[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 226 (Monday, November 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67786-67788]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25886]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID Number: DOT-OST-2014-0031]

Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB
Agency Request for Renewal of a Previously Approved Collection: Airline
Service Quality Performance--Part 234

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
(OST-R), Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended) this notice announces that DOT is
submitting a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
renewal of OMB Control Number 2138-0041 covering Airline Service
Quality Performance, On-time Performance, and Mishandled Baggage
reports that the largest U.S. air carriers file with DOT under part 234
of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). On August 11, 2021, the
Director, Office of Airline Information (OAI), published a Federal
Register notice announcing DOT's intent to renew the information
collections and providing a 60-day comment period regarding the
information collections. See 86 FR 44137. DOT did not receive any
comments in response to the August 11, 2021 notice. This notice
announces an additional 30 days of public comment.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by December 29, 2021.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this
proposal.

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the burden estimate, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Comments may
also be sent via email to OMB at the following address:
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cecelia Robinson, Office of Airline
Information, RTS-42, Room E34-410, OST-R, BTS, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, Telephone Number<PHONE_NUMBER> (voice),
Fax Number<PHONE_NUMBER> or Email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOT collects information regarding flight
performance and mishandled baggage, wheelchairs, and scooters from the
largest U.S. air carriers under 14 CFR part 234. The air carriers
required to provide this information to DOT consist of the U.S. air
carriers that accounted for at least 0.5 percent of domestic scheduled-
passenger revenues (Reporting Carriers) as most recently determined by
OAI. An air carrier that is not a Reporting Carrier may voluntarily
submit the flight performance and mishandled baggage, wheelchairs, and
scooters information to the Department pursuant to 14 CFR 234.7.
    Specifically, Reporting Carriers must submit Part 234 On-time
Performance reports to DOT with information on domestic flight
operations and performance as described in 14 CFR 234.4.\1\ In
addition, under 14 CFR 234.6, Reporting Carriers must submit Part 234
Mishandled Baggage reports to DOT that include the following
information for covered domestic flights: (1) The number of bags
mishandled in its custody, (2) the number of bags enplaned into the
aircraft cargo compartment, (3) the number of mishandled wheelchairs
and scooters mishandled in its custody, and (4) the number of
wheelchairs and scooters enplaned into the aircraft cargo
compartment.\2\ Each Reporting Carrier is required to report the flight
performance and mishandled baggage, wheelchair, and scooter information
to DOT on a monthly basis for the covered flights it operates and for
any covered flights held out under the Reporting Carrier's code (as the
only U.S. carrier code) and operated by a codeshare partner of the
Reporting Carrier that is a U.S. air carrier. These codeshare partners
generally adopt the marketing carrier's branding and, thus, are
referred to as branded codeshare partners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The format and instructions for reporting this information
are in Technical Reporting Directive #27--On-Time Performance,
effective January 1, 2018, available at: https://cms7.bts.dot.gov/sites/bts.dot.gov/files/docs/explore-topics-and-geography/topics/airlines-and-airports/207741/technical-directive-no-27-time-2018.pdf.
    \2\ The format and instructions for reporting mishandled baggage
and wheelchair and scooter information to DOT are in Technical
Reporting Directive #30A--Mishandled Baggage and Wheelchairs and
Scooters (Amended), effective January 1, 2019, available at: https://www.bts.dot.gov/sites/bts.dot.gov/files/docs/explore-topics-and-geography/topics/airlines-and-airports/224606/technicaldirective30abaggage2019amended.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOT uses the information reported by airlines to provide airline
performance information and statistics on the BTS website and in the
Air Travel Consumer Report (ATCR), a monthly publication of DOT's
Office of Aviation Consumer Protection (OACP). Air transportation

consumers and other stakeholders use the information DOT publishes to
understand and compare airlines' service quality performance, including
airlines' rates of on-time performance and cancellation, and rates of
baggage and wheelchair and scooter mishandling.
    DOT's Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) uses data reported by
airlines in part 234 On-time Performance reports to analyze air traffic
delays. Wheels-up and wheels-down times are used by the FAA in
conjunction with departure and arrival times to show the extent of
ground delays. Actual elapsed flight time (wheels-down minus wheels-up
time) is compared by the FAA to scheduled elapsed flight time to
identify airborne delays. The reporting of the aircraft tail number
allows the FAA to track an aircraft through the air network, which
enables the FAA to study the ripple effects of delays at hub airports.
The data can be analyzed by the FAA for airport design changes, new
equipment purchases, and the planning of new runways or airports based
on current and projected airport delays and traffic levels. Identifying
the reasons for delays allows the FAA, airport operators, and air
carriers to pinpoint delays under their control.
    DOT is publishing this notice to announce that its request for
renewal of the previously approved information collections described
above under OMB Control Number 2138-0041 is being forwarded to OMB for
review and comments. Without further action, OMB authorization of the
information collections would expire December 31, 2021.
    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its implementing
regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to issue two
notices seeking public comment on information collection activities
before OMB may approve paperwork packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR
1320.5, 1320.8(d)(1), 1320.12. A Federal agency generally may not
conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is
generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless
it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid
OMB Control Number. In addition, no person shall generally be subject
to monetary penalty for failing to comply with a collection of
information if the collection of information does not display a valid
OMB Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. On August 11, 2021
the Department published a 60-day notice in the Federal Register
soliciting comment on ICRs for which the agency was seeking OMB
approval (86 FR at 44137). The Department did not receive any comments
on the 60-day notice. Accordingly, the Department announces that these
information collection activities have been re-evaluated and certified
under 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and forwarded to OMB for review and approval
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12(c).
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30-day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507(b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983 (Aug. 29, 1995). The 30-day notice informs the
regulated community to file relevant comments to OMB and affords the
agency adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a
decision. 60 FR 44983 (Aug. 29, 1995). Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication
to best ensure their full consideration. 5 CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60
FR 44983 (Aug. 29, 1995).
    The title, a description of the respondents, and an estimate of the
annual recordkeeping and periodic reporting burden for each of the
information collections for which DOT seeks renewal are set forth
below:

