[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 115 (Thursday, June 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39311-39314]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12764]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97694; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2023-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify
the NYSE American Options Fee Schedule

June 9, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on June 1, 2023, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify the NYSE American Options Fee
Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') regarding a rebate for Qualified Contingent
Cross (``QCC'') transactions. The Exchange proposes to implement the
fee change effective June 1, 2023. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to amend the Fee Schedule to offer
Floor Brokers an additional incentive for executing QCC
transactions.\4\ The Exchange proposes to implement the rule change on
June 1, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A QCC is defined as an originating order to buy or sell at
least 1,000 contracts, or 10,000 mini-options contracts, that is
identified as being part of a qualified contingent trade (as that
term is defined in Commentary .01 to Rule 900.3NY), coupled with a
contra side order or orders totaling an equal number of contracts.
See Rule 900.3NY(y).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section I.F. of the Fee Schedule sets forth fees and credits
applicable to QCC transactions.\5\ Currently, Floor Brokers may earn a
credit of ($0.12) per contract for QCC transactions of a Customer or
Professional Customer vs. a Market Maker, Firm, or Broker Dealer, and a
credit of ($0.18) per contract for QCC transactions of a Market Maker,
Firm, or Broker Dealer vs. a Market Maker, Firm, or Broker Dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Fee Schedule, Section I.F. (QCC Fees & Credits).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to modify Section I.F. to add a QCC Billable
Bonus Rebate (the ``Rebate'') for Floor Brokers' QCC transactions.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes that the Rebate would provide Floor
Brokers that achieve (1) 1 million manual billable sides in a month and
(2) 3 million QCC billable contracts in a month with a rebate of
($0.02) per two billable side QCC contract, payable on a monthly basis.
    Although the Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether the
proposed change would encourage Floor Brokers to increase their manual
billable volume or QCC billable volume on the Exchange, the proposed
change is designed to continue to incentivize Floor Brokers to do so in
order to earn an additional rebate on QCC two billable side volume. All
Floor Brokers would be eligible to qualify for the Rebate, as proposed.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\7\ in particular,

because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change is Reasonable
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (``Reg NMS
Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\9\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power
in the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF options order flow.
More specifically, in April 2023, the Exchange had less than 8% market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety of
formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange, available
here: https:/www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics.
    \10\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of
equity-based options and monthly volume of ETF-based options, see
id., the Exchange's market share in equity-based options was 8.14%
for the month of April 2022 and 7.87% for the month of April 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction fees. Stated otherwise, changes
to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of
an exchange to compete for order flow.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Rebate is reasonable
because it is designed to continue to incent Floor Brokers to increase
their manual billable volume and QCC billable contracts executed on the
Exchange. The Exchange notes that all market participants stand to
benefit from any increase in volume, which could promote market depth,
facilitate tighter spreads and enhance price discovery, particularly to
the extent the proposed change encourages market participants to
utilize the Exchange as a primary trading venue, and may lead to a
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
    Finally, to the extent the proposed change continues to attract
greater volume and liquidity, the Exchange believes the proposed change
would improve the Exchange's overall competitiveness and strengthen its
market quality for all market participants. In the backdrop of the
competitive environment in which the Exchange operates, the proposed
rule change is a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to increase the
depth of its market and improve its market share relative to its
competitors. The Exchange's fees are constrained by intermarket
competition, as market participants can choose to direct their order
flow to any of the 16 options exchanges, including those offering
rebates on QCC transactions.\11\ The Exchange believes that proposed
rule change is designed to continue to incent Floor Brokers to direct
liquidity to the Exchange, and, to the extent they continue to be
incentivized to aggregate their trading activity at the Exchange, that
increased liquidity could promote market depth, price discovery and
improvement, and enhanced order execution opportunities for all market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., EDGX Options Exchange Fee Schedule, QCC
Initiator/Solicitation Rebate Tiers (applying ($0.14) per contract
rebate up to 999,999 contracts for QCC transactions when only one
side of the transaction is a non-customer or ($0.22) per contract
rebate up to 999,999 contracts for QCC transactions with non-
customers on both sides); BOX Options Fee Schedule at Section
IV.D.1. (QCC Rebate) (providing for ($0.14) per contract rebate up
to 1,499,999 contracts for QCC transactions when only one side of
the QCC transaction is a broker-dealer or market maker or ($0.22)
per contract rebate up to 1,499,999 contracts for QCC transactions
when both parties are a broker-dealer or market maker); Nasdaq ISE,
Options 7, Section 6.B. (QCC Rebate) (offering rebates on QCC
transactions of ($0.14) per contract when only one side of the QCC
transaction is a non-customer or ($0.22) per contract when both
sides of the QCC transaction are non-customers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Fees and Credits
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable
allocation of its fees and credits. The proposal is based on the amount
and type of business transacted on the Exchange, and Floor Brokers can
choose to execute manual billable transactions and QCC billable
transactions to earn the proposed Rebate or not. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed Rebate is an equitable allocation of fees
and credits because it would be available to all Floor Brokers equally,
and all Floor Brokers would be eligible to qualify for the Rebate based
on achieving the same volume requirements. The Exchange further
believes that the proposed change is equitable because it is intended
to encourage the role performed by Floor Brokers in facilitating the
execution of orders via open outcry, a function which the Exchange
wishes to support for the benefit of all market participants.
    To the extent that the proposed changes continue to incent ATP
Holders to utilize the Exchange as a primary execution venue and
attract more volume on the Exchange, this increased order flow would
continue to make the Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other
things, order execution. Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change would improve market quality for all market participants on the
Exchange and, as a consequence, attract more order flow to the
Exchange, thereby improving market-wide quality and price discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes the proposed change is not unfairly
discriminatory because the proposed Rebate is based on the amount and
type of business transacted on the Exchange, and Floor Brokers are not
obligated to execute billable manual or QCC volume. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory to
non-Floor Brokers because Floor Brokers serve an important function in
facilitating the execution of orders on the Exchange, which the
Exchange wishes to encourage and support to promote price improvement
opportunities for all market participants.
    Thus, the Exchange believes that, to the extent the proposed rule
change would continue to improve market quality for all market
participants on the Exchange by attracting more order flow to the
Exchange, thereby improving market-wide quality and price discovery,
the resulting increased volume and liquidity would provide more trading
opportunities and tighter spreads to all market participants and thus
would promote just and equitable

principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system and, in general,
protect investors and the public interest.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.

