Supporting Statement for NSPS for Automobile and Light Duty Truck
Surface Coating Operations

(40 CFR part 60, subpart MM)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NSPS for Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations (40
CFR

part 60, subpart MM).

1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Automobile and Light
Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations (40 CFR part 60, subpart MM) were
proposed on October 5, 1979, and promulgated on December 24, 1980 (45 FR
85415).  These standards apply to the following automobile and light
duty truck assembly plant operations: each prime coat operation, guide
coat operation, and top coat operation commencing construction,
modification or reconstruction after October 5, 1979.  This information
is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM.

In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports.  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.  These notifications, reports, and records are essential in
determining compliance and are required, in general, of all sources
subject to NSPS.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
two years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports,
and records.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local
authority.  In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the
reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regional office.

Approximately 52 sources are currently subject to the standard, and it
is estimated that an additional two sources per year will become subject
to the regulation in the next three years.  This estimate is based on
discussions with the industry, EPA’s Air Facility System (AFS), and
the previously approved Information Collection Request (ICR).

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the currently active
ICR without any “Terms of Clearance.”

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, as amended,
to establish standards of performance for new stationary sources that
reflect:

. . . application of the best technological system of continuous
emissions reduction which (taking into consideration the cost of
achieving such emissions reduction, or any non-air quality health and
environmental impact and energy requirements) the Administrator
determines has been adequately demonstrated.  Section 111(a)(l).

The Agency refers to this charge as selecting the best demonstrated
technology (BDT).

Section 111 also requires that the Administrator review and, if
appropriate, revise such standards every four years.

In addition, Section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require
any owner or operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C)
install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit
procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with
such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during
such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe);
(E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables
or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is
impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with
Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the
Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator’s judgment, volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from automobile and light duty truck coating operations cause
or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NSPS were promulgated
for this source category at 40 CFR part 60, subpart MM.

2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The control of emissions of VOCs from automobile and light duty truck
coating operations requires not only the installation of properly
designed equipment, but also the operation and maintenance of that
equipment.  Emissions of VOCs from automobile and light duty truck
coating operations are the result of operation of the affected
facilities.  The subject standards are achieved by the capture and
destruction of pollutant emissions using incinerators or through the use
of coatings which contain lower amounts of VOCs.  The notifications
required in the applicable regulations are used to inform the Agency or
delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of
the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to
check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and
operated and the regulations are being met.  Performance test reports
are needed as these are the Agency’s record of a source’s initial
capability to comply with the emission standards, and serve as a record
of the operating conditions under which compliance was achieved.  When
thermal or catalytic incineration is performed, the owner or operator
shall keep records of each three-hour period during which the
incinerator temperature averaged more than 28 degrees centigrade below
the temperature of the most recent performance test, and when the
average temperature difference across the catalyst bed is less than 80%
of the average temperature difference recorded during the most recent
performance test.  The semiannual reports are used for problem
identification as a check on source operation and maintenance and for
compliance determinations.  The information generated by the monitoring,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements described in this ICR is used
by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NSPS continue to
operate the control equipment in compliance with the regulation.
Adequate monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting are necessary to
ensure compliance with these standards, as required by the Clean Air
Act.  The information collected from recordkeeping and reporting
requirements is also used for targeting inspections, and is of
sufficient quality to be used as evidence in court.

3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part
60,

subpart MM.

3(a)  Nonduplication

If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is
sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the
information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If
a state or local agency has adopted their own similar standards to
implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the
state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the
report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication
exists.

3(b)  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR
was published in the Federal Register on June 21, 2006 (71 FR 35652).
No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal
Register.

3(c)  Consultations

	The primary source of information as reported by industry, in
compliance with the record keeping and reporting provisions in the
standard, is the ARS (Airs Facility Subsystem) which is operated and
maintained by EPA’s Office of Compliance.  AFS is the Agency’s
database for the collection, maintenance and retrieval of all compliance
data.  In consultation with the Agency’s industry experts and the AFS
database, we have determined that there has been no growth in the number
of respondents since the last ICR.

