[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 17, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2369-2371]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00625]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 232

[Release Nos. 33-10444; 34-82246; 39-2519; IC-32938]

Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') is
adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and
Retrieval System (``EDGAR'') Filer Manual and related rules to reflect
updates to the EDGAR system. The EDGAR system is scheduled to be
upgraded on December 11, 2017.

DATES: Effective January 17, 2018. The incorporation by reference of
the EDGAR Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of January 17, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In the Division of Investment
Management, for questions concerning Form N-LIQUID and additional data
submission protocols for Form N-CEN, contact Heather Fernandez at (202)
551-6708; and in the Division of Corporation Finance, for questions
concerning the combined Form 10-D/ABS-EE submission protocols or the
new CERT submission form type, contact Heather Macintosh at (202) 551-
8111.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer
Manual, Volume II. The Filer Manual describes the technical formatting
requirements for the preparation and submission of electronic filings
through the EDGAR system.\1\ It also describes the requirements for
filing using EDGARLink Online and the Online Forms/XML website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993,
with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April
1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the
Filer Manual on September 13, 2017. See Release No. 33-10413
(September 13, 2017) [82 FR 45434].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The revisions to the Filer Manual reflect changes within Volume II,
entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: ``EDGAR Filing,'' Version 44
(December 2017). The updated manual will be incorporated by reference
into the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for
filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. Filers must comply
with the applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure
the timely acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic
format.\2\ Filers may consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our
rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for
electronic submission.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301).
    \3\ See Release No. 33-10385 (July 6, 2017) [82 FR 35062]
(implementing revisions to reflect EDGAR Release 17.2. For
additional history of EDGAR Filer Manual revisions, please see the
citations therein).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EDGAR system will be upgraded to Release 17.4 on December 11,
2017 and will introduce the changes referenced below.
    EDGAR Release 17.4 will update EDGAR to allow, but not require,
asset-backed securities filers to submit a combined Form 10-D and Form
ABS-EE. The combined submission would allow filers to concurrently
submit and create hyperlinks in Form 10-D to the Form ABS-EE exhibits
incorporated by reference into the Form 10-D.\4\ The combined
submission will be subject to a size limitation of 800MB, with 600MB
for the Form ABS-EE submission and 200MB for the Form 10-D submission.
Corresponding changes will be made to Chapter 5 (Constructing Attached
Documents and Document Types) and Chapter 7 (Preparing and Transmitting
EDGARLink Online Submissions) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission previously adopted amendments requiring
registrants to include a hyperlink to each exhibit listed in the
exhibit index of certain filings, including filings on Form 10-D.
See Release Nos. 33-10322, 34-80132 (March 1, 2017) [82 FR 14130
(March 17, 2017)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EDGAR Release 17.4 will update EDGAR to allow, but not require,
national securities exchanges to submit a new certification form type
on EDGAR to evidence the approval of securities for listing on an
exchange. EDGAR Release 17.4 will introduce submission

form type CERT, a new EDGARLink Online submission form type.
Instructions for making submissions of form type CERT will be added to
Chapter 5 (Constructing Attached Documents and Document Types) and
Chapter 7 (Preparing and Transmitting EDGARLink Online Submissions) of
the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II.
    In Release No. 33-10233 (October 13, 2016) [81 FR 82142], the
Commission adopted changes to the reporting requirements for open-end
management investment companies. Among the changes was the adoption of
new Form N-LIQUID, which requires all registered open-end funds (except
money market funds) to confidentially notify the Commission when
certain events related to their liquidity occur. EDGAR Release 17.4
will update EDGAR to provide a means of submitting information
regarding liquidity events using the following form types:
     Current Report Open-End Management Investment Company
Liquidity on Form N-LIQUID (N-LIQUID); and
     Amended Current Report Open-End Management Investment
Company Liquidity Form N-LIQUID (N-LIQUID/A).
    Changes will be made to Chapter 3 (Index to Forms) and Chapter 7
(Preparing and Transmitting Online Submissions) of the EDGAR Filer
Manual, Volume II.
    In Release No. 33-10231 the Commission also adopted Form N-CEN,
which will require investment companies, other than face amount
certificate companies, to provide an annual report of census-type
information in a structured format. EDGAR Release 17.3 added Form N-CEN
and its related submission form types to EDGAR.\5\ As part of EDGAR
Release 17.4, Chapter 7 (Preparing and Transmitting Online Submissions)
of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II will be revised to provide
clarifying instructions for filers on how to submit an amended Form N-
CEN that contains data from a previously accepted filing on Form N-CEN
or N-CEN/A covering the same period-end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Release No. 33-10413 (adopting updates to reflect EDGAR
Release 17.3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, clarifying changes to the instructions for preparing
documents that contain interactive data will be made to Chapter 5
(Constructing Attached Documents and Document Types) and Chapter 6
(Interactive Data) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II.
    Along with the adoption of the Filer Manual, we are amending Rule
301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by reference
into the Code of Federal Regulations of today's revisions. This
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    The updated EDGAR Filer Manual will be available for website
viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals.htm. You may also obtain paper copies
of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference
Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m.
    Since the Filer Manual and the corresponding rule changes relate
solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and
comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act
(``APA'').\6\ It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act \7\ do not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).
    \7\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the rule
amendments is January 17, 2018. In accordance with the APA,\8\ we find
that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30
days after publication of these rules. The EDGAR system upgrade to
Release 17.4 is scheduled to become available on December 11, 2017. The
Commission believes that establishing an effective date less than 30
days after publication of these rules is necessary to coordinate the
effectiveness of the updated Filer Manual with these system upgrades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statutory Basis

    We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under Sections 6,
7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933,\9\ Sections 3, 12,
13, 14, 15, 23, and 35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\10\
Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,\11\ and Sections 8, 30,
31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78w, and 78ll.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 77sss.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232

    Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Securities.