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

    In accordance with section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all market participants. As a result, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting
Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which
promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of
orders, large and small.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 8, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
order flow to the Exchange. Specifically, the proposed change is
intended to continue to incent Floor Brokers to direct manual billable
volume and QCC billable volume to the Exchange by offering them a
rebate on QCC billable volume, which could increase the volumes of
contracts traded on the Exchange. Greater liquidity benefits all market
participants on the Exchange, and increased manual billable and QCC
billable transactions could increase opportunities for execution of
other trading interest.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor one
of the 16 competing option exchanges if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and to attract order flow to the Exchange. Based on publicly-
available information, and excluding index-based options, no single
exchange has more than 16% of the market share of executed volume of
multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades.\13\ Therefore, no
exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
multiply-listed equity and ETF options order flow. More specifically,
in April 2023, the Exchange had less than 8% market share of executed
volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See note 9, supra.
    \14\ See note 10, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees and
credits in a manner designed to continue to incent Floor Brokers to
direct trading interest (particularly manual billable volume and QCC
billable volume) to the Exchange, to provide liquidity, and to attract
order flow. To the extent that Floor Brokers are encouraged to utilize
the Exchange as a primary trading venue for all transactions, all of
the Exchange's market participants should benefit from the improved
market quality and increased opportunities for price improvement. The
Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor competing venues, including those
that offer rebates on QCC transactions.\15\ In such an environment, the
Exchange must continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and
credits to remain competitive with other exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See note 11, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) \16\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \17\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. 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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number
    SR-NYSEAMER-2023-31 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to file number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-31. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email 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 website (https://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 website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or

subject to copyright protection. All submissions should refer to file
number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-31 and should be submitted on or before July 6,
2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-12764 Filed 6-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


PPE 4 cancer risk includes long pants, long shirts, double layer, gloves and respirator Two exposure frequencies were used for cancer, the first represented the maximum number of applications per site per season to represent private use ( 3), and the second frequency applied a factor of ten to the first frequency to represent commercial handlers making multiple applications per site per season ( 30). 54 Table B4: Occupational Handler, Cancer ( Q*) Risk from Oxadiazon at Eengineering Control Exposure Scenario # Crop Type Total Eng. Control Daily Dose ( mg/ kg/ day) a Eng. Control LADDb 3/ 30 days Eng Control Riskc Mixer/ Loader Exposure Mixing/ Loading Wettable Powders for Chemigation Application ( 1a) sod farms 0.0170 6.92e 05/ 6.92e 04 4.92E 06/ 4.92e 05 Mixing/ Loading Wettable Powders for Groundboom Application ( 1b) conifer nurseries, woody ornamentals 0.0026 1.05e 05/ 1.05e 04 7.49E 07/ 7.49e 06 herbaceous ornamentals 0.0019 7.90e 06/ 7.90e 05 5.62E 07/ 5.62e 06 sod farms 0.0038 1.58e 05/ 1.58e 04 1.12E 06/ 1.12e 05 golf courses 0.0026 1.05e 05/ 1.05e 04 7.49E 07/ 7.49e 06 Mixing/ Loading Wettable Powders for Rights of Way Sprayer ( 1c) roadside turf, ornamentals 0.0026 1.05e 05/ 1.05e 04 7.49E 07/ 7.49e 06 Loading Granular formulations ( 2) sod farms, conifers forest 0.0002 3.09e 073.09e 06 2.20E 08/ 2.20e 07 golf course turf, parks, recreational areas 0.0001 1.54e 07/ 1.54e 06 1.10E 08/ 1.10e 07 woody ornamentals 0.0001 4.63e 07/ 4.63e 06 3.29E 08/ 3.29e 07 Applicator Applying with a Groundboom ( 3) sod farms 0.0017 6.95e 06/ 6.95e 05 4.94E 07/ 4.94e 06 herbaceous ornamentals 0.0009 3.47e 06/ 3.47e 05 2.47E 07/ 2.47e 06 golf courses 0.0011 4.63e 06/ 4.63e 05 3.29E 07/ 3.29e 06 conifer nurseries, woody ornamentals 0.0011 4.63e 06/ 4.63e 05 3.29E 07/ 3.29e 06 Applying with a Rights of Way Sprayer ( 4) roadsides NF NF NF Applying Wettable Powders for Handgun Applicators ( ORETF) ( 5) lawns, parks, recreational areas NF NF NF Applying Granular with a Tractor Drawn Spreader ( 6) sod farms 0.0019 2.56e 06/ 2.56e 05 1.82E 07/ 1.82e 06 golf courses 0.0009 1.28e 06/ 1.28e 05 9.11E 08/ 9.11e 07 Mixer/ Loader/ Applicator Backpack Sprayer ( LCO) ( 7) lawns, golf courses, ornamentals nurseries NF NF NF Low Pressure Handwand  Wettable Powder Formulations ( LCO) ( 8) lawns, golf courses, nursery stock NF NF NF Table B4: Occupational Handler, Cancer ( Q*) Risk from Oxadiazon at Eengineering Control Exposure Scenario # Crop Type Total Eng. Control Daily Dose ( mg/ kg/ day) a Eng. Control LADDb 3/ 30 days Eng Control Riskc 55 High Pressure Handwand  ( Wettable Powder Formulations) ( 9) woody ornamentals, conifer nurseries. NF NF NF Lawn Handgun ( Wettable Powder Formulations) ( ORETF) ( 10) ornamentals, lawns, parks rec areas NF NF NF Granulars with a Push Type Spreader ( ORETF) ( 11) lawns, golf courses, parks, recreational areas,

ornamentals NF NF NF Granulars with a Bellygrinder ( LCO) ( 12) golfcourses, parks, rec areas. NF NF NF a Eng. Control Total Daily Dose =[ Eng. Control Daily Dermal Exposure ( mg/ day)* Dermal Absorption Factor ( 9%)+ baseline Daily Inhalation Exposure ( mg/ day)]/ Body Weight ( 70 kg).

b Eng. Control LADD ( mg/ kg/ day) = Eng. control Total Daily Dose ( mg/ kg/ day) * ( Number of days exposed per year) / 365 days per year) * 35 years worked/ 70 year lifetime.

c Eng. Control Total Cancer Risk = Eng. Control LADD ( mg/ kg/ day) * ( Q 1*), Q 1* = 7.11e 2 ( mg/ kg/ day) 1.