1. Airline Service Quality Performance Reports--Part 234 On-Time
Performance

    Respondents: Certificated air carriers that account for at least
0.5 percent of the domestic scheduled-service passenger revenues are
required to report flight performance data for the covered flights that
they operate as described in 14 CFR 234.4; Certificated air carriers
that account for at least 0.5 percent of domestic scheduled-service
passenger revenues are required to report this information for the
covered flights marketed under the carrier's code as the only U.S.
carrier code that are operated by another U.S. carrier as described in
14 CFR 234.4; Air carriers may voluntarily report flight performance
data pursuant to 14 CFR 234.7.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 17 air carriers (4 of which market
codeshare flights).
    Frequency: Monthly.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 10 hours for each respondent
to report for the flights operated by the respondent plus an additional
16 hours if the respondent reports for flights operated by its branded
code-share partners.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 2,808 hours (17 air carriers
reporting the flight performance information for the flights they
operate x 10 hours per response x 12 months = 2,040 hours) + (4 air
carriers reporting the flight performance information for flights
operated by their branded codeshare partners x 16 hours per response x
12 months = 768 hours). This estimate is based on the following
information: 17 carriers reported the flight performance data for the
flights they operated to DOT in calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021.
Currently, 4 carriers report flight performance data to DOT for their
branded codeshare operations.
    DOT estimates that respondents will encounter on average a 10-hour
burden per month to report flight performance data to DOT for the
flights they operate. DOT estimates the respondents that market
codeshare flights will encounter on average an additional burden of 16
hours per month to report flight performance data to DOT for their
branded codeshare operations. The burden estimates include staff time
to manage and process the data and to submit the report through DOT's
electronic submission system.

2. Airline Service Quality Performance Reports--Part 234 Mishandled
Baggage

    Respondents: Certificated air carriers that account for at least
0.5 percent of the domestic scheduled-service passenger revenues are
required to report mishandled baggage and wheelchairs and scooters data
for the covered flights that they operate as described in 14 CFR 234.6;
Certificated air carriers that account for at least 0.5 percent of
domestic scheduled-service passenger revenues are required to report
this information for covered flights marketed under the carrier's code
as the only U.S. carrier code that are operated by another U.S. carrier
as described in 14 CFR 234.6; Air carriers may voluntarily report
mishandled baggage and wheelchairs and scooters data pursuant to 14 CFR
234.7.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 17 air carriers (4 that market
codeshare flights).
    Frequency: Monthly.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 10 hours for each respondent
to report for the flights operated by the respondent plus an additional
16 hours if the respondent reports for flights operated its branded
code-share partners.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 2,825 hours (17 air carriers
reporting the mishandled baggage and mishandled

wheelchairs and scooters information for flights they operate x 10
hours per response x 12 months = 2,040 hours) + (4 air carriers
reporting the mishandled baggage and mishandled wheelchairs and
scooters information for flights operated by their branded codeshare
partners x 16 hours per response x 12 months = 768 hours) + (.00138
hours for manual data entry related to wheelchair or scooters x 12,000
manual entries = 17 hours). This estimate is based on the following
information: 17 carriers reported mishandled baggage and wheelchair and
scooter information to DOT in calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021.
Currently, 4 carriers report mishandled baggage and wheelchair and
scooter information to DOT for their codeshare operations.
    DOT estimates that respondents will encounter on average 10-hours
burden per month to report the mishandled baggage and wheelchair and
scooter data to DOT for the flights they operate. DOT estimates that
respondents that market codeshare flights will encounter on average an
additional burden of 16 hours per month to report the mishandled
baggage and wheelchair and scooter data to DOT for their branded
codeshare operations. The burden estimates include staff time to manage
and process the data and to submit the report through DOT's electronic
submission system.
    In addition, the estimated total annual burden is based on the
assumption that most respondents employ automated processes to record
that an item enplaned is a wheelchair or scooter, for the purposes of
reporting data on wheelchairs and scooters to DOT. For a carrier that
manually records this information, such as by having their agent type
information describing a wheelchair or scooter into the airline's
system, DOT estimates that the airline would spend approximately 5
seconds (.00138 hours) per item to manually enter the data.\3\ DOT
estimates that 12,000 wheelchairs and scooters total are recorded
manually per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Final Rule to Amend Rules Requiring Reporting of
Mishandled Baggage, Regulatory Impact Analysis, October 18, 2016,
estimated a data entry burden of 5 seconds per wheelchair or scooter
recorded manually. See Docket No. RITA-2011-0001-0287.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Administrative Issues

    The Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency
Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501) requires a statistical agency to clearly
identify information it collects for non-statistical purposes. BTS
hereby notifies the respondents and the public that BTS uses the
information it collects under this OMB approval for non-statistical
purposes including, but not limited to, publication of both
respondent's identity and its data, submission of the information to
agencies outside BTS for review, analysis and possible use in
regulatory and other administrative matters.