Text of the Amendment

    In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 232--REGULATION S-T--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
ELECTRONIC FILINGS

0
1. The authority citation for part 232 continues to read in part as
follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 77c, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z-3,
77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a-6(c),
80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, and 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350,
unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

0
2. Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  232.301  EDGAR Filer Manual.

    Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by
the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets forth
the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The
requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are
set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: ``General
Information,'' Version 29 (September 2017). The requirements for filing
on EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II:
``EDGAR Filing,'' Version 44 (December 2017). Additional provisions
applicable to Form N-SAR filers are set forth in the EDGAR Filer
Manual, Volume III: ``N-SAR Supplement,'' Version 6 (January 2017). All
of these provisions have been incorporated by reference into the Code
of Federal Regulations, which action was approved by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. You must comply with these requirements in order for documents to
be timely received and accepted. The EDGAR Filer Manual is available
for website viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is
https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals.htm. You can obtain paper
copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public
Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. You can also inspect the document at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: December 8, 2017.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-00625 Filed 1-16-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 28, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 95531-95536]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30610]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9518; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-091-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-19-
09 and AD 2014-25-51, for all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
series airplanes. AD 2013-19-09 currently requires replacing Angle of
Attack (AOA) sensor conic plates with AOA sensor flat plates. AD 2014-
25-51 currently requires revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to
advise the flightcrew of emergency procedures for abnormal Alpha
Protection (Alpha Prot). Since we issued AD 2013-19-09 and AD 2014-25-
51, we have received a report indicating that certain AOA sensors
appear to have a greater susceptibility to adverse environmental
conditions. This proposed AD would require replacing certain AOA
sensors; and doing a detailed inspection and a functional heating test
for discrepancies on certain AOA sensors, and replacing the affected
AOA sensors. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 13,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For Airbus service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.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-2016-
9518; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-9518;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-091-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On March 8, 2013, we issued AD 2013-06-03, Amendment 39-17399 (78
FR 19085, March 29, 2013) (``AD 2013-06-03'') for all Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. AD 2013-06-03 was prompted
by reports of oil residue between the stator and the rotor parts of the
position resolvers of the AOA vane, which was a result of incorrect
removal of the machining oil during the manufacturing process of the
AOA resolvers. AD 2013-06-03 requires an inspection to determine if
certain AOA probes are installed, and replacement of any affected AOA
probe. We issued AD 2013-06-03 to prevent erroneous AOA information and
consequent delayed or non-activation of the AOA protection systems,
which during flight at a high AOA, could result in reduced control of
the airplane.
    On September 13, 2013, we issued AD 2013-19-09, Amendment 39-17591
(78 FR 60667, October 2, 2013) (``AD 2013-19-09'') for all Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. AD 2013-19-09 was prompted
by a determination that replacement of AOA sensor conic plates is
necessary to address the identified unsafe condition. AD 2013-19-09
requires replacing AOA sensor conic plates with AOA sensor flat plates,
and subsequent removal of an AFM revision. We issued AD 2013-19-09 to
prevent reduced control of the airplane.
    On January 7, 2015, we issued AD 2014-25-51, Amendment 39-18067 (80
FR 3153, January 22, 2015) (``AD 2014-25-51'') for all Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. AD 2014-25-51 was prompted
by a report of AOA probes jamming on an in-service Airbus Model A321
airplane. AD 2014-25-51 requires revising the AFM to advise the flight
crew of emergency procedures for abnormal Alpha Prot. We issued AD
2014-25-51 to ensure that the flightcrew has procedures to counteract
the pitch down order due to abnormal activation of the Alpha Prot. An
abnormal Alpha Prot, if not corrected, could result in loss of control
of the airplane.
    Since we issued AD 2013-06-03, AD 2013-19-09, and AD 2014-25-51, we
have received a report indicating that certain AOA sensors appear to
have a greater susceptibility to adverse environmental conditions. It
has been determined that replacement of certain AOA sensors is
necessary to address the unsafe condition on these airplanes.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2015-0135, dated July 8, 2015 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    An occurrence was reported where an Airbus A321 aeroplane
encountered a blockage of two Angle of Attack (AOA) probes during
climb, leading to activation of the Alpha Protection (Alpha Prot)
while the Mach number increased. The flight crew managed to regain
full control and the flight landed uneventfully.
    When Alpha Prot is activated due to blocked AOA probes, the
flight control laws order a continuous nose down pitch rate that, in
a worst case scenario, cannot be stopped with backward sidestick
inputs, even in the full backward position. If the Mach number
increases during a nose down order, the AOA value of the Alpha Prot
will continue to decrease. As a result, the flight control laws will
continue to order a nose down pitch rate, even if the speed is above
minimum selectable speed, known as VLS.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of
control of the airplane.
    Investigation results indicated that A320 family airplanes
equipped with certain UTC Aerospace (UTAS, formerly known as
Goodrich) AOA sensors, or equipped with certain SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA
sensors, appear to have a greater susceptibility to adverse
environmental conditions than airplanes equipped with the latest
Thales AOA sensor, Part Number (P/N) C16291AB, which was designed to
improve A320 airplane AOA indication behaviour in heavy rain
conditions.
    Having determined that replacement of these AOA sensors is
necessary to achieve and maintain the required safety level of the
airplane, EASA issued AD 2015-0087, retaining the requirements of
EASA AD 2012-0236R1 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2013-06-03], [EASA]
AD 2013-0022 (partially) [which corresponds to FAA AD 2013-19-09],
and [EASA] AD 2014-0266-E [which corresponds to FAA AD 2014-25-51],
which were superseded, and requiring modification of the airplanes
by replacement of the affected P/N sensors, and, after modification,
prohibiting (re-)installation of those P/N AOA sensors. That [EASA]
AD also required repetitive detailed visual inspections (DET) and
functional heating tests of certain Thales AOA sensors and provided
an optional terminating action for those inspections.
    Since EASA AD 2015-0087 was issued, based on further analysis
results, Airbus issued Operators Information Transmission (OIT) Ref.
999.0015/15 Revision 1, instructing operators to speed up the
removal from service of UTAS P/N 0861ED2 AOA sensors.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2015-0087, which is superseded, but reduces
the compliance times for airplanes with UTAS P/N 0861ED2 AOA sensors
installed.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9518.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information:
     Service Bulletin A320-34-1415, Revision 03, dated July 8,
2010. This service information describes