NF= Not feasible Two exposure frequencies were used for cancer, the first represented the maximum number of applications per site per season to represent private use ( 3), and the second frequency applied a factor of ten to the first frequency to represent commercial handlers making multiple applications per site per season ( 30). 56 APPENDIX C OCCUPATIONAL AND RESIDENTIAL POST APPLICATION TABLES C1  C4 57 Table C1: Occupational Short and Intermediate Term Postapplication Risks for Oxadiazon Crop/ Use Pattern Application Rate ( lb ai/ acre) Postapplication Activity Transfer Coefficienta Short Term and Intermediate Term Risks Cancer Risk TTRb ( ug/ cm2) MOEc LADDd mg/ kg/ day Riske Golf Course Turf 4 Mow, seed, mechanical weed, aerate, fertilize, prune 500 2.0 ( 5% of application rate) 1,000 4.23e 5 3.01e 6 Transplant, hand weed 16,500 30 1.39e 3 9.92e 5 Sod Farms Mow, scout, mechanical weed, irrigate 500 1,000 4.23e 5 3.01e 6 Transplant, hand weed, harvest ( hand or mechanical) 16,500 30 1.39e 3 9.92e 5 Bermuda Grass Rights of Way Mow, seed, scout, mechanical weed, aerate, fertilize 500 1,000 4.23e 5 3.01e 6 a Transfer coefficient from Science Advisory Council for Exposure: Policy Memo # 003 .1 " Agricultural Transfer Coefficients," Revised  August 7, 2000.

b TTR source: 5% of application rate, " Residential SOP Revised February 2001 " was used for determination of MOE's.

c MOE = Short term NOAEL ( 12 mg/ kg/ day; based on an oral study) / dermal dose where absorbed dose = TTR (

g/ cm2) x TC ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 8hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 60 kg; adult).

d absorbed dermal dose where absorbed dose = TTR (

g/ cm2) x TC ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 8 hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 70 kg)

x ( Number of days ( 3) exposure per year applicator) / 365 days per year) x 35 years worked/ 70 year lifetime e Cancer Risk = LADD ( mg/ kg/ day) x ( Q 1*), where Q 1* = 7.11e 2 ( mg/ kg/ day) 1.

Note: TTR  Turf Transferable Residue rounded to 2.0 ug/ cm2 XXXXX 58 Table C2. Residential Dermal Postapplication Non Cancer Risks for Oxadiazon Dermal Scenarios Application Rate ( lb ai/ acre) Exposure Time ( hours/ day) Short Term and Intermediate Term Risks Transfer Coefficient ( cm2/ hr) a Transfer Coefficient ( cm2/ hr) Irrigatedb Transfer Coefficient ( cm2/ hr)

Non Irrigatedc TTRd ( ug/ cm2)

DAT 0 1 Dermal Dose ( mg/ kg/ day) e Dermal Dose ( mg/ kg/ day)

Irrigatedf Dermal Dose ( mg/ kg/ day)

Non Irrigatedg MOEsh MOEs i Irrigated MOEsj Non Irrigated Adult dermal turf contact 4 2 14500 4300 7,400 1.53 NA 1.97e 2 3.40e 2 NA 610 350 2.0 8.70e 2 NA NA 140 NA NA Toddler dermal turf contact 2 5200 1600 2,700 0.87 NA 1.67e 2 2.82e 2 NA 720 430 2.0 3.12e 2 NA NA 390 NA NA Adult walking, playing golf 4 500 NA NA 2.0 6.0e 3 NA NA 2,000 NA NA Adult push mowing lawn 2 500 NA NA 2.0 3.0e 3 NA NA 4,000 NA NA a Transfer coefficient from the Residential SOP's ( 2/ 01) used for fresh grass b Transfer coefficient from turf study MRID # 435178 01used for dormant grass c Transfer coefficient from turf study MRID # 435178 01used for dormant grass d TTR source: wettable powder from turf studies MRID # 435178 01, DAT 0 1 residue or residential SOP ( 5% application rate)

e Dermal dose ( mg/ kg/ day) = TTR ( 5% application rate) (

g/ cm2) x TC ( from residential SOP, s) ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 2 or 4hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 60 kg adult or 15 kg toddler).

f Dermal dose ( mg/ kg/ day) irrigated = TTR ( from MRID # 435178 01) (

g/ cm2) x TC ( MRID # 435178 01) ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 2 hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 60 kg adult or 15 kg toddler).

g Dermal dose ( mg/ kg/ day) non irrigated = TTR ( from MRID # 435178 01) (

g/ cm2) x TC ( MRID # 435178 01) ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 2 hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 60 kg adult or 15 kg toddler).

h MOE = Short term NOAEL ( 12 mg/ kg/ day; based on an oral study) / dermal dose ( mg/ kg/ day)

i MOE ( irrigated) = Short term NOAEL ( 12 mg/ kg/ day; based on an oral study) / dermal dose ( mg/ kg/ day)

j MOE ( non irrigated) = Short term NOAEL ( 12 mg/ kg/ day; based on an oral study) / dermal dose ( mg/ kg/ day)

