[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 6, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39358-39361]
[FR Doc No: 2011-16873]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0082; FRL-8875-6]

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Agency's receipt of several
initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or
on various commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of interest as shown
in the body of this document, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the docket ID number and the
pesticide petition number of interest as shown in the body of this
document. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person, with telephone
number and e-mail address, is listed at the end of each pesticide
petition summary. You may also reach each contact person by mail at
Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
    [emsp14]Crop production (NAICS code 111).
    [emsp14]Animal production (NAICS code 112).
    [emsp14]Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
    [emsp14]Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition
summary of interest.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI

information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside
of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 174 or part 180 for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking
public comment on the requests before responding to the petitioners.
EPA is not proposing any particular action at this time. EPA has
determined that the pesticide petitions described in this document
contain the data or information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2);
however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted
data at this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide
petitions. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to
evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may
be needed before EPA can make a final determination on these pesticide
petitions.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions
that are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket
for each of the petitions is available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)),
EPA is publishing notice of the petition so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on this request for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petition may be obtained
through the petition summary referenced in this unit.

New Tolerances

    1. PP 0E7754. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0820). Quimica Agronomica de Mexico,
S. de R.L. MI., Calle 18 N[deg] 20501, Colonia Impulso, C.P. 31183,
Chihuahua, Chih., Mexico c/o Gowan Company, P.O. Box 5569, Yuma, AZ
85366, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the fungicide gentamicin, in or on cucurbits (crop group 9)
at 0.05 parts per million (ppm) and fruiting vegetables (crop group 8)
at 0.05 ppm. An analytical method was developed and used to quantitate
residues of gentamicin and oxytetracycline. Briefly, residues of
gentamicin were extracted from samples. The extraction was conducted
with a homogenizer and extracts were centrifuged and decanted into a
mixing cylinder. Extraction buffer and methanol were added to the
centrifuge tube, centrifuged, and shaken a total of two times, with
each extract combined in the mixing cylinder. The sample was brought to
final volume with water and mixed in preparation for liquid
chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) analysis. Contact:
Shaunta Hill,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 0E7818. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0086). Interregional Research
Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ
08540, proposes to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the fungicide acibenzolar S-methyl, in or on low growing
berry subgroup 13-07G at 0.15 ppm. The analytical method involves
extraction, solid phase cleanup of samples with analysis by high
performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with ultraviolet (UV)
detection or confirmatory LC/MS. Contact: Sidney C. Jackson, (703) 305-
7610, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. PP 1E7847. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0904). IR-4, 500 College Rd. East,
Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish tolerances in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the insecticide bifenazate (hydrazine
carboxylic acid, 2-(4-methoxy-[1,1'-biphenyl]-3-yl) 1-methylethyl
ester) in or on herb subgroup 19A, fresh leaves at 30 ppm; herb
subgroup 19A, dried leaves, except chervil, dried and chive, dried at
140 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.75 ppm; vegetable, fruiting,
group 8-10 at 2.0 ppm; timothy, forage at 140 ppm; and timothy, hay at
120 ppm. Chemtura Corporation has developed practical analytical
methodology for detecting and measuring residues of bifenazate in or on
raw agricultural commodities. Contact: Andrew Ertman,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. PP 1F7838. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0427). FMC Corporation, 1735 Market
St., Philadelphia, PA 19103, requests to establish a tolerance in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide sulfentrazone (N-[2,4-
dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-
triazol-1-yl]phenyl]-methanesulfonamide) and its metabolites 3-
hydroxymethyl-sulfentrazone (N-[2,4-dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-
dihydro-3-hydroxymethyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-
yl]phenyl]methanesulfonamide) and 3-desmethyl sulfentrazone (N-[2,4-
dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-
yl]phenyl]methanesulfonamide), in or on crop group10-10 citrus fruit at
0.15 ppm; crop group 13-07 berry and small fruit at 0.15 ppm; crop
group14 tree nut and pistachio at 0.15 ppm; and crop group 18 non-grass
animal feed (forage, fodder, straw, and hay): Alfalfa, forage

