[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 66 (Thursday, April 8, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18180-18183]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07288]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0266; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00320-T;
Amendment 39-21503; AD 2021-08-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS 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
Airbus SAS Model A330-323, -342, and -343 airplanes. This AD was
prompted by the discovery of an erroneous value in some airplane data
files that are used for performance computations in the airplane flight
manual (AFM). This AD requires revising the existing AFM and applicable
corresponding operational procedures, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 23, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 23,
2021.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by May 24, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD, contact
EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You
may find this IBR material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material 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 in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0266.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0266; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0071, dated March 12, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0071) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Airbus SAS Model A330-323, -342, and -343 airplanes.

    This AD was prompted by the discovery of an erroneous value in some
airplane data files used for AFM performance computations. This
erroneous value could result in the generation of an incorrect
displacement drag in the take-off, accelerate-stop, and landing
distance computations for particular situations. The FAA is issuing
this AD to prevent these errors, which, in combination with one engine
inoperative at takeoff, and with more than 50 mm dry snow at an airport
within an AFM altitude between 8,000 and 12,500 feet, could lead to
substantially reduced performance of the airplane and possible runway
overrun, and consequent damage to the airplane and injury to occupants.
See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0071 specifies procedures for revising the existing
AFM and applicable corresponding operational procedures to include a
certification package with the corrected complementary performance data
file incorporated into the performance database section. This material
is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to
it through their normal course of business or by the means identified
in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is issuing this AD because the FAA 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.

Requirements of This AD

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD
2021-0071 described previously, as incorporated by reference, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this AD.
    EASA AD 2021-0071 requires operators to ``inform all flight crews''
of revisions of the existing AFM, and thereafter to ``operate the
aeroplane accordingly.'' However, this AD would not specifically
require those actions as those actions are already required by FAA
regulations. FAA regulations require operators to inform pilots of any
changes to the existing AFM (e.g., 14 CFR 121.137(a)(1)), and to ensure
that pilots are familiar with the existing AFM (e.g., 14 CFR 91.505).
As with any other training requirement, training on the updated AFM
content is tracked by the operators and recorded in each pilot's
training record, which is available for the FAA to review. FAA
regulations also require pilots to follow the procedures in the
existing AFM including all updates. 14 CFR 91.9 requires that any
person operating a civil aircraft comply with the operating limitations
specified in the existing AFM. Therefore, including a requirement in
this AD to operate the airplane according to the revised AFM would be
redundant and unnecessary. Further, compliance with such a requirement
in an AD would be impracticable to demonstrate or track on an ongoing
basis; therefore, a requirement to operate the airplane in such a
manner would be unenforceable.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2021-0071
is incorporated by reference in this final rule. This AD, therefore,
requires compliance with EASA AD 2021-0071 in its entirety, through
that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions
in the regulatory text of this AD. Using common terms that are the same
as the heading of a particular section in the EASA AD does not mean
that operators need comply only with that section. For example, where
the AD requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance
times,'' compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the
section titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in the
EASA AD. Service information specified in EASA AD 2021-0071 that is
required for compliance with EASA AD 2021-0071 is available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0266.

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 an erroneous value in some airplane data files used for AFM
performance computations could result in the generation of an incorrect
displacement drag, and under certain conditions could lead to
substantially reduced performance of the airplane and possible runway
overrun, and consequent damage to the airplane and injury to occupants.
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 relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0266; Project Identifier MCAI-
2021-00320-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
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The requirements of the 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 33 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 work-hours x $85 per hour = $425...........................              $0             $425          $14,025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this 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.

Adoption of 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:

2021-08-09 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-21503; Docket No. FAA-2021-0266;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00320-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective April 23,
2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A330-323, A330-342, and
A330-343 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the discovery of an erroneous value in
some airplane data files used for airplane flight manual (AFM)
performance computations. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent the
generation of an incorrect displacement drag due to the erroneous
value, which could lead to substantially reduced performance of the
airplane and possible runway overrun, and consequent damage to the
airplane and injury to occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0071, dated March 12, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0071).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0071