Note: TTR  Turf Transferable Residue rounded to 2.0 ug/ cm2 59 Table C3. Residential Dermal Postapplication Cancer Risks for Oxadiazon Dermal Scenarios Application Rate ( lb ai/ acre) Exposure Time ( hours/ day) Transfer Coefficient ( cm2/ hr) a Transfer Coefficient ( cm2/ hr) Irrigatedb Transfer Coefficient ( cm2/ hr)

Non Irrigatedc TTRd ( ug/ cm2)

DAT 0 1 LADDe mg/ kg/ day LADDf mg/ kg/ day irrigated LADDg mg/ kg/ dayf Non Irrigated Cancerh Cancer Irrigatedj Cancerj Nonirrigated Adult dermal turf contact 4 2 14500 4300 7400 1.53 NA 6.95e 5 1.2e 4 NA 3.62e 6 6.22e 6 2.0 3.06e 04 NA NA 1.59e 5 NA NA Toddler dermal turf contact 2 5200 1600 2700 0.87 NF NF NF NF NF NF 2.0 NF NF NF NF NF NF Adult walking, playing golf 4 500 NA NA 2.0 2.11e 5 NA NA 1.50e 6 NA NA Adult push mowing lawn 2 500 NA NA 2.0 1.06e 5 NA NA 7.51e 7 NA NA a Transfer coefficient from the Residential SOP's ( 2/ 01) used for fresh grass b Transfer coefficient from turf study MRID # 435178 01used for dormant grass c Transfer coefficient from turf study MRID # 435178 01used for dormant grass d TTR source: wettable powder and granular turf studies MRID # 435178 01, DAT 0 1 residue e LADD ( mg/ kg/ day) = TTR (

g/ cm2)( 5% of application rate) x TC( residential SOP) ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 2 or 4 hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) /

body weight ( 70 kg) x ( Number of days ( 3) exposure per year applicator) / 365 days per year) x 35 years worked/ 70 year lifetime f LADD ( mg/ kg/ day)( irrigated) = TTR (

g/ cm2) ( from MRID # 435178 01) x TC ( cm2/ hr)( from MRID # 435178 01) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 2 hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 70 kg) x ( Number of days ( 3) exposure per year applicator) / 365 days per year) x 35 years worked/ 70 year lifetime g LADD ( mg/ kg/ day)( non irrigated) = TTR (

g/ cm2)( from MRID # 435178 01) x TC( from MRID # 435178 01) ( cm2/ hr) x conversion factor ( 1 mg/ 1,000

g) x exposure time ( 2 hrs/ day) x dermal absorption ( 9 %) / body weight ( 70 kg) x ( Number of days ( 3) exposure per year applicator) / 365 days per year) x 35 years worked/ 70 year lifetime h Cancer Risk = LADD ( mg/ kg/ day) x ( Q 1*), where Q 1* = 7.11e 2 ( mg/ kg/ day) 1.

i Cancer Risk ( irrigated) = LADD ( mg/ kg/ day) ( irrigated) x ( Q 1*), where Q 1* = 7.11e 2 ( mg/ kg/ day) 1.

j Cancer Risk ( non irrigated) = LADD ( mg/ kg/ day)( non irrigated) x ( Q 1*), where Q 1* = 7.11e 2 ( mg/ kg/ day) 1.

NA= Not applicable NF= Not Feasible Note: TTR  Turf Transferable Residue rounded to 2.0 ug/ cm2 60 Table C4 Residential Oral Nondietary Postapplication Risks to Toddlers from " Hand to Mouth" and Ingestion Exposure When Reentering Lawns Treated with Granular or wettable powder Oxadiazon Formulations Type of Exposure Application Ratea ( lb ai/ acre) Ingestion Rate or Other Assumptionsb Short Term TTRc (

g/ cm2)

DAT 0 1 Oral Dosed ( mg/ kg/ day) MOEe Hand to Mouth Activity 4 20 cm2/ event surface area of 1 3 fingers; 20 events/ hr; fresh grass 5% of ai dislodgeable with potentially wet hands 2.0 1.19e 01 100 20 cm2/ event surface area of 1 3 fingers; 20 events/ hr;

2.1% of ai dislodgeable with potentially wet hands ( dormant grass, non irrigated) 1.0 5.02e 02 240 20 cm2/ event surface area of 1 3 fingers; 20 events/ hr;

5.5% of ai dislodgeable with potentially wet hands ( dormant grass, irrigated) 2.5 1.31e 01 90 Incidental Turfgrass Ingestion 25 cm2/ day of turf 20% application rate ( residential SOP) fresh grass 9.0 1.49e 02 805 25 cm2/ day of turf Irrigated ( MRID # 435178 01) used for dormant grass 0.87 2.60e 03 4700 25 cm2/ day of turf Non Irrigated( MRID # 435178 01) used for dormant grass 1.53 1.45e 03 8300 Incidental Ingestion of Soil 100 mg/ day ingestion; 0.67 cm3/ gm soil NA 2.12e 04 57000 a Application rates represent maximum label rates from current EPA registered labels.

b Assumptions from Residential SOP's ( February, 2001). fresh grass c TTR source: wettable powder and granular oxadiazon turf studies MRID Nos. 43517801. Short term risks assessed using DAT 0 1 residue values.

d Oral doses calculated using formulas presented in the Residential SOPs ( February, 2001). Short term and intermediate term doses were calculated using the following formulas. Intermediate term doses were each multiplied by the estimated fraction of oxadiazon residue remaining on DAT 7 after application.

Hand to mouth oral dose to toddlers on the day of treatment ( mg/ kg/ day) = [ application rate ( lb ai/ acre) x fraction of residue dislodgeable from potentially wet hands ( see assumptions) x 11.2 ( conversion factor to convert lb ai/ acre to

g/ cm2)] x median surface area for 1 3 fingers ( 20 cm2/ event) x hand to mouth rate ( ST: 20 events/ hour ) x exp. time ( 2 hr/ day) x 0.001 mg/ µ g] / bw ( 15 kg toddler).