at 5 ppm; alfalfa, hay at 20 ppm; alfalfa, seed at 3 ppm; clover,
forage at 5 ppm; clover, hay at 20 ppm; and clover, seed at 3 ppm. The
analytical enforcement method for sulfentrazone was used with minor
modification that eliminated several cleanup and derivatization steps
that was required for gas chromatography/mass spectrometry detection
(GC/MSD) but not for LC/MS/MS. The analytical method for sulfentrazone
involves separate analyses for parent and its metabolites. The parent
is analyzed by evaporation and reconstitution of the sample prior to
analysis by LC/MS/MS GC/electron capture detection (ECD). The
metabolites samples were refluxed in the presence of acid and cleaned
up with solid phase extraction prior to analysis by LC/MS/MS. Contact:
Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    5. PP 1F7839. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0428). FMC Corporation, 1735 Market
St., Philadelphia, PA 19103, requests to establish a tolerance in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide carfentrazone-ethyl (ethyl-
alpha-2-dichloro-5-[-4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1 H
-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-fluorobenzene propanoate) and its metabolite:
Carfentrazone-chloropropionic acid (alpha, 2-dichloro-5-[-4-
difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1 H -1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-
fluorobenzenepropanoic acid) in or on crop group 18 non-grass animal
feed (forage, fodder, straw, and hay): Alfalfa, forage at 5 ppm;
alfalfa, hay at 18 ppm; alfalfa, seed at 10 ppm; clover, forage at 5
ppm; clover, hay at 18 ppm; and clover, seed at 10 ppm. The analytical
enforcement method for carfentrazone-ethyl was used with minor
modification that eliminated several clean-up and derivatization steps
that was required for GC/MSD but not for LC/MS/MS. The analytical
method for carfentrazone-ethyl involves separate analyses for parent
and its metabolite. The parent is analyzed by evaporation and
reconstitution of the sample prior to analysis by LC/MS/MS GC/ECD. The
metabolite samples were refluxed in the presence of acid and cleaned up
with solid phase extraction prior to analysis by LC/MS/MS. Contact:
Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    6. PP 1F7841. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0357). Valent U.S.A. Company, 1600
Riviera Ave., Walnut Creek, CA 94596-8025, proposes to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide
fenpyrazamine in or on almond at 0.02 ppm; almond, hulls at 1.5 ppm;
small fruit vine climbing (except fuzzy kiwifruit) subgroup 13-07F at
3.5 ppm; raisin at 4.5 ppm; grape, juice at 7.0 ppm; lettuce, head at
2.5 ppm; lettuce, leaf lettuce at 2.5 ppm; and low growing berry
subgroup 13-07G at 3.0 ppm. A practical analytical method utilizing LC/
MSD is available and has been validated for detecting and measuring
residues of fenpyrazamine (fenpyrazamine and S-2188-DC) in and on
crops. Contact: Gene Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    7. PP 1F7844. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0403). Nippon Soda Co., Ltd., c/o
Nisso America, Inc., 45 Broadway, Suite 2120, New York, NY 10006,
requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of
the insecticide acetamiprid, in or on soybean, seed at 0.02 ppm; and
soybean, hulls at 0.04 ppm. A method was developed that involves
extraction of acetamiprid from soybean matrices with a solvent followed
by a decantation and filtration and finally, analysis by a LC/MS/MS
method. Contact: Jennifer Urbanski,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Amended Tolerances

    1. PP 0E7818. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0086). IR-4, 500 College Rd. East,
Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to amend the tolerance in 40
CFR 180.561 for residues of the fungicide acibenzolar-S-methyl by
combining the tables for paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) into one table
under paragraph (a)(1), and by removing paragraph (a)(2). The petition
further proposes to revise the tolerance expression under paragraph
(a)(1) to read as follows: ``Tolerances are established for residues of
acibenzolar-S-methyl, benzo(1,2,3)thiadiazole-7-carbothioic acid-S-
methyl ester, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by measuring only those
acibenzolar-S-methyl residues convertible to benzo(1,2,3)thiadiazole-7-
carboxylic acid (CGA-210007), expressed as the stoichiometric
equivalent of acibenzolar-S-methyl, in or on the commodity.'' The
analytical method involves extraction and solid phase cleanup of
samples with analysis by HPLC with UV detection or confirmatory LC/MS.
Contact: Sidney C. Jackson,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 1E7847. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0904). IR-4, 500 College Rd. East,
Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to delete tolerances in 40
CFR 180.572 for residues of the insecticide bifenazate: Hydrazine
carboxylic acid, 2-(4-methoxy-[1,1'-biphenyl]-3-yl)-methylethyl ester
for vegetable, fruiting, group 8 and fruit, pome, group 11 upon
approval of the proposed tolerances listed in this petition under ``New
Tolerance.'' Contact: Andrew Ertman,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
New Tolerance Exemptions

    1. PP 1E7835. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0333). Akzo Nobel Surface Chemistry
LLC, 909 Mueller Ave., Chattanooga, TN 37406, proposes to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for methacrylic acid
sodium salt (CAS No. 1260001-65-7) when used as a pesticide inert
ingredient as a dispersant in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR
180.960. This petition requests the elimination of the need to
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of acrylic acid-
benzyl methacrylate-1-propanesulfonic acid, 2-methyl-2-[(1-oxo-2-
propenyl)amino]-, monosodium salt copolymer acid version in or on all
raw agricultural commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical
method is needed because this is for an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance without any numerical limitations and this information
is generally not required when all the criteria for polymer exemption
per 40 CFR 723.250 are met. Contact: William Cutchin,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 1E7837. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0376). Huntsman Corporation, 10003
Woodloch Forest Dr., The Woodlands, TX 77380, requests to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.950 for
butylene carbonate (1, 3-dioxolan-2-one, 4-ethyl) (CAS No. 4437-85-8)
in or on all raw agricultural commodities when used as a pesticide
inert ingredient in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes no
analytical method is needed because they are not applicable or required
for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert ingredients.
Contact: William Cutchin,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. PP 1E7862. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430). BASF Corporation, 100 Campus
Dr., Florham Park, NJ 07932, requests to establish an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance for 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt (CAS No.
129811-24-1) under 40 CFR 180.960 when used as a pesticide inert
ingredient as a dispersant in pesticide formulations without
limitation. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed
because they are not applicable or

required for the establishment of a tolerance exemption for inert
ingredients. Contact: Alganesh Debesai,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: June 24, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-16873 Filed 7-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14245-14246]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05524]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9907-89-OA]

Notification of Public Teleconferences of the Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee Air Monitoring and Methods Subcommittee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory
Board (SAB) Staff Office announces three public teleconferences of the
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Air Monitoring and
Methods Subcommittee (AMMS) to conduct a review of the scientific and
technical aspects of a draft document that supports a recommendation to
adopt the Nitric Oxide (NO)-Chemiluminescence method as a second
Federal Reference Method (FRM) for measuring Ozone.