	In determining the correct burden estimate associated with this ICR,
industry trade associations and other interested parties have been
provided an opportunity to comment on the burden associated with the
standard as it was being developed and in subsequent renewals of the
ICR.  It is our policy to carefully review any comments received since
the last ICR renewal, including those submitted in response to the first
federal register notice, and respond appropriately. Per this guidance,
all data assumptions from the previous ICR renewal were used as the
basis for estimating the hourly and cost burdens associated with this
renewal.

	Also, for this information collection, the previous ICR renewal was
used to obtain burden estimates since this ICR renewal was processed
under the “renew without change” option.  Per this guidance, all
data and assumptions from the previous ICR renewal were used as the
basis for estimating the hourly and cost burdens associated with this
renewal.

In the previous ICR, EPA discussed the burden and cost estimates for
this activity with the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) and
the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM) at the
last ICR renewal, and revised its estimates accordingly.  EPA’s Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) conducted an extensive
review and consultations with industry during development  of the
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface Coating that affects
substantially the same universe of sources.  For this information
collection, the previous ICR renewal was used to obtain burden estimates
since this ICR renewal was processed under the “renew without
change” option.  Per this guidance, all data and assumptions from the
previous ICR renewal were used as the basis for estimating the hourly
and cost burdens associated with this renewal.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of
assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.
Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful
techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are
applied and emission limitations are met.  If the information required
by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of
detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and
noncompliance would decrease.

3(e)  General Guidelines

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the
regulations established by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.6.

3(f)  Confidentiality

The required information has been determined not to be confidential.
However, any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B -
Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902,
September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR
42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3(g)  Sensitive Questions

None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive
questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are
automobile and light duty truck surface coating operations for which
construction or modification commenced after October 5, 1979.

Standard

SIC Codes

North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Codes

40 CFR part 60, subpart MM

3711

336111

336112

336211

4(b)  Information Requested

(i)  Data Items

All data in this ICR that is recorded and/or reported is required by
NSPS for Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations (40
CFR part 60, subpart MM).

A source must make the following reports:

Reports

Construction/reconstruction

60.7(a)(1)

Actual startup

60.7(a)(3)

Initial performance test results

60.8(a)

Initial performance test

60.8(d)

Physical or operational change.

60.7(a)(4)

Startups, shutdowns, malfunctions, periods where the continuous
monitoring system is inoperative.

60.7(b)

Report volume weighted average mass of VOC per volume of applied
coatings solid in initial compliance report.

60.395(a)

Report the gas temperature upstream and downstream of catalyst bed,
total mass of VOC per volume of applied coating solids, capture
efficiency, destruction efficiency, and method used to determine VOC
captured and sent to the control device in initial compliance report or
subsequent performance test report.

60.395(a)

Monthly performance test.

60.393(b), 60.393(c)

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature monitoring device
Quarterly reports of excess VOC emissions, semiannual reports if no
exceedences.

60.395(b)

Reports of low incinerator temperature.

60.395(c)

Record the incinerator combustion temperature.

60.395(d)

Notify the Administrator 30 days in advance of any test by Reference
Method 25.

60.395(d)

A source must maintain the following records:

Recordkeeping

Startups, shutdowns, malfunctions, periods where the continuous
monitoring system is inoperative.

60.7(b)

Records are required to be retained for two years.  Records must be
retained at the facility.

60.8

(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate the compliance monitoring
system (CMS) for temperature.

Perform initial performance test, Reference Method 24 or Method 25 test,
and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and
utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting,
validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of 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.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

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

5(a)  Agency Activities

EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the
acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required
information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if
necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports,
and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect
the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used by
the Agency to discern a source(s initial capability to comply with the
emission standard, and note the operating conditions under which
compliance was achieved.  Data and records maintained by the respondents
are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement
programs.  The semiannual reports are used for problem identification,
as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance
determinations.

Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is
operated and maintained by EPA’s Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s
database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance
and annual emission inventory data for over 100,000 industrial and
government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air
pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory
agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters.  EPA and its
delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze

the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner or
operator for

two years.