Grass ingestion oral dose to toddlers on the day of treatment ( mg/ kg/ day) = [ TTR (

g/ cm2) x ingestion rate of grass ( 25 cm2/ day) x0.001 mg/ µ g] / bw ( 15 kg toddler).

Soil ingestion oral dose to toddlers on the day of treatment ( mg/ kg/ day) = [( application rate ( lb ai/ acre) x fraction of residue retained on uppermost 1 cm of soil ( 100% or 1.0/ cm) x 4.54E+ 08

g/ lb conversion factor x 2.47E 08 acre/ cm2 conversion factor x 0.67 cm3/ g soil conversion factor) x 100 mg/ day ingestion rate x 1.0E 06 g/

g conversion factor] / bw ( 15 kg;

toddler). Short term dose based residue on the soil on day of application.

NA= Not applicable Note: TTR  Turf Transferable Residue 61 References 1) Revised Report of Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee, Dec 21,

2001.

2) Oxadizon Labels.

2) Memorandum from J Blondell to S. Tadayon, 13 March, 2001 4) Pesticide Handler Exposure Database Version 1.1 Surrogate Exposure Table ( newly organized) and printed August 1998.

cc: PP# 276360 RDI: Francis Suhre 4/ 6/ 2001 Timothy Leighton 3/ 21/ 2001 Jeff Evans 3/ 21/ 2001 S. Tadayon: 810J: CM# 2: ( 703) 305 5238 62


[Federal Register: March 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 48)]
[Notices]
[Page 11904]
[DOCID:fr12mr10-97]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1876-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Oklahoma; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-1876-DR), dated February 25,
2010, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: February 25, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated February 25, 2010, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Oklahoma resulting from a severe winter storm during the period
of December 24-25, 2009, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
(the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major
disaster exists in the State of Oklahoma.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Gregory W. Eaton, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Oklahoma have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Canadian, Cleveland, Comanche, Cotton, Craig, Delaware, Garvin,
Grady, Hughes, Jackson, Jefferson, Kay, Lincoln, Love, McClain,
Muskogee, Noble, Nowata, Okfuskee, Okmulgee, Ottawa, Payne,
Pontotoc, Pottawatomie, Rogers, Sequoyah, Stephens, Tillman, and
Tulsa Counties for Public Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Oklahoma are eligible to apply
for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-5390 Filed 3-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13387-13395]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05019]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0902; Product Identifier 2016-NM-188-AD; Amendment
39-19224; AD 2018-06-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-03-07,
which applied to certain Airbus Model A320-111, -211, -212, and -231
series airplanes. AD 2004-03-07 required repetitive inspections for
fatigue cracking around the fasteners attaching the pressure panel to
the flexible bracket at a certain frame (FR), adjacent to the
longitudinal beams on the left and right sides of the airplane; and
repair as necessary. This new AD retains certain requirements of AD
2004-03-07, expands the applicability, and requires an inspection of
the fastener holes on the pressure panel and modification or repair as
applicable. This AD was prompted by fatigue tests which revealed
cracking around the fasteners attaching the pressure panel to the
flexible bracket, and by the discovery of additional cracks under the
longitudinal beams at locations that are not included in the inspection
area required by AD 2004-03-07. We are issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 3, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 3, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of March
15, 2004 (69 FR 5907, February 9, 2004).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
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 protected]; internet
http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0902.

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-2017-
0902; 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 (telephone 800-
647-5527) 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: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 206-231-
3398.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2004-03-07, Amendment 39-13451 (69 FR 5907,
February 9, 2004) (``AD 2004-03-07''). AD 2004-03-07 applied to certain
Airbus Model A320-111, -211, -212, and -231 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2017 (82 FR 46729). The
NPRM was prompted by fatigue tests which revealed cracking around the
fasteners attaching the pressure panel to the flexible bracket at FR
36, adjacent to the longitudinal beams on the left and right sides of
the airplane, and by the discovery of additional cracks under the
longitudinal beams at locations that are not included in the inspection
area required by AD 2004-03-07. The NPRM proposed to continue to
require certain requirements of AD 2004-03-07. The NPRM also proposed
to expand the applicability and require an inspection of the fastener
holes on the pressure panel between FR 35 and FR 36 under the
longitudinal beam and modification or repair as applicable. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking around the
fasteners attaching the pressure panel to the flexible bracket at the
FR 36 adjacent to the longitudinal beams, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane and possible rapid decompression
of the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2016-0206, dated October 13, 2016; corrected
October 14, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus Model A318 and Model A319 series
airplanes, Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes,
and Model A321-111, -112, -131,-211, -21-, 213, -231, and -232
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During fatigue tests, cracks were found around the fasteners
connecting the pressure panel with the flexible bracket at fuselage
frame (FR) 36, adjacent to the longitudinal beams on left-hand (LH)
and right-hand (RH) sides.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could impair the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, DGAC [Direction
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] France issued [French]
AD 2000-531-155(B) [which corresponds with FAA AD 2004-03-07] to
require repetitive inspections of the longitudinal beams of the FR
36 pressure panel and, depending on findings, the accomplishment of
a repair.
    Since that [French] AD was issued, additional cracks have been
found under the beams, but in locations not covered by the required
inspections. Fatigue and damage tolerance analyses were performed,
the results of which indicated that all the holes in the pressure
panel above all the longitudinal beams have to be cold worked.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of DGAC France AD 2000-531-155(B), which is superseded,
extends the applicability to all A320 family aeroplanes and requires
[a special detailed inspection of the fastener holes on the pressure
panel between FR35 and FR36 under the longitudinal beam and]
modification [or repair] of all the affected holes.
    This [EASA] AD is republished to correct the number of the
superseded DGAC AD.