DATES: The three CASAC AMMS public teleconferences will be held on
Thursday, April 3, 2014; Tuesday, April 8, 2014; and, Thursday, June
12, 2014, with all three occurring from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
(Eastern Time).

ADDRESSES: The three CASAC AMMS public teleconferences will take place
via telephone only.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wants
further information concerning the CASAC AMMS public teleconferences
may contact Mr. Edward Hanlon, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), EPA
Science Advisory Board (1400R), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; via telephone/
voicemail at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>General information concerning the CASAC can be
found on the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/casac.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CASAC was established pursuant to the
Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1977, codified at 42 U.S.C.
7409D(d)(2), to provide advice, information, and recommendations to the
Administrator on the scientific and technical aspects of issues related
to the criteria for air quality standards, research related to air
quality, sources of air pollution, and the strategies to attain and
maintain air quality standards and to prevent significant deterioration
of air quality. The CASAC is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered
under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The
CASAC AMMS and the CASAC will comply with the provisions of FACA and
all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. The CASAC AMMS
will provide advice to the Administrator through the chartered CASAC.
Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the CASAC
AMMS will hold three public teleconferences to discuss and deliberate
on the topic below.

Background

    The EPA is developing scientific and technical documents associated
with the Ozone (O3) National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). The O3 NAAQS FRM serves as the standard protocol
for measuring ambient O3 concentration values. The
O3 NAAQS FRM is used to assess whether a given geographic
region is in full regulatory compliance with the appropriate
O3 NAAQS standard. The O3 NAAQS FRM is also used
to help assess the operational and laboratory-based performance of
emerging monitoring technologies. The current O3 NAAQS FRM
(Ethylene-Chemiluminescence method) is no longer being manufactured,
and the EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) is proposing
addition of the Nitric Oxide (NO)-Chemiluminescence method as a second
FRM for O3. During the April 3, 2014 teleconference call,
the CASAC AMMS will review the scientific and technical aspects of a
draft document that supports ORD's recommendation to adopt the NO-
Chemiluminescence method as a second FRM for measuring O3.
The April 8, 2014 AAMS teleconference will only be held if the
subcommittee does not complete its deliberations on the topic being
considered during the April 3, 2014 public teleconference.
    Technical Contacts: Any technical questions concerning EPA's
proposal to add the NO-Chemiluminescence method as a second FRM for
O3 should be directed to Mr. Eric S. Hall, National Exposure
Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, 109
T.W. Alexander Drive, MD E205-03, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711-
0001, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    Availability of Meeting Materials: Prior to the meeting, the review
document, agenda and other materials will be accessible through the
calendar link on the blue navigation bar at http://www.epa.gov/casac/.
    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for
consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a
different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices.
The intended use of comments submitted to a federal advisory committee
is different from the purpose of comments submitted to the EPA's
program offices. Federal advisory committees and panels, including
scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to EPA.
Members of the public may submit relevant comments pertaining to the
group conducting the review to the SAB Staff Office or provide relevant
comments pertaining to the topics being considered including the charge
to the CASAC Subcommittee to consider as it develops advice for EPA.
Input from the public to the CASAC Subcommittee will have the most
impact if it provides specific scientific or technical information or
analysis for the CASAC Subcommittee to consider or if it relates to the
clarity or accuracy of the technical information. Members of the public
wishing to provide comment should contact the DFO directly.
    Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an
oral presentation will be limited to three minutes for the public
teleconferences. Each person making an oral statement should consider
providing written comments as well as their oral statement so that the
points presented orally can be expanded upon in writing. Interested
parties should contact Mr. Edward Hanlon, DFO, in writing (preferably
via email) at the contact information noted above by April 2, 2014, to
be placed on the list of public speakers for the April 3, 2014 public
teleconference, and by June 5, 2014, to be placed on the list of public
speakers for the June 12, 2014 public teleconference.
    Written Statements: Written statements should be supplied to Mr.
Hanlon, DFO, via email at the contact information noted above by April
2, 2014 for the April 3, 2014 public teleconference, and by June 5,
2014 for the June 12, 2014 public teleconference so that the
information may be made available to the AMMS members for their
consideration. Written statements should be supplied in one of the
following electronic formats: Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, MS
PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format. It
is the SAB Staff Office general policy to post written comments on the
Web page for the advisory meeting or teleconference. Submitters are
requested to provide an unsigned version of each document because the
SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with signatures on its Web
sites. Members of the public should be aware that their personal
contact information, if included in any written comments, may be posted
to the CASAC Web site. Copyrighted material will not be posted without
explicit permission of the copyright holder.
    Accessibility: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, please contact Mr. Edward Hanlon at
(202) 564-2134 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request accommodation of a
disability, please contact Mr. Hanlon preferably at least ten days
prior to the public meeting and/or teleconference to give EPA as much
time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: March 5, 2014.
Thomas H. Brennan,
Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office.
[FR Doc. 2014-05524 Filed 3-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 149 (Friday, August 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46965-46966]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18629]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2007-D-0369]