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0071 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2021-0071 specifies to
``implement the AFM CP,'' this AD requires revising the existing AFM
and applicable corresponding operational procedures to include a
certification package with the corrected complementary performance
data file incorporated into the performance database section.
    (3) Whereas paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2021-0071 specifies to
``inform all flight crews, and, thereafter, operate the aeroplane
accordingly,'' this AD does not require those actions, which are
already required by existing FAA operating regulations.
    (4) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0071 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation 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 Large
Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests 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 procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0071,
dated March 12, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0071, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material 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>. This material may be found in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0266.
    (5) You may view this material 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_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on April 1, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-07288 Filed 4-6-21; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 156 (Thursday, August 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48555-48557]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20002]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2015-0691; OMB Control Number 1625-0099]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY:  In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval of a
revision of a currently approved collection: 1625-0099, Requirements
for the Use of Liquefied Petroleum Gas and Compressed Natural Gas as
Cooking Fuel on Passenger Vessels. Our ICR describes the information we
seek to collect from the

public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting
comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before October 13,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2015-0691] to the Docket Management Facility (DMF) at the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). To avoid duplicate
submissions, please use only one of the following means:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: DMF (M-30), DOT, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, to attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    The DMF maintains the public docket for this Notice. Comments and
material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in
this Notice as being available in the docket, will become part of the
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Room W12-140
on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. You may also find the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Copies of the ICR(s) are available through the docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are
available from: Commandant (CG-612), Attn Paperwork Reduction Act
Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE., Stop
7710, Washington DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents. Contact Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions on the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be
granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise these ICRs or decide not to seek approval
of revisions of the Collection. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2015-0691], and
must be received by October 13, 2015. We will post all comments
received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov. They will
include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with
DOT to use their DMF. Please see the ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-
2015-0691], indicate the specific section of the document to which each
comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit
your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov), by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If
you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit
the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is
received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing
address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    You may submit your comments and material by electronic means,
mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES; but
please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, and type ``USCG-2015-0691'' in the
``Search'' box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and will address them accordingly.
    Viewing comments and documents: To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ``read comments'' box,
which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Search'' box
insert ``USCG-2015-0691'' and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may also visit the DMF in Room
W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in
dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement
regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of
the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Information Collection Request

    1. Title: Requirements for the Use of Liquefied Petroleum Gas and
Compressed Natural Gas as Cooking Fuel on Passenger Vessels.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0099.
    Summary: This collection of information requires passenger vessels
to post two placards that contain safety and operating instructions on
the use of cooking appliances that use liquefied gas or compressed
natural gas.
    Need: Title 46 U.S.C. 3306 (a) (5) authorizes the Coast Guard to
prescribe regulations for the use of vessel stores of a dangerous
nature. These regulations

are prescribed in both uninspected and inspected passenger vessel
regulations.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of passenger vessels.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from 5,948
hours to 6,429 hours a year due to an increase in the estimated annual
number of respondents.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: August 1, 2015.
Thomas P. Michelli,
Deputy Chief Information Officer, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2015-20002 Filed 8-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36615-36617]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15562]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Nissan

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full Nissan North America, Inc.'s,
(Nissan) petition for exemption of the Leaf vehicle line in accordance
with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard.
This petition is granted because the agency has determined that the
antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is
likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft
as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). Nissan requested confidential
treatment of specific information in its petition by letter dated
February 4, 2011. The agency addressed Nissan's request for
confidential treatment by letter dated April 27, 2011.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2012 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Mazyck's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is
(202) 493-2990

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated March 2, 2010, Nissan
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2012 Nissan Leaf
vehicle line. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard
equipment for the entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Nissan
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the Leaf
vehicle line. Nissan will install its passive transponder-based,
electronic immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment on its
Leaf vehicle line beginning with MY 2012. Major components of the
antitheft device will include an immobilizer control module (BCM),
immobilizer antenna, security indicator light, electronic immobilizer
and vehicle control module. Nissan will also install an audible and
visible alarm system on the Leaf as standard equipment. Nissan stated
that activation of the immobilization device occurs when the ignition
is turned to the ``OFF'' position and all the doors are closed and
locked through the use of the key or the remote control mechanism.
Deactivation occurs when all the doors are unlocked with the key or
remote