    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-2017-
0902.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Remove Reporting Requirement

    United Airlines (UAL) requested that we omit paragraph (k)(2)(ii)
of the proposed AD, which would require operators to report any
findings of cracking that exceeded the limits specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix 01,
dated July 4, 2016, from the proposed AD. UAL stated that paragraph
(k)(2)(ii) of the proposed AD is confusing and unjustified because
there is no explanation for why it is required when it was not included
in EASA AD 2016-0206. UAL stated the requirement to report findings in
paragraph (k)(2)(ii) is redundant with the actions of paragraph
(k)(2)(i) of the proposed AD. UAL noted that for the

crack repair specified in paragraph (k)(2)(i) of the proposed AD, the
findings would be reported. UAL suggested the paragraph (k)(2)(ii) of
the proposed AD required using an unconventional means to report
findings that might require additional procedures and training specific
to the proposed AD. UAL also stated that restricting reporting to a
website may cause issues if the sender does not have access and that
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix
01, dated July 4, 2016, lists alternative options for reporting, like
email, fax, or mail.
    We agree to remove the reporting requirement specified in paragraph
(k)(2)(ii) of the proposed AD from this AD. Neither Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix 01, dated July
4, 2016, nor the MCAI specifically includes reporting to a website as
specified in paragraph (k)(2)(ii) of the proposed AD. We note that
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix
01, dated July 4, 2016, does include reporting within the required for
compliance (RC) procedure for the repair, which indicates that
reporting would be required regardless of whether reporting was called
out in the MCAI. We also verified with EASA that reporting should be
done as defined in the service information. However, we have determined
that a specific reporting requirement is not necessary. As stated by
the commenter, operators will report findings to obtain the repair,
which is specified in paragraph (k)(2)(i) of the proposed AD. We have
removed paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (k)(2)(ii) from this AD and revised
paragraph (k)(2) of this AD to include the information that was in
paragraph (k)(2)(i) of the proposed AD. We have also added paragraph
(n) to this AD to specify that reporting is not required for this AD
and redesignated the subsequent paragraphs accordingly.

Request To Refer to Latest Service Information

    Two commenters requested that we refer to the latest service
information. UAL requested that we update paragraph (k) of the proposed
AD to use Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 02, dated
March 14, 2017, which corrects an error with the fastener lengths for
part number (P/N) EN6115K3. We infer that UAL intended to refer to
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated March 14,
2017, because there is no Revision 02 for Airbus Service Bulletin A320-
53-1264, and because P/N EN6115K3 is referenced in Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated March 14, 2017. Airbus
requested that we refer to Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240,
Revision 02, dated March 14, 2017, in the proposed AD.
    We agree to refer to the latest service information in this AD. In
addition to Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated
March 14, 2017, we have also reviewed Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-
1263, Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01 and including Appendix 02,
dated December 6, 2017, which updates kit information and figures among
other minor changes. We have revised paragraph (k)(1) of this AD
accordingly. We have also provided credit for Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-53-1240, Revision 01, dated April 4, 2016; and Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1263, Revision 01, dated February 29, 2016; in
paragraphs (o)(3)(ii) and (o)(3)(iv) of this AD, respectively.

Request To Include Additional Airplane Models in the Applicability

    Airbus requested that Model A320-215 and Model A320-216 airplanes
be in included in the applicability of the proposed AD. The commenter
noted that these airplane models are included in the MCAI.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. We have not certified
Model A320-215 airplanes for operation in the U.S., and therefore, we
did not include that model in the applicability of this AD. We did not
include Model A320-216 airplanes in the applicability of this AD
because the MCAI was already added to the required airworthiness action
list (RAAL) for Model A320-216 airplanes. We have not changed this AD
in this regard.

Request To Revise Service Bulletin Descriptions in the Related Service
Information Under 1 CFR Part 51 Paragraph in the Preamble of the NPRM

    Airbus stated that the proposed AD identifies the means of
inspection, i.e., rototest inspection, using three different wordings
in the descriptions of the service bulletins specified in the Related
Service Information under 1 CFR part 51 paragraph in the preamble of
the NPRM. Airbus also stated that Service Bulletin A320-53-1240,
Revision 02, dated March 14, 2017, no longer contains a rototest
inspection requirement. In addition, Airbus noted that Service Bulletin
A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated March 14, 2017, does not contain
repair instructions. We infer the commenter is requesting that we
revise the service bulletin descriptions in the Related Service
Information under 1 CFR part 51 paragraph in the preamble of the NPRM.
    We acknowledge the description of the rototest inspection is
different for each service bulletin specified in the Related Service
Information under 1 CFR part 51 paragraph in the preamble of the NPRM.
In the NPRM, we matched the description of the inspection as given in
each service bulletin specified in the Related Service Information
under 1 CFR part 51 paragraph. We have revised the description of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated March 14,
2017, to remove the reference to an inspection and repair.

Request To Clarify What Prompted the Proposed AD

    Airbus requested that we revise paragraph (e) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the proposed AD was prompted by a report of cracking in an
additional area. Airbus stated that paragraph (e) of the proposed AD
describes only the fatigue test results that prompted AD 2004-03-07.
    We agree to revise paragraph (e) of this AD for clarity. This AD
was prompted by the original report of cracking and the additional
report. We have revised paragraph (e) of this AD to include the
additional cracking that prompted the issuance of this AD.

Request To Revise Repair Language in Paragraph (k)(2)(i) of the
Proposed AD

    Airbus requested that we revise the language in paragraph (k)(2)(i)
of the proposed AD, which specifies to repair any cracking in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01,
excluding Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016. Airbus stated that this
service information does not provide direct repair instructions and
instead specifies to contact Airbus.
    We agree to clarify the language in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD
(which corresponds with paragraph (k)(2)(i) of the proposed AD).
Paragraph (k)(2) of this AD also specifies that where Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix 01, dated July
4, 2016, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and
specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), operators
must request approval of repair instructions using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p)(2) of this
AD, and accomplish the repair accordingly within the compliance time
specified in those instructions. We have not changed this AD in this
regard.