Public Comments Invited

    You are invited to comment on any aspect of this information
collection, including: (a) Whether the collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of DOT, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy
of DOT's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information
to be collected; and, (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection
of information on respondents.
    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of
public record on the docket.

    Issued this 17th day of November 2021 at Washington, DC.
William A. Chadwick, Jr.,
Director, Office of Airline Information, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and
Technology.
[FR Doc. 2021-25886 Filed 11-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5365-5367]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01741]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 2, 2016 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3140; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-063-AD;
Amendment 39-18385; AD 2016-02-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-100-1A10 (Challenger 300) airplanes. This AD
was prompted by multiple reports of a short circuit between the heater
element and the metal sheath of the pitot-static probe heater. This AD
requires replacement of the left and right pitot-static probes with
newly redesigned left and right pitot-static probes. We are issuing
this AD to prevent degradation of the heating ability of the pitot-
static probe heater, resulting in erroneous airspeed indication during
flight in icing conditions and consequent reduced controllability of
the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 8, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 8,
2016.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-3140; or in person at the
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.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.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>. It
is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3140.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics and Services Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.
Model BD-100-1A10 (Challenger 300) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on July 31, 2015 (80 FR 45617).
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2015-04, dated March
17, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-100-1A10 (Challenger
300) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    There have been several reports where the pitot-static probe
heater came on and remained on regardless of the heater control
selected position. Investigation determined that the root cause is a
short circuit between the heater element and the metal sheath. If
not corrected, this condition may degrade the heating, resulting in
erroneous Airspeed Indication when flying in icing condition [and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane].
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the replacement of the pitot-static
probes with a redesigned probe which will prevent this failure mode.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-3140-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (80 FR 45617, July 31,
2015) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (80 FR 45617, July 31, 2015) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 45617, July 31, 2015).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier issued Service Bulletin 100-34-38, dated January 9,
2014. The service information describes procedures for replacement of
the left and right pitot-static probes with newly redesigned left and
right pitot-static probes, part numbers 0856WC3 and 0856WC4
respectively. 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 126 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 12 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $13,468 per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on
U.S. operators to be $1,825,488, or $14,488 per product.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this 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 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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-3140; 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 street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone: 800-
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-02-05 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18385. Docket No. FAA-
2015-3140; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-063-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective March 8, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-100-1A10
(Challenger 300) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial
numbers 20003 through 20500 inclusive.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by multiple reports of a short circuit
between the heater element and the metal sheath of the pitot-static
probe heater. We are issuing this AD to prevent degradation of the
heating ability of the pitot-static probe heater, resulting in
erroneous airspeed indication during flight in icing conditions and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Replacement of Left and Right Pitot-Static Probes

    Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, replace
the left and right pitot-static probes with newly designed pitot-
static probes, part numbers (P/N) 0856WC3 and 0856WC4 respectively,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 100-34-38, dated January 9, 2014.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
pitot-static probe, P/N 0856WC1 or 0856WC2, on any airplane.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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 New York ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
516-794-5531. 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. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: 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, New York ACO,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
Canadian AD CF-2015-04, dated March 17, 2015, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-3140-0002.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-34-38, dated January 9,
2014.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 514-
855-7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) 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
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 20, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-01741 Filed 2-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 7, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7871-7873]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02561]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0977]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Savannah River, M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN, Savannah, GA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters of the Savannah River, within a 500-yard radius around
M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by
the transit through the Savannah River to Georgia Port Authority Garden
City Terminal Berth No. 1 while carrying large cranes, and for the
offload of those cranes to the facility. Entry of vessels or persons
into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port Savannah or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:00 a.m. on February 9, 2023
through 11:59 p.m. on February 26, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0977 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST3 Jesse Dillon, Shoreside Compliance, Marine Safety
Unit Savannah, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected] .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The
Coast Guard lacks sufficient time to provide for a comment period and
then consider those comments before issuing the rule since this rule is
needed by February 9, 2023. It would be contrary to the public interest
since immediate action is necessary to protect the safety of the
public, and vessels transiting the waters of the Savannah River, during
the planned movement and obstruction created by oversized cranes.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because the vessel is scheduled to
arrive at the Port of Savannah on February 9, 2023.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Savannah
(COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the
transit and offload of gantry cranes from M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN scheduled
for February 9, 2023 through February 26, 2023, will be a safety
concern for anyone within a 500-yard radius of the vessel. This rule is
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the
navigable waters within the safety zone while the vessel is transiting
the Savannah River and offloading gantry cranes.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from February, 9,
2023 through February 26, 2023. A moving and fixed temporary safety
zone will be established for the vessel M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN while it is
in the Savannah River and would cover all navigable waters within 500
yards of the vessel, up to Georgia Port Authority Garden City Terminal
Berth No. 1, and during offload of the cranes. The moving temporary
safety zone would only be enforced while the vessel is transiting, and
the fixed temporary safety zone will be enforced while it is
discharging the cranes. This safety zone may last until February 26,
2023 but it will not be enforced after the cranes have been removed
from the vessel. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by
the movement and obstruction hazard of two oversized cranes transiting
the Savannah River, and when the vessel is moored to that facility. No
vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without
obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location
and scope of the safety zone. The zone is limited in size, location,
and duration as it will cover all navigable waters of the Savannah
River within 500 yards of the M/V/BIGLIFT BAFFIN while it is underway
with cranes onboard, and while it is moored to the terminal, and
discharging its cargo. The zone is limited in scope as vessel traffic
may be able to safely transit around this safety zone and vessels may
seek permission from the COTP to enter the zone. Moreover, the Coast
Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine
channel 16 about the safety zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule would not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves This
rule involves a safety zone within 500 yards of M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN
during transit and offload of cranes. It is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0977 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0977  Safety Zone; Savannah River, M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN,
Savannah, GA.