5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

The majority of affected facilities are large entities (e.g., large
businesses).  However, the impact on small entities (i.e., small
businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the
regulation.  Due to technical considerations involving the process
operations and the types of control equipment employed, the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and
large entities.  The Agency considers these requirements the minimum
needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further
for small entities.  To the extent that larger businesses can use
economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be
reduced.

The number of small entities potentially subject to the requirements of
this ICR is estimated to be zero percent of the respondent universe.
This estimate is based on the discussion at the affected small entities
during the development of the rule (see BID EPA-450/3-80-003a).

5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost,
NSPS for Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations (40
CFR part 60, subpart MM).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for
the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed
under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept
of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where appropriate,
specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to
this information collection are mandatory.

The 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.

6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from
these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be
156,362 ( Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on
Agency studies and background documents from the development of the
regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NSPS program, the
previously approved ICR, and consultations with the industry.

6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses a Technical Labor Rate of $61.66 per hour.  This rate is
from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
September 2002, “Table 10. Private industry, by occupational and
industry group.”  The rate is from column 1, “Total compensation.”
 The rate has been increased by 110% to account for the benefit packages
available to those employed by private industry.

(ii)  Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

The type of industry costs associated with the information collection
activities in the subject standard(s) are both labor costs which are
addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous
monitoring.  The capital/startup costs are one-time costs when a
facility becomes subject to the regulation.  The annual operation and
maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor(s) and
other costs such as photocopying and postage.

(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Capital/Startup vs. Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

(A)

Continuous Monitoring Device

(B)

Capital/

Startup Cost for One Respondent

(C)

Number of New Respondents

(D)

Total Capital/

Startup Cost, (B X C)

(E)

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent

(F)

Number of Respondents  with O&M

(G)

Total O&M,

(E X F)

Temperature Monitoring Device

$850

2

$1,700

$1,750

52

$91,000

The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $1,700.  The total
operating and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $91,000.  This is
the total of column G.

The total respondent costs have been calculated as the addition of the
capital/startup costs, and the annual operation and maintenance costs.
The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and
maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $92,700.

The continuous monitoring costs that are included in this section
consist only of those capital/startup and O&M costs that a source incurs
as a result of the standard.  Some continuous monitoring costs may not
be included in this section.  For instance, if a particular industry
typically utilizes a control device that must have a continuous monitor
(e.g., temperature, pressure drop, etc.) to function properly, and the
recordation of additional measurements beyond the minimum is required by
the standard, then there is no capital/startup or O & M cost, but there
is a labor cost to record the additional readings.  Such a cost would
not appear in this section, but in the industry burden Section 6(d)
below.

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of
the reported information.  EPA’s overall compliance and enforcement
program includes activities such as the examination of records
maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of
emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected
information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $32,887 (rounded) [see Table 2 in Section 6(e)].  This
cost is based on the average hourly labor rate at a GS-12, Step 1, times
a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead
expenses for a total of $39.49.

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2003
General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.  These rates
can be obtained from the OPM web site,
http//www.opm.gov/oca/payrates/index/htm.  Details upon which this
estimate is based appear in Table 2: Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NSPS
for Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations (40 CFR
part 60, subpart MM), below.

6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

Approximately 52 existing sources are currently subject to the
regulation, and it is estimated that an additional two sources per year
will become subject to the regulation in the next three years.  See
Section 1(b).

Respondent Universe and Number of Responses Per Year

Regulation Citation

(A)

Average Number of New Respondents per Year

(B)

Number of Reports for New Sources

(C)

Number of Existing Respondents

(D)

Number of Reports for Existing Sources

(F)

Number of Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports

(E)

Total Annual  Responses =

(AxB)+(CxD)+F

NSPS subpart MM

2

1

52

4

0

210

The number of total respondents is 54.  This number is the sum of column
A and column C of the Respondent Universe and Number of Responses Per
Year table.  This represents the number of existing sources plus the
number of new sources averaged over the three-year period (i.e., the
total of the number of new respondents over the three-year period
divided by three years).

The number of Total Annual Responses is 210.  This is the number in
column E of the Respondent Universe and Number of Responses Per Year
table above.