procedures for a detailed inspection and a functional heating test for
discrepancies on certain AOA sensors, and replacing the affected AOA
sensors.
     Service Bulletin A320-34-1444, Revision 01, dated March
17, 2011. This service information describes procedures for replacing
certain SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA sensors.
     Service Bulletin A320-34-1610, dated March 31, 2015. This
service information describes procedures for replacing certain UTAS AOA
sensors.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    The requirements specified in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) of
the MCAI correspond to the requirements of AD 2013-06-03. We have
determined that leaving AD 2013-06-03 as a stand-alone AD provides
better clarification of the actions instead of superseding AD 2013-06-
03 as part of this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 959 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    The actions required by AD 2013-19-09, and retained in this
proposed AD take about 8 work-hours per product, at an average labor
rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $0 per product.
Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that are
required by AD 2013-19-09 is $680 per product.
    The actions required by AD 2014-25-51, and retained in this
proposed AD take about 1 work-hour per product, at an average labor
rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $0 per product.
Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that are
required by AD 2014-25-51 is $85 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take about 5 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. The parts cost is not available. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be at least $407,575, or $425 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 5 work-hours. The parts cost is not available. We have no
way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
actions.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed
AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    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.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2013-19-09, Amendment 39-17591 (78 FR 60667, October 2, 2013), and AD
2014-25-51, Amendment 39-18067 (80 FR 3153, January 22, 2015), and
adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-9518; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-
091-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 13, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    (1) This AD replaces AD 2013-19-09, Amendment 39-17591 (78 FR
60667, October 2, 2013) (``AD 2013-19-09''), and AD 2014-25-51,
Amendment 39-18067 (80 FR 3153, January 22, 2015) (``AD 2014-25-
51'').
    (2) This AD affects AD 2013-06-03, Amendment 39-17399 (78 FR
19085, March 29, 2013) (``AD 2013-06-03'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes listed in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
and -133 airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (4) Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231,
and -232 airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that an Airbus Model
A321 airplane encountered a blockage of two Angle of Attack (AOA)
probes during climb, leading to activation of the Alpha Protection
(Alpha

Prot) while the Mach number increased. We are issuing this AD to
prevent a pitch down order due to abnormal activation of the Alpha
Prot. An abnormal Alpha Prot, if not corrected, could result in loss
of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained New Flat Plate Installation, With Removed Post-
Installation Requirement and With Specific Delegation Approval Language

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2013-19-09, with removed post-installation requirement and with
specific delegation approval language. Within 5 months after
November 6, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013-19-09), remove all
AOA sensor conic plates having part number (P/N) F3411060200000 or
P/N F3411060900000 and install AOA sensor flat plates having part
numbers specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, except
as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD. Install the AOA sensor
plates in accordance with the applicable method specified in
paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Install P/N D3411013520200 in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A320-34-1564, including Appendix 01, dated January 25, 2013.
    (2) Install P/N D3411007620000 or P/N D3411013520000, using a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

(h) Retained Exception, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the exception provided by paragraph (k)
of AD 2013-19-09, with no changes. An airplane on which Airbus
modification 154863 (installation of AOA sensor flat plate) and
modification 154864 (coating protection) have been embodied in
production is not affected by the requirements of paragraph (g) of
this AD, provided that, since first flight, no AOA sensor conic
plate having P/N F3411060200000 or P/N F3411060900000 has been
installed on that airplane.

(i) Retained Parts Installation Prohibition, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (m) of AD
2013-19-09, with no changes.
    (1) For any airplane that has AOA sensor flat plates installed:
As of November 6, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013-19-09), do not
install any AOA sensor conic plate having P/N F3411060200000 or P/N
F3411060900000, and do not use any AOA protection cover having P/N
98D34203003000.
    (2) For any airplane that has AOA sensor conic plates installed:
As of November 6, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013-19-09), after
modification of the airplane as required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, do not install any AOA sensor conic plate having P/N
F3411060200000 or P/N F3411060900000, and do not use any AOA
protection cover having P/N 98D34203003000.

(j) Retained Revision of Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2014-25-51, with no changes. Within 2 days after February 6, 2015
(the effective date of AD 2014-25-51), revise the AFM to incorporate
procedures to address undue activation of Alpha Prot by inserting
the text specified in figure 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD into the
Emergency Procedures section of the applicable AFM, to advise the
flight crew of emergency procedures for abnormal Alpha Prot. This
may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.
When a statement identical to the text specified in figure 1 to
paragraph (j) of this AD is included in the general revisions of the
AFM, the general revisions may be inserted in the AFM, and the text
specified in figure 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD may be removed.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28DE16.009

(k) New Requirement of This AD: Replacement of Certain UTAS (formerly
Goodrich) AOA Sensors

    For airplanes on which any UTAS AOA sensor, P/N 0861ED or P/N
0861ED2, is installed: Within the applicable compliance times
specified in paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), and (k)(4) of this
AD, replace the affected Captain and First Officer AOA sensors with
Thales AOA sensors, P/N C16291AB, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1610,
dated March 31, 2015.
    (1) For Model A318 and A321 series airplanes on which any UTAS
AOA sensor, P/N 0861ED, is installed: Replace within 7 months after
the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For Model A319 and A320 series airplanes on which any UTAS
AOA sensor, P/N 0861ED, is installed: Replace within 22 months after
the effective date of this AD.
    (3) For Model A318 and A321 series airplanes on which any UTAS
AOA sensor, P/N 0861ED2, is installed: Replace within 4 months after
the effective date of this AD.
    (4) For Model A319 and A320 series airplanes on which any UTAS
AOA sensor, P/N 0861ED2, is installed: Replace within 7 months after
the effective date of this AD.