    (a) Location. The following is a safety zone: The moving safety
zone will include all navigable waters of the Savannah River, within a
500-yard radius of the vessel M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN while transiting the
Savannah River and laden with oversized cranes. The fixed zone will
include all navigable waters of the Savannah River, within a 500-yard
radius of vessel M/V BIGLIFT BAFFIN while moored at Georgia Port
Authority Garden City Terminal Berth No. 1 and laden with oversized
cranes.
    (b) Definition. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Savannah (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) Persons or vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the safety zone may contact COTP Savannah by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated representative via VHF
radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area
is granted by the COTP Savannah or a designated representative, all
persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the
instructions of the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Marine Safety Information Bulletins, and
on-scene designated representatives.
    (d) Effective and Enforcement period. This section is effective
from February 9, 2023 through February 26, 2023. The moving zone will
be enforced while the vessel is transiting with the cranes embarked,
and the fixed zone will be enforced while the vessel is moored at the
facility, and the cranes are onboard.

    Dated: January 31, 2023.
K.A. Broyles,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Savannah, GA.
[FR Doc. 2023-02561 Filed 2-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 217)]
[Notices]
[Page 66237-66238]
[DOCID:fr07no08-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR08-23-001]

Worsham-Steed Gas Storage, L.P.; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 31, 2008.
    Take notice that on October 27, 2008, Worsham-Steed Gas Storage,
L.P. filed a Statement of Operating Conditions for both gas storage and
transportation service pursuant to section 284.123(e) of the
Commission's regulations and to comply with the Commission's letter
order issued on September 25, 2008, in Docket No. PR08-23-000.
    Any person desiring to participate in this proceeding must file a
motion to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated
below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on November 7, 2008.

 Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-26581 Filed 11-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 83 (Friday, April 29, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25605-25608]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10166]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0250; FRL-9945-91-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Removal of I/M Program in Memphis and
Revisions to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for Shelby County,
Tennessee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
State of Tennessee's May 23, 2014, State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision, submitted through the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC) on behalf of the Shelby County Health Department
(SCHD), seeking to modify the SIP by removing the Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M) program in the City of Memphis, Tennessee, and by
incorporating Shelby County's revised maintenance plan for the 1997 8-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Among other
things, the revised maintenance plan updates the emissions inventory
estimates and the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the years
2006 and 2021, and contains an emissions reduction measure to offset
the emissions increase expected from the termination of City of Memphis
I/M program. EPA has determined that Tennessee's May 23, 2014, SIP
revision is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This rule is effective May 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0250. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
Mr. Wong can be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Shelby County was designated as nonattainment for the carbon
monoxide (CO) NAAQS on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962). Local transportation
sources in the City of Memphis were identified as the prime
contributors to monitored CO violations in Shelby County at that time.
The City of Memphis I/M program was adopted as a control strategy to
attain the CO NAAQS.
    On July 26, 1994 (59 FR 37939), EPA redesignated Shelby County to
attainment for the CO standard and approved the initial 10-year CO
maintenance plan for Shelby County. Subsequently, further improvements
in automotive technology led to a consistent reduction in locally
monitored levels of CO. On October 25, 2006 (71 FR 62384), EPA approved
the required second 10-year CO maintenance plan which demonstrated that
I/M was no longer needed to maintain the CO NAAQS.
    On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA designated Shelby County,
Tennessee, and Crittenden County, Arkansas, as nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, with a classification of `moderate'
(hereinafter collectively referred to as the ``Memphis 1997 8-hour
Ozone Area'').\1\ Under CAA section 182(b)(4), moderate ozone
nonattainment areas with a census-defined urbanized area population
over a given threshold are required to adopt basic I/M as part of the
required SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.075 parts per million. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
EPA designated Shelby County; Crittenden County, Arkansas; and a
portion of Desoto County, Mississippi, as a marginal nonattainment
area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2012 (effective
July 20, 2012). See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). Currently,
monitoring data for the Memphis 2008 8-hour Ozone Area indicates
that the Area has attaining data for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As
noted above, marginal ozone nonattainment areas are not required to
adopt an I/M program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the initial designations for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, Shelby County, the State of Tennessee, Crittenden County, and
the State of Arkansas adopted additional measures to control ozone-
forming emissions in the region and petitioned EPA to use its
discretion under CAA section 181(a)(4) to reclassify the Area from
moderate to marginal. On September 22, 2004 (69 FR 56697), EPA granted
the petition to reclassify the Area, which removed the SIP planning
requirements mandated of moderate ozone nonattainment areas, including
the adoption of a mandatory I/M program, and reset the attainment
deadline to June 15, 2007. The Area

