Q and C-130H
airplanes, TCDS T00019LA, Revision 4.
    (x) Lockheed-Georgia Company Model 282-44A-05 (C-130B)
airplanes, TCDS A5SO.
    (xi) Surplus Model C-130A airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating a quality audit
found aft fuselage sloping longerons manufactured with an overaged
condition (i.e., understrength). The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the possibility of both aft sloping longerons being
understrength, which would reduce the structural integrity of the
airplane below limit load (i.e., maximum load to be expected in
service) and could lead to failure of both longerons. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Records Review for All Airplanes Except Model 382J Airplanes

    For all airplanes except Model 382J airplanes: Within 35 days
after the effective date of this AD, review the airplane maintenance
records to determine if the left or right aft fuselage sloping
longeron, having part number (P/N) 342986-( ), has been replaced on
or after December 31, 2012.

(h) Conductivity Check for All Airplanes Except Model 382J Airplanes

    If, during the airplane maintenance records review required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, it is determined that the left or right
aft fuselage sloping longeron, having P/N 342986-( ), has been
replaced on or after December 31, 2012, or it cannot be conclusively
determined that the part has not been replaced, before further
flight, do a conductivity check on the longeron, in accordance with
paragraph 2.E. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Martin
Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin A382-53-69, dated April
12, 2023.

(i) Hardness Test for All Airplanes Except Model 382J Airplanes

    If, during the conductivity check required by paragraph (h) of
this AD, the conductivity measurements exceed the values specified
in paragraph 2.E.(6) or (7), as applicable, of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382-53-69, dated April 12, 2023, before further flight, do
a Rockwell hardness test of the longeron, in accordance with
paragraph 2.F. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Martin
Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin A382-53-69, dated April
12, 2023.

(j) Conductivity Check for Model 382J Airplanes

    For all Model 382J airplanes: Within 35 days after the effective
date of this AD, do a conductivity check on any aft fuselage sloping
longeron having P/N 342986-13/-14/-19/-20, in accordance with
paragraph 2.D. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Martin
Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin A382J-53-004, dated March
27, 2023.

(k) Hardness Test for Model 382J Airplanes

    If, during the conductivity check required by paragraph (j) of
this AD, the conductivity measurements exceed the values specified
in paragraph 2.E.(6) or (7), as applicable, before further flight,
do a Rockwell hardness test of the longeron, in accordance with
paragraph 2.E. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed Martin
Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin A382J-53-004, dated March
27, 2023.

(l) Corrective Action for All Airplanes

    If, during any hardness test required by paragraph (i) or (k) of
this AD, the hardness reading is below 80 Rockwell B, before further
flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, East
Certification Branch, FAA.

(m) No Report

    Although Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service
Bulletin A382-53-69,

dated April 12, 2023; and Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert
Service Bulletin A382J-53-004, dated March 27, 2023; specify to
submit all conductivity and hardness inspection results to Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company, this AD does not require any report.

(n) Parts Installation Limitation

    (1) For all airplanes except Model 382J airplanes: As of the
effective date of this AD, no person may install any aft fuselage
sloping longeron having P/N 342986-( ) unless the conductivity check
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD has been accomplished and all
applicable actions specified in paragraphs (i) and (l) have been
accomplished.
    (2) For all Model 382J airplanes: As of the effective date of
this AD, no person may install any aft fuselage sloping longeron
having P/N 342986-( ) unless the conductivity check specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD has been accomplished and all applicable
actions specified in paragraphs (k) and (l) have been accomplished.

(o) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits, as described in 14 CFR 21.197 and
21.199, are not allowed.

(p) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, East Certification 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 responsible Flight
Standards 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 (q) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as specified by
paragraph (m) of this AD, if any service information contains steps
that are identified as RC, those steps, including substeps under an
RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to
comply with this AD; any steps that are not identified as RC are
recommended. Those steps that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the steps and tests identified as RC
can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to steps, including substeps
under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step,
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(q) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Fred Caplan,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

(r) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin
A382-53-69, dated April 12, 2023.
    (ii) Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Alert Service Bulletin
A382J-53-004, dated March 27, 2023.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company,
Airworthiness Office, Dept. 6A0M, Zone 0252, Column P-58, 86 S Cobb
Drive, Marietta, GA 30063; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on June 2, 2023.
Michael Linegang,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-13430 Filed 6-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2009–0422; FRL-       ]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review
and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Chromium Emissions from Hard
and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing Tanks (40
CFR part 63, subpart N), EPA ICR Number 1611.07, OMB Control Number
2060–0327.

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 [INSERT DATE 30
DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number
EPA-OECA-2009–0422, 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 2801T , 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:  John Schaefer, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-05),
Measurement Policy Group, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail 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 July 8, 2009 (74 FR 32580), 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-2009–0422, which is available for public viewing
online at   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"
http://www.regulations.gov , 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   HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov , to 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   HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov , as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure
is restricted by statute.  For further information about the electronic
docket, go to   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"
www.regulations.gov .

	Title:  NESHAP for Chromium Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium
Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing Tanks (40 CFR part 63, subpart N)

	ICR Numbers:  EPA ICR Number 1611.07, OMB Control Number 2060–0327.

	ICR Status:  This ICR is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2010.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while

this submission is pending at OMB.  	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 numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR,
after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40
CFR part 9, and displayed either by publication in the Federal Register
or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable.  The display of OMB control numbers
in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

	Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions
of the NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, and any changes, or
additions to the General Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart
N. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit a
one-time-only report of any physical or operational changes, initial
performance tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or operators
are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of
any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected
facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are

required semiannually.

	Burden Statement:  The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden
for this collection of information is estimated to average 77.6 hours
per response.  Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or 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; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and
requirements which 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: Hard chromium electroplating, decorative
chromium electroplating, and chromium anodizing.

	Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,770

	Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, quarterly,
semiannually, and annually.

	Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:  171,118

	Estimated Total Annual Cost:  $31,933,586, which includes $5,383,586 in
labor costs, $0 in capital/startup costs, and $26,550,000 in operation
and maintenance (O&M) costs.

	Changes in the Estimates: There was a decrease in burden hours, costs,
and number of responses currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved Burdens.  This is due to a change in the number of estimated
chromium electroplating and anodizing operations affected by ICR since
the last renewal which decreased from 5,020 to 1,770 sources.

Dated:  ______________________

_____________________________

Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division

BILLING CODE 6560-50

 PAGE   4

 PAGE   3


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 50 (Thursday, March 14, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 9322]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04682]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 6474-003]

KC Pittsfield LLC, Daley Energy, LLC; Notice of Transfer of
Exemption

    1. By letter filed February 15, 2019, KC Pittsfield LLC informed
the Commission that the exemption from licensing for the 100-MW Eastman
Brook Project No. 6474, originally issued September 7, 1982 \1\ has
been transferred from KC Pittsfield LLC to Daley Energy, LLC. The
project is located on Eastman Brook in Grafton County, New Hampshire.
The transfer of an exemption does not require Commission approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Notice of Exemption From Licensing. Eastman Brook Hydro, 20
FERC ] 62,426 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Daley Energy, LLC is now the exemptee of the Eastman Brook
Project No. 6474. All correspondence should be forwarded to: Mr. Travis
Daley, Daley Energy, LLC, 210 Route 10, Piermont, NH 03779, Phone: 802-
291-0839, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 7, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-04682 Filed 3-13-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P