Draft Guidance for Industry on Bioequivalence Recommendations for
Mesalamine Rectal Suppositories; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Bioequivalence
Recommendations for Mesalamine.'' The recommendations provide specific
guidance on the design of bioequivalence (BE) studies to support
abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for mesalamine rectal
suppositories. The draft guidance is a revised version of a previously
issued draft guidance on the same subject.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comments on
this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by October 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the draft
guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 2201, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris Andre, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research (HFD-600), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish
Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of June 11, 2010 (75 FR 33311), FDA
announced the availability of a guidance for industry entitled
``Bioequivalence Recommendations for Specific Products,'' which
explained the process that would be used to make product-specific BE
recommendations available to the public on FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm. As described in that guidance, FDA adopted this process as
a means to develop and disseminate product-specific BE recommendations
and provide a meaningful opportunity for the public to consider and
comment on those recommendations. This notice announces the
availability of a draft guidance on mesalamine (Draft Mesalamine Rectal
Suppository BE Recommendations of 2013).
    CANASA (Mesalamine, USP) Rectal Suppositories, new drug application
021252, 500 milligram (mg) and 1,000 mg strengths were approved by FDA
in January 2001 and November 2004, respectively. The 500 mg strength is
no longer marketed. There are no approved ANDAs for this product.
    In May 2007, FDA posted on its Web site a draft guidance for
industry on the Agency's recommendations for BE studies to support
ANDAs for mesalamine rectal suppositories (Draft Mesalamine Rectal
Suppository BE Recommendations of May 2007). In that draft guidance,
FDA recommended in vivo studies to demonstrate BE of generic mesalamine
rectal suppositories: A BE study with clinical endpoints and a fasting
BE study with pharmacokinetic endpoints. FDA has reconsidered the
recommendations in the Draft Mesalamine Rectal Suppository BE
Recommendations of May 2007 and has decided to revise it. In March
2013, FDA withdrew the Draft Mesalamine Rectal Suppository BE
Recommendations of May 2007 and posted on its Web site a revised draft
guidance for industry, the Draft Mesalamine Rectal Suppository BE
Recommendations of 2013. In this revised draft guidance, FDA recommends
in vivo and in vitro studies to demonstrate BE of generic mesalamine
rectal suppositories: A fasting BE study with pharmacokinetic endpoints
and comparative in vitro studies (melting point, differential scanning
calorimetry, density, and viscosity). FDA is no longer

recommending a BE study with clinical endpoints for demonstration of BE
of generic mesalamine rectal suppositories.
    In July 2007, Axcan Scandipharm (Axcan), manufacturer of CANASA,
submitted a citizen petition requesting that FDA withhold approval of
any ANDA application for a generic version of CANASA (mesalamine rectal
suppositories) unless certain studies that demonstrated BE were
conducted (Docket No. FDA-2007-P-0010, formerly 2007P-0302/CP1). FDA is
reviewing the issues raised in the petition and is also reviewing the
supplemental information submitted to the docket for this petition. FDA
will consider any comments on the Draft Mesalamine Rectal Suppository
BE Recommendations of 2013 before responding to Axcan's citizen
petition.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on the design
of BE studies to support ANDAs for mesalamine rectal suppositories. It
does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not
operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used
if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations.

II. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at
either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 29, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-18629 Filed 8-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: November 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 228)]
[Notices]
[Page 71590-71591]
[DOCID:fr29no05-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52809; File No. SR-PCX-2005-108]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Listing Standards for Investment Company Units and
Dissemination of Intraday Optimized Portfolio Value

November 18, 2005.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 26, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (``PCX'' or
``Exchange''), through its wholly owned subsidiary PCX Equities, Inc.
(``PCXE'' or ``Corporation''), filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposal from interested persons and also approving the proposal on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange, through its wholly-owned subsidiary PCXE, proposes to
amend its rules governing the Archipelago Exchange (``ArcaEx''), the
equities trading facility of PCXE. With this filing, the Exchange
proposes to amend its listing standards for Investment Company Units
(``ICUs'') to provide that PCXE may approve a series of ICUs for
trading if one or more major market data vendors disseminates for each
series of ICUs listed on ArcaEx an estimate of the value of a share of
each series of ICUs, sometimes referred to as the Intraday Optimized
Portfolio Value (``IOPV''), at least every 15 seconds during the time
these ICUs trade on ArcaEx. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Internet Web site (http://www.pacificex.com
), at the Exchange's principal office, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    PCXE Rule 5.2(j)(3), Commentary .01, provides listing standards for
ICUs to permit listing and trading of these securities pursuant to Rule
19b-4(e) under the Act.\3\ Rule 19b-4(e) provides that the listing and
trading of a new derivative securities product by a self-regulatory
organization (``SRO'') shall not be deemed a proposed rule change,
pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 19b-4, if the Commission has
approved, pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act, the SRO's trading
rules, procedures and listing standards for the product class that
would include the new derivative securities product, and the SRO has a
surveillance program for the product class.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761 (December 8,
1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange rules for ICUs currently provide that the Reporting
Authority \5\ will disseminate for each series of ICUs (in the case of
PCXE Rule 5.2(j)(3)) an estimate, updated every 15 seconds, of the
value of a share of the series. The IOPV may be based, for example,
upon current information regarding the required deposit of securities
and cash amount to permit creation of new shares of the series or upon
the index value.\6\ The Exchange believes that, rather than identifying
specifically in its rules the Reporting Authority as the dissemination
service, it is preferable to reflect in the rules a requirement for
wide dissemination of the IOPV. This proposed rule change would make
clear that the IOPV must be widely disseminated by a reputable
dissemination service, such as the Consolidated Tape Association,
Reuters, or Bloomberg. The Exchange believes that naming the Reporting
Authority as the dissemination service is not necessary and that the
purpose of the rule would be achieved as long as the service used for
dissemination is reputable, accepted in the investment community, and
effects appropriately wide dissemination of the IOPV relating to a
particular series of ICUs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ PCXE Rule 5.1(b)(16) provides that the term ``Reporting
Authority'' in respect of a particular series of ICUs means the
Corporation, a subsidiary of the Corporation, or an institution or
reporting service designated by the Corporation or its subsidiary as
the official source for calculating and reporting information
relating to such series, including, but not limited to, any current
index or portfolio value; the current value of the portfolio of any
securities required to be deposited in connection with issuance of
ICUs; the amount of any dividend equivalent payment or cash
distribution to holders of ICUs, net asset value, or other
information relating to the issuance, redemption or trading of ICUs.
The rule further states that: (i) Nothing in PCXE Rule 5.2(j)(3)
implies that an institution or reporting service that is the source
for calculating and reporting information relating to ICUs must be
designated by the Corporation and (ii) the term ``Reporting
Authority'' shall not refer to an institution or reporting service
not so designated.
    \6\ PCXE Rule 5.2(j)(3), Commentary .01(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange therefore proposes to change the listing standards for
ICUs to provide that PCXE may approve a series of ICUs for trading if
one or more major market data vendors disseminates for each series of
ICUs listed on ArcaEx the IOPV every 15 seconds during the time that
these ICUs trade on ArcaEx.
2. Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, because it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments and
perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market, and to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-PCX-2005-108 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-108. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-PCX-2005-108 and should be submitted on or before
December 20, 2005.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\9\ In particular, the Commission believes that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of the Exchange be
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, the Exchange would modify its
``generic'' listing standards under PCXE Rule 5.2(j)(3) applicable to
ICUs to remove the requirement that the Reporting Authority disseminate
estimated values for each series every 15 seconds. Instead, the
proposal would impose a requirement to have one or more major market
vendors to disseminate such information during the time that ICUs trade
on ArcaEx. For the purposes of this rule, the Exchange notes that its
definition of major market data vendor includes the Consolidated Tape
and services such as Reuters and Bloomberg.
    The Exchange has requested that the Commission find good cause for
approving the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after
publication of notice thereof in the Federal Register. The Commission
notes that it previously approved a similar rule change for the New
York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'').\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52081 (July 20,
2005), 70 FR 43488 (July 27, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that granting accelerated approval of the
proposal will allow the Exchange to implement, without undue delay,
these listing standards for dissemination of the estimated values for
ICUs. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\12\ for approving this proposal before the
thirtieth day after the publication of notice thereof in the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-PCX-2005-108) is hereby
approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6619 Filed 11-28-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 184 (Thursday, September 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 58805]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24306]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. EF11-9-000]