control mechanism. Nissan's submission is considered a complete
petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general
requirements contained in Sec.  543.5 and the specific content
requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    Nissan stated that the immobilizer device prevents normal operation
of the vehicle without the use of a special key. Nissan further stated
that incorporation of the theft warning alarm system in the device has
been designed to protect the belongings within the vehicle and the
vehicle itself from being stolen when the back door and all of the side
doors are closed and locked. If any of the doors are unlocked through
an inside door lock knob or any attempts are made to reconnect the
device after it has been disconnected, the device will also activate
the alarm. Nissan stated that upon alarm activation, the head lamps
will flash and the horn will sound. Nissan stated that the alarm can
only be deactivated by unlocking the driver's side door with the key or
the remote control device. Additionally, Nissan has incorporated a
``Security'' indicator light in the vehicle which it states will
provide a signal to inform the vehicle owner as to the status of the
immobilizer device. When the ignition key is turned to the ``OFF''
position, the indicator light begins flashing to notify the operator
that the immobilizer device is activated.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Nissan
provided information on the reliability and durability of the device.
Nissan stated that its antitheft device is tested for specific
parameters to ensure its reliability and durability. Nissan provided a
detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is
reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified
requirements for each test.
    Nissan provided data on the effectiveness of the antitheft device
installed on its Leaf vehicle line in support of the belief that its
antitheft device will be highly effective in reducing and deterring
theft. Nissan referenced the National Insurance Crime Bureau's data
which it stated showed a 70% reduction in theft when comparing MY 1997
Ford Mustangs (with a standard immobilizer) to MY 1995 Ford Mustangs
(without an immobilizer). Nissan also referenced the Highway Loss Data
Institute's data which reported that BMW vehicles experienced theft
loss reductions resulting in a 73% decrease in relative claim frequency
and a 78% lower average loss payment per claim for vehicles equipped
with an immobilizer. Additionally, Nissan stated that theft rates for
its Pathfinder vehicle experienced reductions from model year (MY) 2000
to 2001 with implementation of the engine immobilizer device as
standard equipment and further significant reductions subsequent to MY
2001. Specifically, Nissan noted that the agency's theft rate data for
MY's 2001 through 2006 reported theft rates of 1.9146, 1.8011, 1.1482,
0.8102, 1.7298 and 1.3474 respectively for the Nissan Pathfinder.
    In support of its belief that its antitheft device will be as
effective as compliance with the parts-marking requirements in reducing
and deterring vehicle theft, Nissan compared its device to other
similar devices previously granted exemptions by the agency.
Specifically, it referenced the agency's grant of a full exemption to
General Motors Corporation for the Buick Riviera and Oldsmobile Aurora
(58 FR 44872, August 25, 1993), and Cadillac Seville vehicle lines (62
FR 20058, April 24, 1997) from the parts-marking requirements of the
theft prevention standard. Nissan stated that it believes that since
its device is functionally equivalent to other comparable
manufacturers' devices that have already been granted parts-marking
exemptions by the agency such as the ``PASS-Key III'' device used on
the 1997 Buick Park Avenue, the 1998 Cadillac Seville and the 2000
Cadillac DeVille, Pontiac Bonneville, Buick LeSabre and Oldsmobile
Aurora lines, the reduced theft rates of the ``PASS-Key'' and `PASS-Key
II'' equipped vehicle lines and the advanced technology of transponder
electronic security, the Nissan immobilizer device has the potential to
achieve the level of effectiveness equivalent to the ``PASS-Key III
device.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Nissan on the device,
the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Leaf vehicle line
is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). The agency concludes that the device
will provide the five types of performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3):
promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of
unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by means other than
a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Nissan has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Leaf vehicle line is likely to be as effective
in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR
part 541). This conclusion is based on the information Nissan provided
about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Nissan's petition for exemption for the Leaf vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with the 2012
model year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A-
1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention
Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product
nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted
and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order
to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from
the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If Nissan decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR parts 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Nissan wishes in the future to modify the
device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit
a petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a

modification petition for every change to the components or design of
an antitheft device. The significance of many such changes could be de
minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the manufacturer
contemplates making any changes, the effects of which might be
characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before
preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Issued on: June 15, 2011.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-15562 Filed 6-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 87802-87803]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9265; Airspace Docket No. 16-ANM-11]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-235 and V-293 in the Vicinity
of Cedar City, Utah