failed to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the marginal area
attainment deadline. Consequently, on March 28, 2008 (73 FR 16547), EPA
reclassified the Area as a moderate nonattainment area. This
reclassification reset the attainment deadline to June 15, 2010, with
an attainment plan SIP revision due on March 1, 2009, to address all
CAA requirements for a moderate ozone nonattainment area, including an
I/M program in Shelby County pursuant to CAA section 184(b)(4).
    The end of the 2008 ozone monitoring season resulted in a design
value for the Memphis 1997 8-hour Ozone Area that met the NAAQS.
Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas prepared separate, but
coordinated, redesignation requests and maintenance plans for their
respective portions of the Area. Tennessee, on behalf of Shelby County,
submitted the redesignation request and maintenance plan for its
portion of the 1997 8-hour Ozone Area to EPA on February 26, 2009,
prior to the attainment plan SIP revision due date.
    EPA approved Tennessee's redesignation request and maintenance plan
on January 4, 2010 (75 FR 56). Although there was no longer a mandatory
requirement to implement I/M in Shelby County under section 184(b)(4)
of the CAA, the City of Memphis continued to operate its I/M program,
and the SIP-approved maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
includes the implementation of a basic I/M program in Shelby County as
a contingency measure in the event that the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
violated in the 1997 8-hour Ozone Area after redesignation. In mid-
2012, the Memphis City Council voted to defund the City of Memphis I/M
program beginning with Fiscal Year 2013/2014. Vehicle inspection
operations at all four City of Memphis inspection stations ended on
June 28, 2013. Tennessee's May 23, 2014, SIP submission addresses the
termination of this program.
    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on February 12,
2016 (81 FR 7483), EPA proposed to approve the May 23, 2014, SIP
revision. No comments were received on the February 12, 2012, NPRM. The
details of Tennessee's submittal and the rationale for EPA's actions
are further explained in the NPRM.

II. Revised MVEBs

    Tennessee's May 23, 2014, maintenance plan revision updates the
MVEBs for 2006 and 2021 using on-road mobile source emissions estimates
from MOVES and removes the MVEBs for 2009 and 2017. The revised 2021
MVEB accounts for the termination of the I/M program and the shutdown
of the Cleo, Inc. facility.\2\ These budgets are used by transportation
authorities to assure that transportation plans, programs, and projects
are consistent with, and conform to, the maintenance of acceptable air
quality in the Memphis 1997 8-hour Ozone Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As discussed in the NPRM, the maintenance plan revision
includes emissions reductions from the closure of the Cleo, Inc.
facility to offset the estimated increase in emissions due to the
termination of the City of Memphis I/M program. The Cleo facility
was a gift wrap manufacturing plant and warehouse located at 4025
Viscount Avenue, Memphis, Tennessee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans,
programs, and projects, such as the construction of new highways, must
``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the state's air
quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. Conformity
to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air
quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of the NAAQS or any interim milestones. If a transportation
plan does not conform, most new projects that would expand the capacity
of roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth
EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP. The regional
emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for
implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a
requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
are areas that were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but
have since been redesignated to attainment with an approved maintenance
plan for that NAAQS.
    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas.
These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment
demonstration) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and
trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years
as well. The MVEB is the portion of the total allowable emissions in
the maintenance demonstration that is allocated to highway and transit
vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The MVEB serves as a
ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24,
1993 (58 FR 62188), Transportation Conformity Rule. The preamble also
describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the
MVEB. According to 40 CFR 93.118, a maintenance plan must establish
MVEBs for the last year of the maintenance plan (in this case, 2021).
The updated MVEBs in the revised maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS are for the base year (2006) and the last year of the first
10-year maintenance plan (2021). The 2021 MVEB reflects the total on-
road mobile source emissions for 2021 plus an allocation from the
available volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) safety margins.\3\ The MVEBs are presented in Table 1,
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The safety margin is the difference between the attainment
level of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of
emissions (from all sources) in the maintenance plan. As discussed
in the NPRM, Shelby County chose to allocate 4.224 tpd of the
available VOC safety margin and 40.393 tpd of the available
NOX safety margin to the 2021 MVEBs.