Western Area Power Administration; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on September 7, 2011, the Western Area Power
Administration submitted its Rate Order No. WAPA-156, concerning power,
transmission, and ancillary service formula rates for the Central
Valley Project, The California-Oregon Transmission Project, the Pacific
Alternating Current Intertie Transmission, and Information on the Path
15 Transmission Upgrade, for confirmation and approval on a final basis
effective October 1, 2011, and ending September 30, 2016.
    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 Applicant.
    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 14 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 7, 2011.

    Dated: September 15, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-24306 Filed 9-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 119 (Thursday, June 24, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33091-33094]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13193]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0267; Project Identifier 2017-SW-110-AD; Amendment
39-21620; AD 2021-13-15]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited)
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Bell Textron Canada Limited (type certificate previously held by Bell
Helicopter Textron Canada Limited) (Bell) Model 429 helicopters. This
AD was prompted by the identification of certain parts needing life
limits and certification maintenance requirement (CMR) tasks. This AD
requires establishing life limits and CMR tasks for various parts.
Depending on the results of the CMR tasks, this AD requires corrective
action. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 29, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bell Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel,
Quebec J7J 1R4, Canada; telephone 1-450-437-2862 or 1-800-363-8023; fax
1-450-433-0272; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or at https://www.bellflight.com/support/contact-support. You may view the referenced
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0267; 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, the Transport Canada AD, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, AD Program Manager,
General Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX
76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Bell Model 429
helicopters, serial numbers 57001 and subsequent. The NPRM published in
the Federal Register on April 8, 2021 (86 FR 18218). In the NPRM, the
FAA proposed to require establishing a life limit for certain part-
numbered tail rotor outboard flapping bearings and a certain part-
numbered hoist kit cable cutter cartridge. The NPRM also proposed to
require establishing recurring CMR tasks for a certain part-numbered
wheeled landing gear system, float/life raft kit, and hoist kit, and
depending on the results of the CMR tasks, corrective action. The NPRM
was prompted by Canadian AD CF-2017-16, dated May 17, 2017, issued by
Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority of Canada, to correct
an unsafe condition for Bell Model 429 helicopters, serial numbers
57001 and subsequent. Transport Canada advises that Bell has
established life limits and CMR tasks for various parts and accordingly
revised Chapter 4--Airworthiness Limitations Schedule of Bell
Helicopter 429 Maintenance Manual BHT-429-MM-1 to Revision 26, dated
September 9, 2016 (BHT-429-MM-1). Transport Canada states that failure
to replace life-limited parts or perform CMR tasks as specified could
result in an unsafe condition.
    Accordingly, the Transport Canada AD requires updating the
maintenance schedule for the parts affected with the airworthiness life
limits and CMR tasks in Revision 26 of BHT-429-MM-1.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from one commenter. The commenter was
Bell. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the
FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Change the Compliance Time of the Hoist Cable Anti-Foul
Assembly Operational Check

    Bell requested changing the compliance time of the hoist cable
anti-foul assembly operational check from before the first flight of
the day involving a hoist operation to after the last flight of the
day. Bell requested this change to avoid the potential to suspend
critical operations in order to accomplish the check and any required
corrective maintenance because according to Bell, hoist equipment
serves an essential service and may be required for critical missions
with minimal notice. Bell further stated that this task was established
based on the system safety assessment for the Bell Model 429 helicopter
hoist installation and exposure based on a daily check after the last
flight was considered in that assessment to conservatively meet
acceptable reliability targets for its Major hazard classification.
    The FAA disagrees with the request to change the compliance time to
after the last flight of the day. The compliance time of before the
first flight of the day is standard practice in rotorcraft AD actions
for enforceability purposes. However, this wording does not imply that
the operational check and corrective action must be done on the same
calendar day as the first flight of the day involving a hoist
operation. In light of this, the FAA has made no changes based on this
request.