Request To Include Wording From the MCAI in Paragraph (m)(1)(iii) of
the Proposed AD

    Airbus requested that we revise paragraph (m)(1)(iii) of the
proposed AD. Airbus stated the wording is similar to paragraph (9) of
the MCAI except that the important wording ``in accordance with Airbus
approved instructions that identify the repair as technically
equivalent to the accomplishment of Airbus SB A320-53-1240 or SB A320-
53-1263'' is omitted.
    We disagree with the commenter's request. The intent of paragraph
(m)(1)(iii) of this AD is to obtain corrective actions from the
manufacturer that are approved by the FAA, EASA, or Airbus's EASA
Design Organization Approval (DOA). These approved instructions will
provide an equivalent level of safety. We have not changed this AD in
this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments 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 changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1029, Revision 01,
including Appendix 01, dated April 29, 2002. The service information
describes procedures for repairing cracking.
    Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 01,
dated April 4, 2016; and A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated March 14,
2017, which describe procedures for modifying the pressure panel above
the left and right longitudinal beams, by cold working the attachment
holes under the longitudinal beam at FR 36 for airplanes on which no
cracking was found. Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 01, dated
April 4, 2016 also includes related investigative action (e.g., high
frequency eddy current (rototest) inspection of all the removed
fastener holes) and corrective actions (e.g., repair). These documents
are distinct since they are different revision levels.
    Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1263, Revision 01,
dated February 29, 2016; and A320-53-1263, Revision 02, excluding
Appendix 01 and including Appendix 02, dated December 6, 2017, which
describe procedures for modifying the pressure panel above the left and
right longitudinal beams, including related investigative actions
(e.g., eddy current rotating probe inspection of the fastener holes)
and corrective actions (e.g., repair), by adding a doubler and a
filler, and cold expansion of the holes under the longitudinal beam at
FR 36 for airplanes on which cracking was found. These documents are
distinct because they are different revision levels.
    Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01,
excluding Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016. The service information
describes procedures for a special detailed inspection (rotating probe)
for cracking of the fastener holes on the pressure panel between FR 35
and FR 36 under the longitudinal beam and repair of any crack.
    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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 737 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost     Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection [Retained from AD     Up to 2 work-hours x                 $0  Up to $170 per      Up to $125,290 per
 2004-03-07].                     $85 per hour = $170                      inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                  per inspection cycle.
Inspection [new proposed         13 work-hours x $85 per              $0  $1,105............  $814,385.
 requirement].                    hour = $1,105.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary modifications
that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
modifications:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                         Labor cost                Parts cost           Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification.......................  Up to 213 work-hours x $85   Up to $8,510..........  Up to $26,615.
                                      per hour = $18,105.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that will enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition repairs 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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C.

In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function
of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this
transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority
to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director
of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    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 removing Airworthiness Directive
(Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-03-07, Amendment 39-13451 (69 FR
5907, February 9, 2004), and adding the following new AD:

2018-06-04 Airbus: Amendment 39-19224; Docket No. FAA-2017-0902;
Product Identifier 2016-NM-188-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 3, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2004-03-07, Amendment 39-13451 (69 FR 5907,
February 9, 2004) (``AD 2004-03-07'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category,
except for airplanes on which Airbus Modification 151574 was
embodied in production.
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by fatigue tests which revealed cracking
around the fasteners attaching the pressure panel to the flexible
bracket at frame (FR) 36, adjacent to the longitudinal beams on the
left and right sides of the airplane, and by the discovery of
additional cracks under the longitudinal beams at locations that are
not included in the inspection area required by AD 2004-03-07. We
are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking around
the fasteners attaching the pressure panel to the flexible bracket
at the FR 36 adjacent to the longitudinal beams, which could result
in reduced structural integrity of the airplane and possible rapid
decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Inspection and Follow-on Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraphs (a) and
(b) of AD 2004-03-07, with no changes.
    (1) For Model A320-211, -212, and -231 series airplanes having
serial numbers 0002 through 0107 inclusive, except those airplanes
on which Airbus Modification 21202/K1432 has been incorporated in
production, or on which Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1029,
Revision 01, including Appendix 01, dated April 29, 2002, has been
incorporated in service: Prior to the accumulation of 30,000 total
flight cycles, do a rotating probe inspection on airplanes with a
center fuel tank, or a detailed inspection on airplanes without a
center fuel tank, to detect cracking around the fasteners that
attach the pressure panel to the flexible bracket at FR 36, adjacent
to the longitudinal beams on the left and right sides of the
airplane, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1030, Revision 01, excluding
Appendix 01, dated May 21, 2002.
    (2) If no crack is detected by the inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, repeat the applicable inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles for
airplanes without a center fuel tank, and at intervals not to exceed
18,000 flight cycles for airplanes with a center fuel tank.

(h) Retained Corrective Actions, With Specific Delegation Approval
Language

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraphs (c) and
(d) of AD 2004-03-07, with specific delegation approval language.
    (1) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, before further flight, repair the
affected structure by accomplishing all applicable actions in
accordance with paragraphs 3.B. through 3.E. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1030, Revision 01,
excluding Appendix 01, dated May 21, 2002. Repeat the applicable
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles
for airplanes without a center fuel tank, and at intervals not to
exceed 18,000 flight cycles for airplanes with a center fuel tank.
For any area where cracking is repaired, the repair constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspection of that area.
    Note 1 to paragraph (h)(1) of this AD: Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-53-1030 references Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1029,
Revision 01, including Appendix 01, dated April 29, 2002, as an
additional source of service information for certain repairs.
    (2) If Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1030, Revision 01,
excluding Appendix 01, dated May 21, 2002, specifies to contact the
manufacturer for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (p)(2) of this AD.

(i) Retained Optional Terminating Action, With Revised Compliance
Language

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (e) of AD
2004-03-07, with revised compliance language, to provide optional
terminating action for paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD. For Model
A320-211, -212, and -231 series airplanes having serial numbers 0002
through 0107 inclusive, except those airplanes on which Airbus
Modification 21202/K1432 has been incorporated in production, or
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1029, Revision 01, including
Appendix 01, dated April 29, 2002, has been incorporated in service:
Modification, before the effective date of this AD, of the structure
around the fasteners that attach the pressure panel to the flexible
bracket at FR 36, adjacent to the longitudinal beams on the left and
right sides of the airplane, by accomplishing all applicable actions
in accordance with paragraphs 3.A. through 3.E. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1029,
Revision 01, including Appendix 01, dated April 29, 2002,
constitutes terminating action for the actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.