The total annual labor costs for Respondents are $9,641,281 (rounded).
Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1. Annual
Respondent Burden and Cost, NSPS for Automobile and Light Duty Truck
Surface Coating Operations (40 CFR part 60, subpart MM).  Note that the
total annual capital and O&M costs to the regulated entity are 92,700.
These costs are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs.
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The bottom line burden hours and cost tables for both the Agency and the
respondents are attached.  The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 745
(rounded) hours per response.

6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in burden from the most recently approved ICR.  This
ICR renewal was approved under the “renew without change” option and
reflects no increase in the number of new or modified sources.

6(g)  Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to average 745 (rounded) 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; 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 valid OMB
Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are
listed at 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 Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0416.  An electronic version of the public docket is
available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a
copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in
the docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are
also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance
Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 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 and Information Center Docket is (202)
566-1514.  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 Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0416 and OMB Control Number
2060-0034 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in
collecting this information.

 PAGE

 PAGE   16


[Federal Register: March 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 57)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14333-14335]
[DOCID:fr25mr10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0274; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-055-AD;
Amendment 39-16248; AD 2010-07-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 and Model ERJ 190 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    It has been determined that due to an intermittent communication
between AMS [Air Management System] controller cards and both
Secondary Power Distribution Assemblies (SPDAs) the message ``RECIRC
SMK DET FAIL'' is displayed in the Engine Indication and Crew
Alerting System (EICAS). This communication failure could result in
loss of automatic activation of engine inlet ice protection system
when in ice condition. In this situation the caution messages ``A-I
Eng 1 Fail'' and ``A-I Eng 2 Fail'' will be displayed and if the
flight crews do not follow the associated procedures ice may accrete
in the engines inlet and cause a dual engine shut down.
* * * * *
This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 9, 2010.
    We must receive comments on this AD by May 10, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2768; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC),
which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian
Airworthiness Directives 2010-01-01 and 2010-01-02, both effective
January 31, 2010 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct
an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    It has been determined that due to an intermittent communication
between AMS [Air Management System] controller cards and both
Secondary Power Distribution Assemblies (SPDAs) the message ``RECIRC
SMK DET FAIL'' is displayed in the Engine Indication and Crew
Alerting System (EICAS). This communication failure could result in
loss of automatic activation of engine inlet ice protection system
when in ice condition. In this situation the caution messages ``A-I
Eng 1 Fail'' and ``A-I Eng 2 Fail'' will be displayed and if the
flight crews do not follow the associated procedures ice may accrete
in the engines inlet and cause a dual engine shut down.
* * * * *
The required action includes revising the Limitations section of the
airplane flight manual to prohibit dispatch with message ``RECIRC SMK
DET FAIL'' displayed on the ground unless troubleshooting action
confirms the message has not been triggered due to a failure of an AMS
controller card. You may obtain further information by examining the
MCAI in the AD docket.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

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

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because an
intermittent communication failure between AMS controller cards and
both SPDAs could result in the loss of automatic activation of the
engine inlet ice protection system when in icing conditions. In this
situation, the caution messages ``A-I Eng 1 Fail'' and ``A-I Eng 2
Fail'' will be displayed. If the flight crews do not follow the
associated procedures, ice may accrete in the engines' inlet and cause
a dual engine shut down. Therefore, we determined that notice and
opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable
and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer
than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0274; Directorate
Identifier 2010-NM-055-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;

    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 AD:

2010-07-04 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):
Amendment 39-16248. Docket No. FAA-2010-0274; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-055-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective April 9,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE, and -100 SU
airplanes; Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 SU, and -200 STD airplanes;
Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100 IGW airplanes;
and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes;
certificated in any category; equipped with Air Management System
(AMS) controller cards having part number 1001050-1-YYY or 1001050-
2-YYY containing software version Black Label 08 or lower installed.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26: Fire
protection.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    It has been determined that due to an intermittent communication
between AMS [Air Management System] controller cards and both
Secondary Power Distribution Assemblies (SPDAs) the message ``RECIRC
SMK DET FAIL'' is displayed in the Engine Indication and Crew
Alerting System (EICAS). This communication failure could result in
loss of automatic activation of engine inlet ice protection system
when in ice condition. In this situation the caution messages ``A-I
Eng 1 Fail'' and ``A-I Eng 2 Fail'' will be displayed and if the
flight crews do not follow the associated procedures ice may accrete
in the engines inlet and cause a dual engine shut down.
* * * * *
The required action includes revising the Limitations section of the
airplane flight manual to prohibit dispatch with message ``RECIRC
SMK DET FAIL'' displayed on the ground unless troubleshooting action
confirms the message has not been triggered due to a failure of an
AMS controller card.