(l) New Requirement of This AD: Replacement of Certain SEXTANT/THOMSON
AOA Sensors

    For airplanes on which any SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA sensor, P/N
45150320 or P/N 16990568, is installed: Within the applicable
compliance time specified in paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) of this AD,
replace each SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA sensor, P/N 45150320 and P/N
16990568, with a Thales AOA sensor, P/N C16291AB, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-
1444, Revision 01, dated March 17, 2011; except AOA sensors modified
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Thales
Avionics Service Bulletin C16291A-34-009, dated September 10, 2009,
cannot be used for the replacement.
    (1) For Model A318 and A321 series airplanes on which any
SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA sensor, P/N 45150320 or P/N 16990568, is
installed: Replace within 7 months after the effective date of this
AD.
    (2) For Model A319 and A320 series airplanes on which any
SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA sensor, P/N 45150320 or P/N 16990568, is
installed: Replace within 22 months after the effective date of this
AD.

(m) New Requirement of This AD: Functional Heating Test, and Corrective
Action for Certain AOA Sensors

    For an airplane on which any Thales AOA sensor, P/N C16291AA, is
installed: Before exceeding 5,200 flight hours accumulated by each
affected Thales AOA sensor since its first installation on an
airplane, or within 6 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later, do a functional heating test of each AOA
sensor, P/N C16291AA, to determine the maximum current (Imax) value,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-34-1415, Revision 03, dated July 8, 2010. If, during
any functional heating test, any Imax value is below the flow chart
value as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1415, Revision
03, dated July 8, 2010, before further flight, replace each
discrepant AOA sensor with a sensor identified in paragraph (m)(1)
or (m)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1415, Revision 03,
dated July 8, 2010. Repeat the functional heating test thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours.
    (1) Replace with a Thales AOA sensor, P/N C16291AA, that has
passed a functional

heating test as specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1415, Revision 03, July 8, 2010.
    (2) Replace with a Thales AOA sensor, P/N C16291AB, except AOA
sensors modified as specified in Thales Avionics Service Bulletin
C16291A-34-009, dated September 10, 2009, cannot be used for the
replacement.

(n) Optional Terminating Action

    Modification of an airplane by replacing each Thales P/N
C16291AA AOA sensor with a Thales P/N C16291AB AOA sensor, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-34-1444, Revision 01, dated March 17, 2011, terminates
the repetitive functional heating tests required in paragraph (m) of
this AD for that airplane; except AOA sensors modified in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Thales Avionics Service
Bulletin C16291A-34-009, dated September 10, 2009, cannot be used
for the replacement.

(o) New Provisions of This AD: Airplanes Not Affected

    An airplane with Airbus modification 150006 (installation of
Thales P/N C16291AB AOA sensors), but without modification 26934
(installation of UTAS P/N 0861ED AOA sensors) embodied in
production, is not affected by the requirements of paragraphs (k),
(l), and (m) of this AD, provided it is determined that no AOA
sensor having SEXTANT/THOMSON P/N 45150320 or 16990568, or UTAS P/N
0861ED or 0861ED2, has been installed on that airplane since its
date of manufacture.

(p) New Requirement of This AD: Parts Installation Prohibitions

    (1) As of the effective date of this AD: For an airplane on
which only Thales AOA sensors, P/N C16291AB, are installed, do not
install a Thales AOA sensor, P/N C16291AA, on that airplane. This
parts installation prohibition terminates the requirements of
paragraph (i)(1) of AD 2013-06-03, for the airplanes identified in
this paragraph.
    (2) As of the effective date of this AD: For an airplane on
which any combination of Thales AOA sensors, P/N C16291AA and Thales
P/N C16291AB, are installed, do not install any SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA
sensor, P/N 45150320 or 16990568, or UTAS AOA sensor, P/N 0861ED or
0861ED2, on that airplane.
    (3) After modification of an airplane as required by paragraph
(k) of this AD, do not install any AOA sensor with a part number
specified in paragraphs (p)(3)(i) and (p)(3)(ii) of this AD on that
airplane, with the exception that installation of a UTAS P/N 0861ED
AOA sensor is allowed in the standby position of that airplane.
    (i) SEXTANT/THOMSON AOA sensors, P/N 45150320 and P/N 16990568.
    (ii) UTAS AOA sensors, P/N 0861ED and P/N 0861ED2.

(q) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (l) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-
1444, dated October 7, 2009; provided the replacement AOA sensors
were not modified as specified in Thales Avionics Service Bulletin
C16291A-34-009, dated September 10, 2009.

(r) Acceptable Parts

    Installation of a version (part number) of an AOA sensor
approved after the effective date of this AD is an approved method
of compliance with the requirements of paragraph (k), (l), or (m) of
this AD, as applicable, provided the requirements specified in
paragraphs (r)(1) and (r)(2) of this AD are met.
    (1) The version (part number) must be approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA;
or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.
    (2) The installation must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.

(s) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (i) 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.
    (ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2013-19-09, are approved
as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraphs (g), (h),
(i), and (t)(1) of this AD.
    (iii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2014-25-51, are approved
as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (j) of this
AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.

(t) Retained Special Flight Permits

    (1) For AD 2013-19-09, Amendment 39-17591 (78 FR 60667, October
2, 2013): Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the airplane can be modified (if the operator elects to do so),
provided Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 TR TR286, Issue 1.0, dated
December 17, 2012, has been inserted into the Emergency Procedures
of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 AFM.
    (2) For AD 2014-25-51, Amendment 39-18067 (80 FR 3153, January
22, 2015): Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the airplane can be modified (if the operator elects to do so),
provided the revision required by paragraph (j) of this AD has been
done.