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the legal description of the Very High
Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways V-235 and V-293
in the vicinity of Cedar City, UT. The FAA is taking this action
because the Cedar City VOR/DME, included as part of the V-235 and V-293
route structure, is being renamed the Enoch VOR/DME.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, March 2, 2017. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA, Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming
amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Ready, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the air traffic service route structure in the
north central United States to maintain the efficient flow of air
traffic.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15,
2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by amending the legal description of VOR Federal airways V-235
and V-293, in the vicinity of Cedar City, UT. Currently, V-235 and V-
293 have Cedar City, UT, [VOR/DME] included as part of their route
structure. The Cedar City VOR and the Cedar City Airport share the same
name, but are not co-located and are greater than 5 nautical miles
apart. To eliminate the possibility of confusion, and a potential
flight safety issue, the Cedar City VOR/DME is renamed the Enoch VOR/
DME; and will have a new facility identifier (ENK). Airways with Cedar
City, UT, [VOR/DME] included in their legal descriptions will be
amended to reflect the name change. The name change of

the VOR/DME will coincide with the effective date of this rulemaking
action.
    Domestic VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of
FAA Order 7400.11A dated August 3, 2016 and effective September 15,
2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Domestic
VOR Federal airways listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    Since this action merely involves editorial changes in the legal
description of a VOR Federal airway, and does not involve a change in
the dimensions or operating requirements of that airspace, notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act, and its agency
implementing regulations in FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures'' regarding categorical exclusions for
procedural actions at paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes
from full environmental impact review actions that are rulemaking
actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways,
routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class
A, B, C, D, and E Airspace areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and
Reporting Points). This name change action which amends the legal
description of the Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR)
Federal Airways V-235 and V-293 in the vicinity of Cedar City, UT is
not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental
impacts. In accordance with FAAO 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, this action has been reviewed for factors
and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may
have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis, and
it is determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant
preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 is amended to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p.389

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016 and
effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-235 [Amended]

    From Peach Springs, AZ; Mormon Mesa, NV, via INT Mormon Mesa
059[deg] and Enoch, UT, 197[deg] radials; Enoch; Milford, UT; Delta,
UT; Fairfield, UT; 10 miles, 15 miles, 135 MSL, 46 miles, 125 MSL;
Fort Bridger, WY. From Rock Springs, WY; 20 miles, 41 miles, 92 MSL,
37 miles, 107 MSL; Muddy Mountain, WY; to Newcastle, WY.
* * * * *

V-293 [Amended]

    From Grand Canyon, AZ, via Page, AZ; INT Page 340[deg] and Bryce
Canyon, UT; 120[deg] radials; Bryce Canyon; Enoch, UT; 37 miles, 108
MSL Wilson Creek, NV; 5 miles, 108 MSL, 37 miles, 115 MSL, Ely, NV;
125 MSL Bullion, NV; 28 miles, 57 miles, 99 MSL, Twin Falls, ID; 37
miles, 33 miles, 87 MSL, 76 miles, 113 MSL, 99 MSL Donnelly, ID.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, November 29, 2016.
Leslie M. Swann,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2016-29143 Filed 12-5-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 41547]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16657]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL14-81-000]

Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Sharyland Utilities,
L.P.; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on July 3, 2014, pursuant to Rule 207(a) of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2), Golden Spread Electric
Cooperative, Inc. and Sharyland Utilities, L.P. (collectively, the
Petitioners) filed a petition for declaratory order requesting that the
Commission disclaim jurisdiction over: (1) Transmission interconnection
facilities delivering power from the Antelope Elk Energy Center located
in the State of Texas to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
(ERCOT) electric grid (Transmission Interconnection Facilities), and
(2) transmission and sales of energy over the Transmission
Interconnection Facilities. In addition, the Petitioners request that
the Commission declare that utilities in ERCOT and the Market
Participants that are not currently public utilities under the Federal
Power Act, will not become public utilities as a result of the
interconnection of the Antelope Elk Energy Center, as more fully
explained in the petition.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 4, 2014.

    Dated: July 9, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16657 Filed 7-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P