                Table 1--Shelby County VOC and NOX MVEBs
                       [Ozone season tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2006       2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX...............................................     58.013     56.428
VOC...............................................     23.986     12.782
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The previously-approved 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for
Shelby County contained interim MVEBs for years 2006, 2009, and 2017 in
addition to the required maintenance year MVEB of 2021. The consensus
formed during the interagency consultation process was that MVEBs
should only be set for 2006 and 2021.\4\ Therefore, the revised
maintenance plan removes the interim budgets for years 2009 and 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The transportation conformity provisions of the CAA require
interagency consultation in the development of MVEBs. The
consultation process involves federal agencies (EPA, Federal Highway
Administration, and Federal Transit Administration), state and local
transportation agencies, state and local air agencies, and
metropolitan planning organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Tennessee's May 23, 2014, SIP revision seeking to
remove the City of Memphis I/M program from the SIP and to incorporate
Shelby County's revised maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS into the SIP.\5\ The maintenance plan includes,

among other things, an emissions reduction measure to offset the
emissions increase expected from the termination of City of Memphis I/M
program as well as revised emission inventory estimates and revised
2006 and 2021 MVEBs based upon new modeling associated with the
termination of the I/M program and the inclusion of the offset measure.
Within 24 months from this final rule, the transportation partners will
need to demonstrate conformity to the new NOX and VOC MVEBs
pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The contingency measures portion of Shelby County's
maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as incorporated
into the SIP, includes the implementation of an I/M program in
Shelby County as a contingency measure should a monitored violation
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS occur in the former Memphis, TN-AR
nonattainment area. Today's final action does not remove the I/M
program from the contingency measures in the SIP-approved
maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 28, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 20, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. Section 52.2220(e), is amended by adding an entry for ``8-Hour Ozone
Maintenance plan for the Shelby County, Tennessee Area'' at the end of
the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                EPA-Approved Tennessee Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable         State
   Name of non-regulatory SIP        geographic or      effective    EPA approval date         Explanation
            provision              nonattainment area      date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Revised 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance  Memphis, Shelby        5/14/2014  4/29/2016 [Insert    Revises the maintenance
 plan for the Shelby County,       County.                           citation of          plan approved by EPA
 Tennessee Area.                                                     publication].        on 1/4/10 to include a
                                                                                revised emissions
                                                                                inventory, revised
                                                                                MVEBs, and an
                                                                                emissions reduction
                                                                                measure to offset the
                                                                                termination of the
                                                                                City of Memphis I/M
                                                                                program.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-10166 Filed 4-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

		     WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

							                                            	  OFFICE OF

				PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

	AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

April 4, 2008

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Revised Risk Assessments to Support the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document for the Wood Preservative Uses of
Chromated Arsenicals (Case 0132)

FROM:	Lance Wormell, Chemical Review Manager

		Regulatory Management Branch 2

Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

TO:		Public Docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0250

	This document presents the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA or
“the Agency”) Case Overview and revised risk assessments for
reregistration Case 0132: Wood Preservative Uses of Chromated
Arsenicals.

Attachments

Attachment 1:

Human Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Effects Assessment for the
Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) Document of Inorganic
Arsenicals and/or Chromium-based Wood Preservatives. March 31, 2008.

Attachment 2:

Occupational Exposure Chapter for Inorganic Arsenicals and
Chromium-based Wood Preservatives in Support of the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document for the Chromated Arsenicals (RED
Case 0132). March 18, 2008.

Attachment 3:

Hazard Identification and Toxicology Endpoint Selection for Inorganic
Arsenic and Inorganic Chromium.  March 12, 2008.

Attachment 4:

Incident Report Associated with Inorganic Arsenical Wood Preservatives.
February 2, 2004.

Attachment 5:

Ecological Hazard and Environmental Risk Assessment RED Chapter for
Inorganic Arsenical Wood Preservatives (CCA).  March 10, 2008.

Attachment 6:

Environmental Fate and Transport Assessment of CCA-C for Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Process.  February 19, 2008.

Attachment 7:

Product Chemistry Science Chapter of CCA-C for Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Process.  February 27, 2008.

I.	CASE OVERVIEW

Case 0132, chromated arsenicals, includes heavy duty chemical wood
preservatives containing some combination of chromium, arsenic, and/or
copper.  These compounds are chromated copper arsenate (CCA), ammoniacal
copper zinc arsenate (ACZA), ammoniacal copper arsenate (ACA), and acid
copper chromate (ACC).  The registered active ingredients assessed in
case 0132 are arsenic acid, arsenic pentoxide, chromic acid, and sodium
dichromate (see Table 1).  The wood preservative chemicals in this case
are colloquially referred to as “CCA” (chromated copper arsenate)
although they also include other chromated arsenical wood preservative
uses. Since the 1940s, wood has been pressure treated with chromated
arsenicals in treatment cylinders, also called retorts, to protect wood
from rotting due to insect and microbial agent attack.