(u) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0135, dated July 8, 2015,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9518.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this 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>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 8, 2016.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-30610 Filed 12-27-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                        INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST
                             SUPPORTING STATEMENT

                                      FOR

                            State Review Framework

                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                             Office of Compliance

                               TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part A

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION
	1(a)	Title of the Information Collection
	1(b)	Short Characterization/Abstract

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION
	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection
	2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA
	3(a)	Nonduplication
	3(b)	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB
	3(c)	Consultations
	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection
	3(e)	General Guidelines
	3(f)	Confidentiality
	3(g)	Sensitive Questions

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED
	4(a)	Respondents/SIC Codes
	4(b)	Information Requested

5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
	5(a)	Agency Activities
	5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management
	5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility
	5(d)	Collection Schedule

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION
	6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden
	6(b)	Estimating Agency Burden
	6(c)	Bottom Line Burden and Cost Table
	6(d)	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs
      6(e)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables
      6(f) 	Reasons for Change of Burden
	6(g)	Burden Statement

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

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

	1(a)	Title of the Information Collection

ICR: State Review Framework (ICR No. 2185.08)
OMB Control Number: 2020-0031

"State Review Framework"

	1(b)	Short Characterization/Abstract

	The State Review Framework ("Framework") is an oversight tool designed to assess state performance in enforcement and compliance assurance.  The Framework's goal is to evaluate state performance by examining data to provide a consistent level of oversight and develop a uniform mechanism by which EPA Regions, working collaboratively with their states, ensure state environmental agencies consistently implement the national compliance and enforcement program to meet agreed-upon goals and standards.  Furthermore, the Framework is designed to foster dialogue on enforcement and compliance performance between the states to enhance relationships and increase feedback, which leads to consistent program management and improved environmental results.

      Specifically, the Framework is a structured process to provide critical information on a state's (or Region's, for states with EPA-implemented programs) core enforcement and compliance assurance performance by employing data in EPA's national databases and presented in management reports for each state.  No new data collection is required for the national databases.  Data from national databases is complimented by data obtained through file reviews of a state environmental agency's compliance and enforcement files.  No new data is required in these files; however, they are reviewed to ensure proper and adequate documentation.

      The Framework process asks regions, states, and local governments to examine the existing data described above in four core programs: Clean Air Act ("CAA"), Stationary Sources; Clean Water Act ("CWA"), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES"); and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"), Subtitle C and the Safe Drinking Water Act ("SDWA").  The EPA evaluates five (5) elements using data and file review metrics that require no new reporting burden.  A new collection covered by this ICR relates to state criminal enforcement activity related to CAA, CWA and RCRA; however, the additional burden is minimal, given that the data is expected to be preexisting.  The utility of the Framework's metrics and the Implementation Guide are a direct result of the collaboration between states, EPA Regions, and EPA Headquarters.

      The five (5) elements are 1) Data (completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of MDR entry into national data systems); 2) Inspections (coverage, report completeness and timeliness); 3) Violations (accuracy of compliance and SNC/HPV determinations); 4) Enforcement (timeliness, appropriateness, return to compliance and criminal); and 5) Penalties (documentation of gravity, economic benefit, reduction in amount, and collection).  In the interest of accuracy and efficiency, the Framework also includes a five-step protocol for managing the process: (1) pre-review; (2) offsite review; (3) onsite review; (4) drafting of the report; and (5) composing the final report and follow-up.  After reviewing the level of performance based on the metrics developed under the five required performance elements, and other information collected in the review process, EPA will determine if a state or Region meets minimum performance levels.

      This ICR also covers the Drinking Water Enforcement Review Pilot (DW ER Pilot), which wasn't covered in the previous ICR. Due to its similar structure and goals to the SRF, this ICR is an appropriate forum to meet OMB requirements. Goals of the DW ER Pilot include: (1) Provide a nationally consistent approach for periodic, retrospective oversight of drinking water enforcement primacy programs; (2) Establish clear expectations and a level playing field for Primacy Agencies; (3) Encourage EPA-Primacy agency collaboration to identify and address program challenges; and (4) Evaluate whether the primacy agency take timely and appropriate actions to address violations, properly escalate enforcement, and ensures return to compliance.

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

      The purpose of this collection is to assess state performance in core enforcement and compliance assurance programs.  The goals are to provide a consistent level of oversight and develop a uniform mechanism by which EPA Regions, working collaboratively with their states, can ensure state environmental agencies meet agreed-upon goals.  It is important to note; all data requested by this collection is currently in EPA's or the state's databases and enforcement and compliance files.  No additional monitoring or sampling will be required by this ICR.

      While the data is pre-existing, the Agency is permitted to review the states' Clean Air Act, Stationary Source program, the Solid Waste Disposal Act, Subtitle C program, the Clean Water Act, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit and the Safe Drinking Water Act programs to ensure minimum performance levels are met.  The Agency's oversight authority for the aforementioned programs are:

(1) Clean Air Act, Stationary Source program:

      Section 114 allows collection of information from states.  Specifically, the collection of the requested information is authorized by 40 CFR 70.4(j)(1), which states "[a]ny information obtained or used in the administration of a State program shall be available to EPA upon request without restriction and in a form specified by the Administrator, including computer-readable files to the extent practicable," and 40 CFR 70.10(c)(1)(iii), which addresses EPA oversight of State and local agencies' compliance and enforcement efforts for major sources under Title V operating permit programs.

(2) Solid Waste Disposal Act, Subtitle C program:

      The Act refers to activities at companies that generate hazardous waste.  At §3007, the Agency is permitted to have access to and request records regarding hazardous waste generating activities.   Additionally, 40 CFR 271.17(a) authorizes EPA, upon request without restriction, access to "[a]ny information obtained or used in the administration of a State program."