Conclusion

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Canada and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with Canada, Transport Canada has
notified the FAA about the unsafe condition described in its AD. The
FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and
determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed.
Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these helicopters. Except, since issuance of the NPRM, Bell has
updated its contact information to obtain service documentation by
changing its website address and adding an email address. This final
rule reflects those changes and this AD is otherwise adopted as
proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes increase the economic burden
on any operator.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Chapter 4--Airworthiness Limitations Schedule of
BHT-429-MM-1. This service information specifies airworthiness life
limits, inspection intervals, and CMR requirements for parts installed
on Model 429 helicopters. Revision 26 of this service information
establishes life limits for a certain part-numbered tail rotor flapping
outboard bearing and hoist kit cartridge cable cutter and CMR
requirements for a certain part-numbered wheeled landing gear system,
float/life raft kit, and hoist kit.
    Additionally, the FAA reviewed Chapter 96-47--600-Pound External
Hoist Electrical System--Operational Check, of Bell 429 Maintenance
Manual Supplement For 600-Pound External Hoist Kit, BHT-429-MMS-4,
Revision 1, dated March 14, 2014. This service information specifies
inspection procedures and corrective action for various components of
the hoist system.
    Lastly, the FAA reviewed Testing and Fault Isolation, pages 101-
117/118, Cleaning, pages 401-405/406, and Scheduled Maintenance, pages
609-611/612, of Goodrich Rescue Hoist System Component Maintenance
Manual 25-00-38-1, dated July 15, 2009, for rescue hoist assembly part
number 44316-12-102. This service information specifies maintenance
procedures and lists replacement parts for this part-numbered Goodrich
rescue hoist assembly.

Differences Between This AD and the Transport Canada AD

    This AD requires corrective action for failed CMR tasks, whereas
the Transport Canada AD does not. The Transport Canada AD requires
accomplishing an operational check of the hoist cable anti-foul
assembly daily after the last flight, whereas this AD requires this
action before the first flight of the day involving a hoist operation
instead.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 110 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this AD.
    Replacing a tail rotor outboard flapping bearing takes about 4
work-hours and parts cost about $7,500 for an estimated cost of $7,840
per helicopter and $862,400 for the U.S. fleet, per replacement cycle.
Replacing a hoist kit cable cutter cartridge takes about 3 work-hours
and parts cost about $5,200 for an estimated cost of $5,455 per
helicopter and $600,050 for the U.S. fleet, per replacement cycle.

    Performing a functional check of the wheeled landing gear system
takes about 4 work-hours for an estimated cost of $340 per helicopter
and $37,400 for the U.S. fleet, per cycle. Performing a functional
check of the float/life raft kit takes about 2 work-hours for an
estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and $18,700 for the U.S. fleet,
per cycle.
    Performing an operational check of the hoist kit cable anti-foul
assembly takes about 2 work-hours for an estimated cost of $170 per
helicopter and $18,700 for the U.S. fleet, per cycle. Cleaning,
visually inspecting, and lubricating the rescue hoist cable takes about
2 work-hours for an estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and $18,700
for the U.S. fleet, per cycle. Performing an operational check of the
hoist kit speed limit switches and the electrical system takes about
0.5 work-hour for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and $4,730
for the U.S. fleet, per cycle. Performing a functional check of the
cable cutter cartridge electrical system takes about 3 work-hours for
an estimated cost of $255 per helicopter and $28,050 for the U.S.
fleet, per cycle.
    The FAA has no way of determining the estimated costs to do
allowable repairs based on the results of the CMR tasks. If required,
replacing the float/life raft takes about 2 work-hours and parts cost
about $5,000 for an estimated cost of $5,170 per float/life raft.
Replacing the anti-foul assembly takes about 3 work-hours and parts
cost about $1,500 for an estimated cost of $1,755 per anti-foul
assembly. Replacing a rescue hoist cable takes about 3 work-hours and
parts cost about $3,150 for an estimated cost of $3,405 per rescue
hoist cable. Overhauling a rescue hoist assembly costs about $83,000
and it takes about 8 work-hours to remove and reinstall the hoist for a
labor cost of $680, for a total estimated cost of $83,680 per
helicopter, per overhaul cycle. Alternatively, replacing a hoist takes
about 8 work-hours and parts cost about $200,000 for an estimated cost
of $200,680 per helicopter, per replacement cycle.