(j) New Requirement of This AD: Inspection

    For all airplanes, except for airplanes identified in paragraph
(l) of this AD: At the applicable time specified in table 1 to
paragraph (j) of this AD, do a special detailed inspection for
cracking of the fastener holes

on the pressure panel between FR 35 and FR 36 under the longitudinal
beam, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix 01,
dated July 4, 2016.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29MR18.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29MR18.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29MR18.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29MR18.010

(k) On-Condition Actions

    (1) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (j) of this
AD, no cracking is found, or cracking is found that is within the
limits specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision
01, excluding Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016: Before further
flight, modify the pressure panel above the left and right
longitudinal beams, including doing all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240,
Revision 02, dated March 14, 2017; or Service Bulletin A320-53-1263,
Revision 02, excluding

Appendix 01 and including Appendix 02, dated December 6, 2017, as
applicable. Do all related investigative and corrective actions
before further flight. Where Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240,
Revision 02, dated March 14, 2017; or Service Bulletin A320-53-1263,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01 and including Appendix 02, dated
December 6, 2017; specify to contact Airbus for appropriate action:
Before further flight, accomplish the repair using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p)(2) of
this AD.
    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (j) of this
AD, any cracking is found that exceeds the limits specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding
Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016: Before further flight, repair any
cracking in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01, excluding
Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016. Where Airbus Service Bulletin A320-
53-1264, Revision 01, excluding Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016,
specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and specifies
that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), before further
flight, request approval of repair instructions using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(p)(2) of this AD, and accomplish the repair accordingly within the
compliance time specified in those instructions. If no compliance
time is defined in the repair instructions, accomplish the repair
before further flight.

(l) Actions for Certain Airplanes

    For Model A319 and Model A320 series airplanes on which the
actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1193 have been
embodied and the airplane has accumulated 33,000 flight cycles or
66,000 flight hours or more since the airplane's first flight on the
effective date of this AD: Within 30 days after the effective date
of this AD, contact the Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA);
or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA) for approved
repair instructions and within the compliance time specified in
those instructions, accomplish the repair accordingly. If approved
by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
If no compliance time is defined in the repair instructions,
accomplish the repair before the next flight.

(m) Terminating Action for Repetitive Inspections

    (1) Modification of an airplane as specified in paragraph
(m)(1)(i), (m)(1)(ii), or (m)(1)(iii) of this AD constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspection required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD for that airplane only.
    (i) Modification of an airplane as required by paragraph (k)(1)
of this AD.
    (ii) Modification of an airplane prior to the effective date of
this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 01, dated April 4,
2016; or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1263, Revision 01, dated
February 29, 2016; as applicable.
    (iii) Modification of an airplane using instructions obtained in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p)(2) of this
AD.
    (2) Repair of an airplane as required by paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD for that
airplane, unless specified otherwise in the repair instructions
approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA,
the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(n) No Reporting Requirement

    Although Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01,
excluding Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016, specifies to submit
certain information to the manufacturer, and specifies that action
as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), this AD does not include that
requirement.

(o) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h)(1) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before March 15, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-03-
07) using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1030, dated January 5,
2000; or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1029, dated January 5,
2000.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (j) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-
1264, dated March 19, 2015.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using the applicable service
information specified in paragraphs (o)(3)(i) through (o)(3)(iv) of
this AD, for that airplane only.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, dated March 19, 2015.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 01, dated
April 4, 2016.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1263, dated March 19,
2015.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1263, Revision 01, dated
February 29, 2016.
    (4) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (m)(1)(ii) of this AD if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-53-1240, dated March 19, 2015; or Service Bulletin A320-53-
1263, dated March 19, 2015.

(p) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Branch, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (q)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. 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.
    (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 Section, Transport Standards
Branch, 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.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraphs (k)(2) and (n) of this AD: If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(q) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2016-0206, dated October 13, 2016; corrected October
14, 2016; 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-2017-0902.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
206-231-3223; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (r)(5) and (r)(6) of this AD.

(r) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
May 3, 2018.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1029, Revision 01, including
Appendix 01, dated April 29, 2002.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 01, dated
April 4, 2016.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1240, Revision 02, dated
March 14, 2017.

    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1263, Revision 01, dated
February 29, 2016.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1263, Revision 02, excluding
Appendix 01 and including Appendix 02, dated December 6, 2017.
    (vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1264, Revision 01,
excluding Appendix 01, dated July 4, 2016.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
March 15, 2004 (69 FR 5907, February 9, 2004).
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1030, Revision 01, excluding
Appendix 01, dated May 21, 2002.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) 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 protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (7) 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 March 2, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-05019 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 50803-50804]
[DOCID:fr28au08-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12717-001]

Northern Illinois Hydropower, LLC; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approval
of Use of the Traditional Licensing Process

August 21, 2008.
    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 12717-001.
    c. Date Filed: July 16, 2008.
    d. Submitted By: Northern Illinois Hydropower, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Brandon Road Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project would be located at the U.S. Corps of
Engineers Brandon Road Lock and Dam, on the Des Plaines River in Will
County, Illinois.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Damon Zdunich, President, Northern Illinois
Hydropower, LLC, 801 Oakland Avenue, Joliet, IL 60435,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Michael Spencer,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Northern Illinois Hydropower, LLC filed its request to use the
Traditional Licensing Process on July 16, 2008. Northern Illinois
Hydropower, LLC filed public notice of its request on August 4, 2008.
In a letter dated August 20, 2008, the Director of the Office of Energy
Projects approved Northern Illinois Hydropower, LLC's request to use
the Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act; and (b) the Illinois State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historical Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. Northern Illinois Hydropower, LLC filed a Pre-Application
Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    m. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via e-mail of new filing and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-19933 Filed 8-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P