(3) Clean Water Act, NPDES program:

      The Act refers to activities involving the discharge of materials into waters of the United States.  At §308, the Agency is permitted to review records to determine compliance with effluent limitations or treatment performance standards.  Further, the NPDES state program regulations provide; "[a]ny information obtained or used in the administration of a State program shall be available to EPA upon request without restriction."  40 CFR 123.41.  Also, 40 CFR 123.43 requires states to provide EPA with information on NPDES program implementation.

(4) Safe Drinking Water Act program:

      Section 1445 of the SDWA states that public water systems (PWSs) shall conduct monitoring, maintain records, and provide information as needed for EPA to implement its monitoring and enforcement responsibilities with respect to the Act. Primacy agencies, EPA and state governments that have assumed primary enforcement responsibility under SDWA section 1413, ensure PWSs are complying with these regulatory requirements.

      The information collected through this ICR will aid the Agency in achieving EPA's Strategic Plan goal to increase compliance and environmental stewardship.  This goal was developed in response to the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act and is described in EPA's FY2022-2026 Strategic Plan, the agency's core mission of protecting human health and the environment.

	2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

      EPA will use data obtained from the collection to determine if a state or Region meets minimum performance levels.  Such a determination is necessary to recognize states that are performing well and provide assistance to states not meeting minimum performance levels.

3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

	3(a)	Nonduplication

The information obtained under this ICR has not been collected by EPA or another federal agency.

	3(b)	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission

On September 19, 2023, EPA published a Federal Register Notice announcing its intent to request to renew an existing approved ICR for the State Review Framework to OMB.  EPA received no comments to the Federal Register Notice.

	3(c)	Consultations

      EPA consulted with state and media associations while developing the State Review Framework.  The leadership and membership of these organizations were instrumental in helping OECA develop the initial concept for the State Review Framework, in working to develop the main components and metrics, completing pilot projects, and providing input into its evaluation.  These associations remain involved in the review process and are in consultation with the EPA regarding reviews taking place from FY2024-FY2027.

	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection

Each respondent will report once every five years, as outlined in the State Review Framework Reviewers Guide. SRF is based on a 5-year cycle, which gives the agency and states an opportunity to accurately assess the status of the monitoring and enforcement program. If the review occurs more frequently, it may overburden the agency and/or state as a review may take approximately 1 year to complete. In addition, the 5-year cycle provides adequate time and opportunity for states to improve on SRF elements from the last review. If the review extends beyond a 5-year cycle, it's difficult to accurately assess status of the monitoring and enforcement program, as state data may be stale or policies out of date. As a best practice, the environmental community should address issues in a timely manner and extending the period beyond 5 years may allow issues to exacerbate. Based on feedback received in the previous ICR, the 5-year cycle is the appropriate timeframe based on burden and goals of the SRF.

	3(e)	General Guidelines

This information collection is consistent with OMB guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

	3(f)	Confidentiality

      Information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B - Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

	3(g)	Sensitive Questions

The collection in this ICR does not contain sensitive questions.

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

	4(a)	Respondents and SIC Codes

      Respondents potentially affected by this action are 50 (fifty) States, 4 (four) Territories, and 47 (forty-seven) Local Air Agencies.  Based on experience, we believe the true number of respondents for this ICR will primarily be fifty (50) states, 4 (four) territories, and 14 (fourteen) local air agencies.  The difference in local air agencies is due to the small size of certain districts and the decision to review them less frequently than the standard 5-year SRF cycle. There are no SIC codes for the Respondents.

	4(b)	Information Requested

		(i) Data items, including recordkeeping requirements

      The State Review Framework requests information on the contribution of state enforcement activities to federally delegated programs.  There are no recordkeeping requirements associated with this collection.

      Prior to conducting a review, EPA will request states make available a limited number of pre-existing facility-specific files, so EPA may review information in those state files.  The files normally contain information on the state's enforcement and compliance activities, including inspection coverage, enforcement timeliness and appropriateness, penalty calculations and fines collected, and data quality, accuracy, and completeness. Most of the data EPA reviews is uploaded into a national compliance database from state compliance databases but a small subset of the data is only available in hard-copy files.

		(ii) Respondent Activities

Respondent will engage in the following activities during the Framework process:

1. Pre-Review and Offsite Review
Review elements and metrics
Train/brief state staff & managers on review substance and process
Collect files, policies, data sets, reports, and review and correct the national data

2. Review
Participate in kick-off meeting
Assist/facilitate EPA review of files and data sets
Participate in discussion of program with EPA

3. Report Drafting
Review and comment on draft report

4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3
Coordination of review with the state agency
Coordination of the review within EPA

5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	5(a)	Agency Activities

Agency activities associated with the State Review Framework consist of the following:

(1) Review elements and metrics
(2) Train/brief state staff & managers on review substance and process
(3) Collect files, policies, data sets, reports, and review and correct the national data.
(4) Participate in kick-off meeting.
(5) Assist/facilitate EPA review of files and data sets
(6) Participate in discussion of program with EPA
(7) Review and comment on draft report
(8) Coordination of review with the state agency
(9) Coordination of the review within EPA

	5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

      The Agency will provide respondents with guidelines and training for conducting the review to ensure a consistent approach.  Over the course of the review process the Agency will work with the states and provide assistance as necessary.  All the state reports will be submitted electronically.  National data used to assess state performance already resides in various EPA databases.  These data are covered by other Information Collection Requests or regulatory language.  Additional data will come from the review of state inspection and enforcement files, which is the data collected based on this request.

	5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

Small entities will not be affected as the collection will only be completed by EPA Regions, States, and territories.