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 helicopters identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The 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:

2021-13-15 Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously
Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited): Amendment 39-21620;
Docket No. FAA-2021-0267; Project Identifier 2017-SW-110-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 29, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Textron Canada Limited (type certificate
previously held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited) Model 429
helicopters, certificated in any category, serial numbers 57001 and
subsequent.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 3200, Landing Gear
Systems, and 2560, Emergency Equipment.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by parts remaining in service beyond their
fatigue life or beyond maintenance intervals required by the
certification maintenance requirements (CMRs) of the Instructions
for Continued Airworthiness. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent
failure of a part, which could result in loss of control of the
helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight after the effective date of this AD,
remove from service any part that has reached or exceeded its life
limit as follows. Thereafter, remove from service each part on or
before reaching its life limit as follows:
    (i) Tail rotor outboard flapping bearing part number (P/N) 429-
312-103-117 and 429-312-103-119: 15,000 total hours time-in-service
(TIS).
    (ii) Hoist kit cable cutter cartridge P/N 42315-281: 5 years
since date of manufacture.
    (2) Before further flight after the effective date of this AD,
perform the following CMR tasks for any part that has reached or
exceeded its CMR interval as follows. Thereafter, perform the
following CMR tasks for each part on or before reaching its CMR
interval as follows:
    Note 1 to paragraph (g)(2): Chapter 4--Airworthiness Limitations
Schedule of Bell Helicopter 429 Maintenance Manual BHT-429-MM-1 to
Revision 26, dated September 9, 2016, contains additional
information about the CMR tasks.
    (i) Wheeled Landing Gear System P/N 429-705-001-101: 800 hours
TIS or 1 year, whichever occurs first, perform a functional check of
the Emergency Gear Release. If the functional check fails, before
further flight, repair in accordance with FAA-approved procedures.
    (ii) Float/Life Raft Kit P/N 429-706-069-101: 1,600 hours TIS,
perform a functional check of the float/life raft kit electrical
system to determine if there are any dormant failures including:
Manual inflation switch, water immersion switch, auto-activation
relay, manual activation relay, raft activation relay, test
activation relay, and the fuse disc elements. If there is a failure,
before next flight over water, replace the float/life raft.
    (iii) Hoist Kit P/N 429-706-001-101:
    (A) Before the first flight of the day involving a hoist
operation, perform an operational check of the hoist cable anti-foul

assembly. If the operational check fails, before next flight
involving a hoist operation, repair or replace the anti-foul
assembly.
    (B) 3 hoist operating hours, clean, visually inspect the rescue
hoist cable for damage, which may be indicated by a broken wire,
kink, bird caging, flattened area, abrasion, or necking. If there is
any damage, before further flight, replace the rescue hoist cable.
If there is no damage, before further flight, lubricate the rescue
hoist cable. For purposes of this AD, hoist operating hours are
counted anytime the hoist motor is operating.
    Note 2 to paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(B): Bell Helicopter service
information refers to hoist operating hours as hoisting hours.
    (C) 800 hours TIS or 1 year, whichever occurs first, perform an
operational check of the speed limit switches and perform an
operational check of the 600-pound external hoist electrical system
to inspect operation of the HOIST HOT caution light. If an
operational check fails, before next flight involving a hoist
operation, repair in accordance with FAA-approved procedures or
replace the hoist.
    (D) 2,200 hours TIS or 111 hoist operating hours, whichever
occurs first, perform a functional check of the cable cutter
cartridge electrical system to inspect for correct functioning of
the cable cutter switches (hoist pendant, pilot cyclic, and copilot
cyclic) and associated wiring. If a functional check fails, before
next flight involving a hoist operation, repair in accordance with
FAA-approved procedures or replace the hoist.
    (E) 111 hoist operating hours, overhaul or replace the hoist.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Matt Fuller, AD
Program Manager, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Chapter 4--Airworthiness Limitations Schedule of Bell
Helicopter 429 Maintenance Manual BHT-429-MM-1 to Revision 26, dated
September 9, 2016, which is not incorporated by reference, contains
additional information about the subject of this AD. For service
information identified in this AD, contact Bell Textron Canada
Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J 1R4, Canada;
telephone 1-450-437-2862 or 1-800-363-8023; fax 1-450-433-0272;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or at https://www.bellflight.com/support/contact-support. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada AD
CF-2017-16, dated May 17, 2017. You may view the Transport Canada AD
at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2021-0267.

    Issued on June 17, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-13193 Filed 6-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55510-55511]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25322]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0398; FRL-9971-14-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Nonattainment New Source Review Requirements for the 2008 8-
Hour Ozone Standard; Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Due to the receipt of an adverse comment, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is withdrawing the September 29, 2017 direct
final rule (DFR) that approved a revision to the Maryland state
implementation plan (SIP). The revision was in response to EPA's
February 3, 2017 Findings of Failure to Submit for various requirements
relating to the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). This SIP revision was specific to nonattainment new
source review (NNSR) requirements. EPA stated in the direct final rule
that if EPA received adverse comments by October 30, 2017, the rule
would be withdrawn and not take effect. EPA subsequently received an
adverse comment. EPA will address the comment received in a subsequent
final action based upon the proposed action also published on September
29, 2017. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. This withdrawal action is being taken under section 110 of the
Clean Air Act.