Compliance

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

Actions

    (g) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the Limitations section of the airplane flight manual (AFM) to
include the following statement. This may be done by inserting a
copy of this AD in the AFM.
    ``Dispatch with the message `RECIRC SMK DET FAIL' displayed on
the ground is prohibited unless troubleshooting action confirms the
message has not been triggered due to a failure of an AMS controller
card.''

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

    Note 2: The limitation and procedure specified in paragraph (g)
of this AD is an interim solution until a final action is
identified, at which time the FAA might consider further rulemaking.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 3: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
    (i) Special Flight Permits: We are prohibiting the issuance of
special flight permits to operate the airplane to a location to
replace the AMS controller card, unless the following condition is
met: The flight crew must manually engage the engine anti-ice system
if icing conditions occur during any ferry flight.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 2010-01-01
and 2010-01-02, both effective January 31, 2010, for related
information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 16, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-6518 Filed 3-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 21, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2002-13217

               							            OST-2002-13400

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

Applications of DELTA AIR LINES, INC. (DELTA) filed 6/17/04, for:

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

Docket OST-2002-13217:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point San Diego, California, and the terminal point
Loreto, Mexico, and to combine this exemption authority with all of
Delta’s existing certificate and exemption authority, consistent with
international agreements.

Docket OST-2002-13400:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point San Diego, California, and the terminal point
Mazatlan, Mexico, and to combine this exemption authority with all of
Delta’s existing certificate and exemption authority, consistent with
international agreements.

Delta states that it uses the authority in both documents pursuant to a
code-share arrangement with Aerovias de Mexico, S.A., de C.V.
(Aeromexico), whereby Delta places its “DL” code on the flights of
Aeromexico in the subject markets.

Applicant reps: Robert E. Cohn<PHONE_NUMBER> DOT Analyst: Linda Lundell
Thuy H. Cooper<PHONE_NUMBER>5423

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions and remarks, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:  _  July 21, 2004  through
_.July 21, 2006.

Action taken by:	Paul L. Gretch, Director

			Office of International Aviation

(See next page)												2

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

	XX   Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

________________________________________________________________________
__________

Conditions:   The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2, and is limited to operations conducted on a code-share
basis only.

The route integration authority granted to Delta is subject to the
condition that any service provided under this exemption shall be
consistent with all applicable agreements between the United States and
the foreign countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award
of the route integration authority granted should be construed as
conferring upon Delta rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate
and/or beyond rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is
limited unless Delta notifies the Department of its intent to serve such
a market and unless and until the Department has completed any necessary
carrier selection procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be
authorized to exercise such rights); (b) should there be a request by
any carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are included in
Delta’s authority by virtue of the route integration exemption granted
here, but that are not then being used by Delta, the holding of such
authority by route integration will not be considered as providing any
preference for Delta in a competitive carrier selection proceeding to
determine which carrier(s) should be entitled to use the authority at
issue.

.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________

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

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the

referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time

without hearing at our discretion.

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

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

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

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

05/2004

 Aeromexico holds the requisite underline underlying authority by Notice
of Action Taken dated October 15, 2003 in Docket 2002-13400.


 Triadimenol Reader =

s Guide 1 Reader =

s Guide to Triadimenol Docket # EPA HQ OPP 2006 0038 EPA has created this document to provide an organizational structure to the Triadimenol Docket. The docket index groups related documents. The first group contains the Federal Register and Docket Organizational Documents; the second group contains Human Health Risk Assessment Documents for Phase 3 Public Comments, and the third group contains the Environmental Risk Assessment documents. The Agency is providing the A Reader =

s Guide @

to allow the reader to more easily access and navigate the various items contained in the Triadimenol docket.