	5(d)	Collection Schedule

      Each respondent will complete the following once every five years: (1) pre-review and offsite review, including a review and correction of the data of the national data; (3) onsite review; (4) drafting of the report; and (5) composing the final report and follow-up.  Ten (10) states, 1 territory and 3 local districts are scheduled to complete the review process each year over the five-year term.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

	6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden and Costs

      The estimated total hour burden for response is 305 hours per respondent.  This burden hour estimate translates to a cost of $21,996 per respondent that voluntarily completes the survey resulting in an average annual cost of $937,030. There is no recurring respondent burden associated with this ICR.  No capital or operations and maintenance costs are incurred by respondents under this ICR.

	The labor costs in the following table are based on the following mean hourly labor rates and multiplied by the standard government benefits multiplication factor of 1.6.

		Legal:		$77.89 (State Government Lawyer, 23-1011)
		Managerial:	$94.90 (State Managers, 11-0000)
		Technical:	$62.50 (Environmental Scientists and Specialists, 19-2041)
		Clerical:	$33.41 (Office and Administrative Support, 43-0000)

      These rates are from the United States Department of Labor's, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "May 2021 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates," https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_stru.htm.

Table 1.  Respondents' Burden and Costs
                            Information Collection
                                     Legal
                                     Man.
                                     Tech.
                                   Clerical
                                    Total
                                   Activity
                                    $77.78
                                    $94.90
                                    $62.50
                                    $33.41

                                     hour
                                     hour
                                     hour
                                     hour

                       1. Pre-Review and Offsite Review

Prepare for upcoming review (collect files, policies, data sets, past reports, etc.)
                                       1
                                      24
                                      54
                                       8
                                      87
Review and correct state data metrics (not including annual data verification time)
                                       0
                                       6
                                      17
                                       1
                                      24
                  Train/brief personnel on SRF review process
                                       2
                                       4
                                       9
                                       0
                                      15
                               2. Onsite Review

                       Participate in kick-off meeting.
                                       2
                                       4
                                       3
                                       1
                                      10
              Assist/facilitate EPA review of files and data sets
                                       1
                                      12
                                      28
                                       3
                                      44
             Participate in discussion of the program with the EPA
                                       3
                                      11
                                      17
                                       0
                                      31
                              3. Report Drafting

                      Review and comment on draft report
                                       5
                                      18
                                      32
                                       0
                                      55
                     4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3

              Coordination of the review within the state agency
                                       1
                                      11
                                      10
                                       2
                                      24
                      Coordination of the review with EPA
                                       2
                                       6
                                       7
                                       0
                                      15
                                     TOTAL
                                      17
                                      96
                                      177
                                      15
                                      305

                                  TOTAL COST
                                    $1,322
                                    $9,110
                                    $11,063
                                     $501
                                    $21,996

6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs
 Estimating Labor Costs
      EPA estimates an average annual respondent hourly cost (labor plus overhead) of $77.78 for legal staff, $94.90 for managerial staff, $62.50 for technical staff, and $33.41 for clerical staff.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor's, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "May 2021 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates," In deriving these costs, EPA consulted with EPA regional subject matter experts and data from the currently approved ICR.

 Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

      This ICR uses existing data required by various regulations and therefore doesn't include any capital/startup or operation and maintenance cost associated with the original data collection and management.  EPA consulted with EPA regional subject matter experts and data from the currently approved ICR to support this statement.

 Capital/Start-up Operations and Maintenance Costs

      This ICR uses existing data required by various regulations and therefore doesn't include any capital/startup or operation and maintenance cost associated with the original data collection and management.  EPA consulted with EPA regional subject matter experts and data from the currently approved ICR to support this statement.

 Annualizing Capital Costs
      There are no capital costs to annualize.
6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden

EPA Regions 1 through 10 will participate in the State Review Framework process and the following table details the hour and cost burden per region.  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) "2022 General Schedule" and include the standard government benefits multiplication factor of 1.6.

	The cost for the regional table (Table 2) is based on the base average hourly labor rate as follows:

            Legal		$82.00 (GS-13, Step 5)
		Managerial	$96.90 (GS-14, Step 5)
            Technical	$98.96 (GS-12, Step 5)

	The cost for the Headquarters table (Table 3) is based on the average hourly labor rate, including locality payment, as follows:

            Legal		$109.68 (GS-14, Step 5)
		Managerial	$129.01 (GS-15, Step 5)
            Technical	$92.82(GS-13, Step 5)

Table 2. Agency Burden and Cost (per region)

                            Information Collection
                                     Legal
                                     Man.
                                     Tech.
                                    Total
                                   Activity
                                    $82.00
                                    $96.90
                                    $98.96

                                     hour
                                     hour
                                     hour

                       1. Pre-Review and Offsite Review

                              Review data metrics
                                       0
                                       5
                                      25
                                      30
     Train/brief state staff and managers on review substance and process
                                       0
                                       4
                                      15
                                      19
                  Collect files, policies, data sets, reports
                                       0
                                       4
                                      15
                                      19
                               2. Onsite Review

                       Participate in kick-off meeting.
                                       1
                                       2
                                       6
                                       9
            Assist/facilitate on-site review of files and data sets
                                       0
                                      22
                                      120
                                      142
            Participate in discussion of the program with the state
                                       0
                                       2
                                      30
                                      32
                              3. Report Drafting

                      Review and comment on draft report
                                       0
                                       8
                                      50
                                      58
                     4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3

               Coordination of the review with the state agency
                                       0
                                       2
                                       8
                                      10
                     Coordination of the review within EPA
                                       0
                                       2
                                      12
                                      14
                                     TOTAL
                                       1
                                      51
                                      281
                                      333

                                  TOTAL COST
                                     $82
                                    $4,942
                                   $27,808
                                   $32,832

Table 3. Agency Burden and Cost (Headquarters)

                            Information Collection
                                     Legal
                                     Man.
                                     Tech.
                                    Total
                                   Activity
                                   $109.68
                                   $129.01
                                    $92.82

                                     hour
                                     hour
                                     hour