DATES: The direct final rule published at 82 FR 45475, on September 29,
2017, is withdrawn as of November 22, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0398 for
this action. The index to the docket is available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Amy Johansen,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 8, 2017, the Maryland Department of
the Environment (MDE) submitted on behalf of the State of Maryland a
formal revision, requesting EPA's approval for the SIP of its NNSR
Certification for the 2008 Ozone Standard (Revision 17-01). The SIP
revision is in response to EPA's final 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS Findings
of Failure to Submit for NNSR requirements. See 82 FR 9158 (February 3,
2017). Specifically, Maryland is certifying that its existing NNSR
program, covering the Baltimore Nonattainment Area (which includes Anne
Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and Howard Counties and the city
of Baltimore), the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Nonattainment
Area (which includes Cecil County in Maryland), and the Washington, DC
Nonattainment Area (which includes Calvert, Charles, Frederick,
Montgomery, and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland) for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, is at least

as stringent as the requirements at 40 CFR 51.165, as amended by the
final rule titled ``Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements''
(SIP Requirements Rule), for ozone and its precursors.\1\ See 80 FR
12264 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The SIP Requirements Rule addresses a range of nonattainment
area SIP requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, including
requirements pertaining to attainment demonstrations, reasonable
further progress (RFP), reasonably available control technology,
reasonably available control measures, major new source review,
emission inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and of
compliance with emission control measures in the SIP. The rule also
revokes the 1997 ozone NAAQS and establishes anti-backsliding
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please see additional information provided in the direct final
action published in the Federal Register on September 29, 2017 (82 FR
45475) and in the companion proposed rule which was also published on
September 29, 2017 (82 FR 45547). In the DFR, we stated that if we
received adverse comment by October 30, 2017, the rule would be
withdrawn and not take effect. EPA subsequently received an adverse
comment. As a result of the comment received, EPA is withdrawing the
direct final rule approving Maryland's SIP revision related to NNSR
requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: November 9, 2017.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
Accordingly, the amendment to 40 CFR 52.1070(e) published on September
29, 2017 (82 FR 45475) is withdrawn as of November 22, 2017.

[FR Doc. 2017-25322 Filed 11-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12368-12370]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02521]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0866; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-131-AD;
Amendment 39-17743; AD 2014-03-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracks found in the aft
support fitting, the rear spar upper chord, and the rear spar web. This
AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the aft support
fitting for the main landing gear (MLG) beam, and the rear spar upper
chord and rear spar web in the area of rear spar station (RSS) 224.14;
and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
such cracks, which could grow and result in a fuel leak and possible
fire.

DATES: This AD is effective April 9, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 9,
2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for

and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-0866; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility 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 address
for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6440; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 24, 2013 (78 FR
63431). The NPRM was prompted by reports of cracks found in the aft
support fitting, the rear spar upper chord, and the rear spar web. The
NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for cracking of the aft
support fitting for the MLG beam, and the rear spar upper chord and
rear spar web in the area of RSS 224.14; and repair if necessary. We
are issuing this AD to detect and correct such cracks, which could grow
and result in a fuel leak and possible fire.

Comment

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the proposal
(78 FR 63431, October 24, 2013) and the FAA's response to that comment.

Statement Regarding Installation of Winglets

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that the installation of winglets
per supplemental type certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the
accomplishment of the manufacturer's service instructions.
    We concur. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of the NPRM (78 FR
63431, October 24, 2013) as paragraph (c)(1) in this final rule and
added paragraph (c)(2) to state that installation of STC ST01219SE
(http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/2C6E3DBDDD36F91C862576A4005D64E2?OpenDocument&Highlight=st01219se) does
not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD.
Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a
``change in product'' alternative method of compliance approval request
is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 63431, October 24, 2013) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 63431, October 24, 2013).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 353 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Action                Labor cost           Parts cost       Cost per product     Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.............  Up to 86 work-hours x               $0   Up to $7,310 per        Up to $2,580,430 per
                          $85 per hour = $7,310                    inspection cycle.       inspection cycle.
                          per inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    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

    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,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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 (AD):

2014-03-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17743; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0866; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-131-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 9, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -
200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in
any category.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/2C6E3DBDDD36F91C862576A4005D64E2?OpenDocument&Highlight=st01219se)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks found in the aft
support fitting for the main landing gear (MLG) beam, and the rear
spar upper chord and rear spar web. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct such cracks, which could grow and result in a fuel leak
and possible fire.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspections: Group 1

    For airplanes identified in Group 1 of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15, 2013: At the applicable
time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15, 2013, except
as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, do inspections and
applicable corrective actions using a method approved in accordance
with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(h) Inspections: Groups 2-7

    For airplanes identified in Groups 2 through 7 of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15, 2013: At the
applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15,
2013, except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, do high
frequency eddy current inspections to detect cracking of the aft
support fitting for the MLG beam, and the rear spar upper chord and
rear spar web in the area of rear spar station 224.14, as
applicable, in accordance with Option 1, 2, or 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15, 2013.
    (1) If no crack is found, repeat the inspection thereafter at
the time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15, 2013,
as applicable. Accomplishment of the inspection of the 12 fastener
holes (locations 1-12) in accordance with Option 2, Action 3; or
Option 3, Action 3; as specified in note (b) of tables 2 through 5
of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated May 15, 2013; terminates only
the corresponding inspections that include note (b) in the ``Repeat
Interval'' column of the applicable table.
    (2) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) or (g)(1) of this AD, repair before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(i) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1318,
dated May 15, 2013, specifies a compliance time ``after the original
issue date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance
within the specified compliance time after the effective date of
this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA), which has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Nancy Marsh,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1318, dated
May 15, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 18, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-02521 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


"Goldstein, Nick"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 03/02/2007 04:20 PM

To

Fred Butterfield/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

"Goldstein, Nick"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject

ARTBA Oral and Written Statements for 3/5/07 CASAC Meeting

Fred,

Please find attached a copy of ARTBA's oral and written statements for

the March 5, 2007 CASAC meeting.  If you have any questions or problems

with the document, please let me know.

Nick

Nick Goldstein

Staff Attorney/Division Manager, Transportation Officials Division

American Road & Transportation Builders Association

1219 28th Street NW

Washington, DC 20007

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> ext. 207

Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

www.artba.org