Table 1.  Active Ingredients to be Assessed in the CCA RED

Case Number	CAS Number	PC Code	Empirical Formula	Name Used in RED
Documents	Common Name

0132	7778-39-4	006801	H3AsO4	  Arsenic Acid	Orthoarsenic Acid

(o-Arsenic Acid)

0132	1303-28-2	006802	As2O5	Arsenic Pentoxide	Arsenic Acid

Anhydride

0132	7738-94-5	021101	CrO3	Chromic Acid	Chromic Acid Flake;

Chromium Trioxide

0132	10588-01-9	068304	Na2Cr2O72H2O	Sodium Dichromate	Chromic Acid,
Disodium Salt

Cupric oxide (PC Code 042401), the form of copper used in the treatment
solutions for the wood preservatives containing arsenic and/or chromium,
is also outside the scope of this assessment.  Non-antimicrobial uses of
cupric oxide were addressed in a July 2006 RED (EPA 738-R-06-020).
Antimicrobial uses of cupric oxide will be addressed in a separate RED
document at a future date.  Similarly, zinc oxide (PC Code 088502) –
the form of zinc used as an active ingredient in the formulations of
ACZA – is also outside the scope of this assessment because it has
been addressed in the August 2002 RED for zinc salts (EPA-738-F-92-007).

Currently there are 20 products registered for pressure treatment of
wood intended for above ground and ground contact, as well as in fresh
water and marine environments. Wood treated with these preservatives are
specified for commercial, institutional, and limited residential/farm
construction uses in indoor and outdoor sites.  All 20 products are
Restricted Use Pesticides.

Table 2 presents a summary of the active Manufacturing Use Products
(MUP) and End-Use Products (EUP) considered for reregistration.

Table 2. Active Registrations Considered in Case 0132

Company	EPA Reg. No.	Product Name	MUP	EUP

Osmose, Inc.	3008-66	Arsenic Acid	(1

3008-72	Osmose Arsenic Acid 75%

(1

	3008-17	Osmose K-33-C (72%) Wood Preservative

(2

	3008-34	Osmose K-33 (60%) Wood Preservative

(2

	3008-76	Osmose Technical Grade Cupric Oxide	(

3008-78	Osmose Chromic Acid	(

	Chemical Specialties, Inc.	10465-32	CSI Arsenic Acid 75%

(1

	10465-28	CCA Type-C Wood Preservative 60%

(2

	10465-41	Chromic Acid	(

10465-42	CSI Technical Cupric Oxide	(

	Arch Wood Protection, Inc.	62190-7	Arsenic Acid 75%	(1

62190-27	Chemonite Part A

(3

	62190-8	Wolman Concentrate 72%

(2

	62190-14	Wolmanac Concentrate 60%

(2

	62190-28	Chemonite Part B

(

	62190-29	Chemonite Part C

(

	62190-13	Copper Oxide	(

62190-21	Arch Chromic Acid	(

	Elementis Chromium, LP	75449-1	Sodium Bichromate Liquid	(

75449-2	Chromic Acid Flake	(

	1 As arsenic acid

2 As arsenic pentoxide (arsenic acid anhydride)3 As arsenic acid but
only as part of three part system to result in ACZA

No tolerance currently exists for the wood preservative uses of chomated
arsenicals.

Chemical Information

Type of Pesticide:	Fungicide, Insecticide, Miticide and Molluscicide

Use Sites:		Arsenic and chromium compounds used as wood preservatives
are Restricted Use Pesticides specified for commercial pressure
treatment applications only (i.e., impregnated into forest products
using a vacuum pressure system).  Treated products include terrestrial
uses (e.g., utility poles, cross ties, timbers, posts, lumber, and
groundline-contact building components) and aquatic uses (e.g.,
piles/posts/timbers).  Detailed information on currently approved use
sites is presented in Appendix B of the Occupational Exposure Chapter
for Inorganic Arsenicals and Chromium-based Wood Preservatives in
Support of the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) Document for
the Chromated Arsenicals dated March 18, 2008.

Target Pests:	Invertebrates: (Insects, Miscellaneous Invertebrates, and
Related Organisms.)

		 			- Wood Boring Insects

		- Termites

		- Ants

		- Marine Borers (Limnoria & Teredo)

Plant Pathogenic Organisms: (Bacteria, Fungi, and Other Fouling
Organisms.)

		- Ascomycetes

		- Wood Rot/Decay

		- Wood Rot/Decay Fungi

		- Wood Rot/Decay Fungi (Spores)

		- Dry Rot

		- Brown Rot

		- White Rot

Types of Treatment:  Pressure Treatment; Vacuum Pressure Treatment.

Equipment:  	Pressure Treating Cylinder/Vessel/Retort.

Timing: 		Prior to end use of wood.

Use Rates: 	Detailed use rate information is presented in Appendix B of
the Occupational Exposure Chapter for Inorganic Arsenicals and
Chromium-based Wood Preservatives in Support of the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document for the Chromated Arsenicals dated
March 18, 2008.

B. Estimated Usage of Pesticide

C. Estimated Usage of Pesticide tc \l1 "C. Estimated Usage of Pesticide

This section summarizes the best estimates available for the wood
preservatives containing arsenic and/or chromium. These estimates are
derived from a variety of published and proprietary sources available to
the Agency.

Technical sources of Arsenic used as wood preservatives are derived from
Arsenic trioxide imported principally from China to produce Arsenic acid
for formulation of CCA and related arsenicals.  About 90% of all arsenic
consumed is for the production of wood preservatives (U.S. Geological
Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries, 1997).  Statistics indicate that
wood preservatives make up 72% of the Chromic acid market (Chemical
Market Reporter, 2000).