                       1. Pre-Review and Offsite Review

Train/brief state and region staff & managers on review substance and process.
                                       0
                                       0
                                       5
                                       5
              Collect files, policies, data sets, reports etc.
                                       0
                                       0
                                       3
                                       3
                               2. Onsite Review

                       Participate in kick-off meeting.
                                       0
                                       1
                                       1
                                       2
           Participate in discussion of the program with the Regions
                                       1
                                       2
                                       2
                                       5
                              3. Report Drafting

                      Review and comment on draft report
                                       1
                                       4
                                      14
                                      19
                     4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3

                     Coordination of the review within EPA
                                       1
                                       2
                                       4
                                       7
                                     TOTAL
                                       3
                                       9
                                      29
                                      41

                                  TOTAL COST
                                     $329
                                    $1,161
                                    $2,692
                                    $4,182

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

EPA estimates 213 respondents. The number of respondents is based on a review of 4 separate media (CAA, CWA, RCRA, SDWA) in 50 states and 4 territories as well as single media reviews in 14 individual local air districts. Out of that total, 17 respondents were removed to reflect the fact that EPA directly implements 9 CWA and 8 RCRA programs.

Those 213 respondents are expected to go through the review process once every 5 years.  Therefore, the average annual number of reviews (responses) is 42.6.  Applying the estimated per-review burden of 305 hours or $21,996 in labor costs to the average annual number of responses results in a total average annual respondent burden for this collection of 12,993 hours or $937,030 in labor costs.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

 Table 4.  Total Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary

                              No. of Respondents
                               No. of Responses
                                  Total hours
                               Total Labor Costs
                       Total Capital and Start-up costs
                          Total Annual O&M costs
                                 5-Year Total
213
213
64,965
$4,685,214
$0.0
$0.0
                             Average Annual Total
213
42.6
12,993
$937,030
$0.0
$0.0

 Table 5. Total Estimated Agency Burden and Cost Summary

                                  Total hours
                               Total Labor Costs
                       Total Capital and Start-up costs
                          Total Annual O&M costs
                                 5-Year Total
Regions
70,729 (for all ten regions)
$6,993,143 (for all ten regions)
$0.0
$0.0

Headquarters
8,733
$890,746
$0.0
$0.0

Total EPA
79,662
$7,883,890
$0.0
$0.0
                             Average Annual Total
Total EPA
15,932
$1,576,778
$0.0
$0.0

       The EPA does not anticipate significant variation (>25%) in the annual respondent reporting/recordkeeping burden or cost over the course of reporting period.

6(f)	Reasons for Changes in Burden

      There is an increase of 87 hours in the total estimated per-response  burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to the addition of the safe drinking water act enforcement review pilot and the collection and reporting of criminal enforcement data, which weren't captured in the previous ICR.  This pilot isn't formally part of the SRF, but the agency believes this ICR is an appropriate forum to collect input, due to their similarities in workload and purpose. At the conclusion of the pilot, the agency will review the program and if necessary, revise this ICR.  It is appropriate to collect information on state criminal enforcement activity as criminal enforcement is one facet of overall enforcement and, at least for some states, is (or could be)  a capitalized activity. In addition, there is an increase in the number of respondents from 54 to 213 due to inclusion of all media (CAA, CWA, RCRA and SDWA) for 50 states and 4 territories, and 14 local air districts.  Previous ICR's included a single response for each state/territory, whereas this ICR utilized a different methodology to capture the burden more accurately. The burden estimates for CAA, CWA and RCRA are unchanged.

6(g)	Burden Statement

      The average annual respondent burden is 305 hours for each review. Some states may have up to four reviews in a year (CAA, CWA, RCRA and SDWA).  This estimate includes time for (1) reviewing and correcting the national data and the metrics; (2) training and briefing state staff & managers on review substance and process; (3) collecting files, policies, data sets, reports etc.; (4) participating in kick-off meetings; (5) assisting/facilitating EPA review of files and data sets; (6) participating in discussion of program with EPA; (7) reviewing and commenting on draft report; (8) coordinating of review with the state agency; and (9) coordinating of the review within EPA. There is no record keeping burden for this collection as the State Review Framework does not include record keeping requirements.

      Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA's regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

       To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2022-0812 which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OECA Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at http://www.regulations.gov.  Use http://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2022-0812 and OMB Control Number 2020-0031 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

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


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller,

I am writing you today in regards to the Food and Drug Administration's ('FDA') Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Control Act (the 'Proposed Rule') published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. I am writing you today specifically to request that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a large number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of the products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on these issues, many of which are going to take a significant amount of time, energy, and research in order to address in the way which they should; thoughtfully, thoroughly, and judiciously. I do not think that requesting an extension for open commenting is at all unreasonable.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. I firmly believe that they have increased my health and have extended my life. After twenty-five plus years of smoking, and numerous failed attempts at trying to quit combustible cigarettes in the past, I finally found an alternative that actually works. It is amazing how effective this method has been for me, and the large number of other ‘vapers’ out there who have used e-cigarettes as a Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR) method as well. I sincerely urge you to listen to the people who have struggled with quitting for so long and to hear their stories of success by switching to e-cigarettes. While I agree that some regulation is necessary, these proposed regulations and financial burdens you set forth will, in essence, eliminate the tools necessary to keep this industry alive, not to mention the thousands of small businesses that will be put out of business. Shrouding these regulations in the guise of ‘protecting children’ is honestly just a subterfuge, and quite insulting to me as a parent. I don’t truly believe that you want to protect my children, nor have I asked you to, nor do I need you to. Vaping is not a problem; it’s an extremely effective solution to a much more dangerous problem. There is obviously a larger agenda at play here that has nothing to do with children, the future health of our society, or the freedom to choose, as an American, a healthier lifestyle for myself and that is truly a shame.

I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all us involved have the opportunity to provide our comments in the best way possible.

Your consideration of my request is greatly appreciated.