Federal Register and Docket Organizational Documents:

Docket Item 1. Federal Register Notice: Triadimenol Risk Assessment; Notice of Availability, and Risk Reduction Options ( Phase 3 of 4 Phase Process)

This document formally and publicly announces that the triadimenol risk assessment is available for review on the internet or at the EPA =

s Office of Pesticides Programs =

Public Docket and solicits comments and suggestions on the risk assessment and how to mitigate or address potential risks of concern.

Docket Item 2. Reader =

s Guide to the Triadimenol Docket # EPA HQ OPP 2006 0038.

This document is designed to annotate all the documents in the Triadimenol Docket.

Human Health Risk Assessment Documents for Phase 3 Public Comments Docket Item 3. Triadimenol: HED Chapter of the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision ( TRED) Document ( Revised) Griffin 2/ 9/ 06 This document describes all the human health risks from the use of triadimenol including erroronly revisions based on registrant comments.

Docket Item 4. Triadimenol. Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments for the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision ( TRED) Document 11/ 18/ 05 Ary This document describes the potential risk to the US general population and population subgroups from food and drinking water containing triadimenol residues in/ on them. Triadimenol Reader =

s Guide 2 Docket Item 5. Triadimenol. HED Chapter of the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision ( TRED) Document 11/ 23/ 05 Jarvis This document describes all the human health risks from the use of triadimenol.

Docket Item 6. Triadimenol: Summary of Product Chemistry Data for Tolerance Reassessment ( TRED) Document 11/ 22/ 05 Barnes This document describes physical and chemical characteristics of the technical product that contain triadimenol.

Docket Item 7. Triadimenol. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data for the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision ( TRED) Document 11/ 22/ 05 Ary This document reports on the fate and metabolic pathways of the active ingredient, triadimenol. It describes how much triadimenol is likely to remain in food after use over time.

Docket Item 8. Review of Triadimefon Incident Reports ( includes 127201, triadimenol) 8/ 24/ 2005 Hawkins This document reports on the documented poisoning incident data involving triadimenol and triadimefon.

Docket Item 9. Note to Reader memo ( Triazoles) 2/ 8/ 06 Special Review and Reregistration Division This document describes the Agency's current process for reviewing the registration of three fungicide pesticides ( triadimefon, triadimenol, and propiconazole) who share the common metabolites 1,2,4 triazole, triazole alanine, and triazole acetic acid.

Docket Item 10. Occupational and Residential Exposure/ Risk Assessment of 1,2,4 Triazole 12/ 9/ 05 Arthur This document describes the potential risks to workers and homeowners who come in contact with 1,2,4 Triazole. Triadimenol Reader =

s Guide 3 Docket Item 11. 1,2,4 Triazole. Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments to Support Reregistration and Registration Actions for Triazole derivative Fungicides 11/ 1/ 05 Doherty This document describes the acute and chronic dietary risks ( 1,2,4 triazole as a terminal residue) associated with food consumption through the conjugated metabolites triazole alanine and triazole acetic acid.

Docket Item 12. Triazole Alanine and Triazole Acetic Acid. Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments to Support Reregistration and Registration Actions for Triazole derivative Fungicides 12/ 20/ 05 Doherty This document describes the acute and chronic dietary risks ( 1,2,4 triazole as a terminal residue) associated with food consumption through the conjugated metabolites triazole alanine and triazole acetic acid.

Docket Item 13. 1,2,4 Triazole, Triazole Alanine, Triazole Acetic Acid: Human Health Aggregate Risk Assessment in Support of Reregistration and Registration Actions for Triazole derivative Fungicide Compounds 2/ 7/ 06 Doherty This document describes the evaluation of risks for various population subgroups, including those comprised of infants and children.

Environmental Fate and Effects Documents for Phase 3 Public Comment Docket Item 14. EFED's Response to Bayer's Comments on the Triadimenol Drinking Water Assessment 2/ 7/ 06 Breithaupt Docket Item 15. TRED for Triadimenol ( PC # 127201) Drinking Water Assessment 2/ 9/ 05 Breithaupt This document describes how much triadimenol and other metabolites may be found in drinking water after application.