According to EPA sources, the most common of the waterborne
preservatives is CCA (as Type C containing 47.5% chromium, 18.5% copper,
and 34% arsenic) which by the mid-1990's represented 90% of the U.S.
waterborne preservatives market.  Market statistics for 2002 indicated
that there were between 300 and 350 wood treatment plants in the US that
used CCA.  The U.S. consumed approximately 110 million pounds of CCA in
2002 (EPA proprietary data and Vlosky 2006).  In 2002 the total volume
of CCA-treated wood products was estimated at approximately 350 million
cubic feet.

C.	Regulatory History

Formulated wood preservative products containing arsenic and/or chromium
compounds have been registered since the 1940's when pesticides were
under the regulatory purview of the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and subsequently have been regulated by EPA under
FIFRA since the 1970s.  The wood preservative pesticides containing
arsenic and/or chromium compounds are registered as technical
source/manufacturing-use products or formulated industrial end-use
product concentrates or mixtures intended for aqueous dilution to form
CCA, ACZA, ACA and ACC treatment solutions.

Case 0132 was previously identified as “Chromated Arsenicals” in
OPP’s Spring 1998 “Status of Pesticides in Registration,
Reregistration, and Special Review (Rainbow Report)” and included four
additional active ingredients which have since been cancelled and
therefore are not eligible for reregistration and are not further
addressed in this document: sodium arsenate (PC Code 013505) cancelled
2004, potassium dichromate (PC Code 068302) cancelled 2000, sodium
pyroarsenate (PC Code 013401), cancelled 1991, sodium chromate (PC Code
068303)  cancelled 1987, and ammonium arsenate (PC Code 013601)
cancelled 1987.

One additional arsenic compound, arsenic trioxide (PC Code 007001), is
currently registered as an insecticide for use in ant bait products.
This compound is does not have any wood preservative use and therefore
is not within the scope of this assessment. The Agency will complete a
separate reregistration eligibility decision for this chemical.

The Agency required registrants to submit studies in response to
Registration Standards issued in 1986 and 1988 (PB87-114088, and
PB89-102842) for chromated arsenical compounds. Data from submitted
studies along with more recent industry-sponsored studies were used to
characterize the risks associated with the uses described in this
document.  Additional data required to be eligible reregistration,
including any previously required and unfulfilled data, will be
presented in the RED document.

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71804-71805]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001]

Request for Notification From Industry Organizations Interested
in Participating in the Selection Process for Nonvoting Industry
Representatives and Request for Nominations for Nonvoting Industry
Representatives on the Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory
Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any
industry organization interested in participating in the selection of
nonvoting industry representatives to serve on the Device Good
Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee (DGMPAC) in the Center for
Devices and Radiological Health notify FDA in writing. A nominee may
either be self-nominated or nominated by an organization to serve as a
nonvoting industry representative. Nominations will be accepted for
current vacancies effective with this notice.

DATES: Any industry organizations interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting members to represent industry
interests must send a letter stating that interest to FDA by January 3,
2013, for the vacancies listed in this notice. Concurrently, nomination
materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA by January
3, 2013.

ADDRESSES: All letters of interest and nominations should be submitted
in writing to Margaret J. Ames (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret J. Ames, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5234, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-
5960<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 520 of the Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360j), as amended, provides that the DGMPAC
shall be composed of two representatives of interests of the device
manufacturing industry. The Agency is requesting nominations for
nonvoting industry representatives on the DGMPAC.

I. Function of DGMPAC

    Review proposed regulations issuance regarding good manufacturing
practices governing the methods used in, and the facilities and
controls used for manufacture, packaging, storage, installation, and
servicing of devices, and make recommendations regarding the
feasibility and reasonableness of those proposed regulations. The
committee also reviews and makes recommendations on proposed guidelines
developed to assist the medical device industry in meeting the good
manufacturing practice requirements, and provides advice with regard to
any petition submitted by a manufacturer for an exemption or variance
from good manufacturing practice regulations.

II. Qualifications

    Persons nominated for the DGMPAC should possess appropriate
qualifications to understand and contribute to the committee's work as
described in the committee's function.

III. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of publication of
this document (see DATES). Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will send
a letter to each organization that has expressed an interest, attaching
a complete list of all such organizations, and a list of all nominees
along with their current resumes. The letter will also state that it is
the responsibility of the interested organizations to confer with one
another and to select a candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of
the FDA letter, to serve as the nonvoting member to represent industry
interests for a particular committee. The interested organizations are
not bound by the list of nominees in selecting a candidate. However, if
no individual is selected within the 60 days, the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs will select the nonvoting member to represent industry
interests.

IV. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self nominate and/or an organization may nominate
one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry
representative. Contact information, a current curriculum vitae, and
the name of the committee of interest should be sent to the FDA contact
person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of
publication of this document (see DATES). FDA will forward all
nominations to the organizations expressing interest in participating
in the selection process for the committee. (Persons who nominate
themselves as nonvoting industry representatives will not participate
in the selection process).
    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all
racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities
on its advisory committees, and therefore encourages nominations of
appropriately qualified candidates from these groups. Specifically, in
this document, nominations for nonvoting representatives of industry
interests are encouraged from device manufacturing industry.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14 relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: November 28, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-29165 Filed 12-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P