[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 221 (Thursday, November 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68200-68202]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0201]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
12 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective November 16, 2012. Comments must be
received on or before December 17, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [FMCSA-2010-0201], using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the

docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 12 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 12 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

James B. Bierschbach (MN)
John P. Catalano (NJ)
Tyron O. Friese (MN)
Mark E. Lapp (PA)
David S. Matheny (WA)
Frank G. Merrill (OK)
Shannon L. Puckett (KY)
Leo S. Ruiz, Jr. (CA)
Ronald B. Shafer (MI)
Thomas M. Sharp (ME)
Kenneth M. Sova (IN)
Earl L. White, Jr. (NH)
    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 12 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (75 FR 54958; 75 FR 70078). Each of these 12 applicants
has requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence
showing that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the
requirement specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision
impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety
while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two
years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
requirements. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting
each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate
commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for
each renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by December 17, 2012.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 12 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: November 8, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-27697 Filed 11-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 39 (Wednesday, March 1, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12177-12180]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03985]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[USCG-2014-1037]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Eastport Breakwater Terminal, Eastport, Maine

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; change in effective period.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending the effective period of a safety
zone in the vicinity of the Eastport Breakwater Terminal, Eastport,
Maine. This safety zone was established on January 9, 2015 (80 FR
1344). This rule will extend the

effective period of the existing temporary final rule from January 30,
2017 until October 1, 2017. This rule will continue to restrict vessels
from approaching within 100 yards of the eastern face of the Eastport
Breakwater Terminal without authorization from the Captain of the Port
(COTP) Sector Northern New England. This safety zone continues to be
necessary due to the ongoing repairs to the breakwater following a
partial collapse of the structure on December 4, 2014.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from March 1, 2017
until October 1, 2017. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from the date the rule was signed, January 17, 2017, until
March 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2014-1037 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MSTC Chris Bains at Sector Northern New England;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TFR Temporary Final Rule
U.S.C. United States Code
USCG United States Coast Guard

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On January 9, 2015 we published a TFR entitled ``Safety Zone:
Eastport Breakwater Terminal, Eastport, Maine'' in the Federal Register
(80 FR 1344). The effective period for this rule was from December 12,
2014 until on January 30, 2017. The Coast Guard is now extending the
effective period of the safety zone in the vicinity of the Eastport
Breakwater Terminal, Eastport, Maine until October 1, 2017.
    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 NPRM with respect to this rule
because publishing an NPRM would be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest. The construction company was late in requesting an
extension of the safety zone beyond the original construction
completion date of January 30, 2017. As a result, the delay inherent in
the NPRM process is contrary to the public interest and impracticable,
as immediate action is needed to extend this safety zone in order to
protect ports, waterways, and the maritime public.
    We are issuing this rule, and 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 for the reasons
discussed above. For the same reasons discussed in the preceding
paragraph, the Coast Guard finds that waiting 30 days to make this rule
effective would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The legal basis for the temporary rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231. On
December 4, 2014, the southwest portion of the Eastport Breakwater
Terminal collapsed into the protected harbor shoreward of the
Breakwater in Eastport, Maine. The catastrophic collapse resulted in
several vessels being damaged or destroyed, and left the remaining
breakwater structure at risk of further collapse. This safety zone was
established based on the analysis of an independent engineering firm
that determined the remaining portion of the breakwater did not have
the required lateral strength, nor was it designed to hold the weight
of the forces thrust upon it. As a result, the remaining portion of the
breakwater could have collapsed without warning. The COTP determined
that a safety zone was necessary to protect the public from the safety
hazards created by this emergency and the construction of a replacement
breakwater.
    In January 2015, contractors began working of the construction of a
replacement breakwater. The COTP has determined that potential hazards
associated with emergency repairs to the breakwater continue to be a
safety concern. Construction of the replacement breakwater was
originally scheduled to be completed by January 30, 2017. Significant
delays in construction have resulted in an anticipated completion date
in August 2017. To ensure the continued protection of personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the
safety zone, the Coast Guard is extending the effective period of the
safety zone in the vicinity of the Eastport Breakwater Terminal to
October 1, 2017.

IV. Discussion of Rule

    For the reasons discussed above, the COTP is extending the period
of a temporary safety zone in Eastport Harbor, ME. The safety zone will
be bound inside an area within 4 points along the breakwater at
44[deg]54'26'' N., 066[deg]59'00'' W., 44[deg]54'25'' N.,
066[deg]58'54'' W., 44[deg]54'19'' N., 066[deg]58'55'' W.,
44[deg]54'19'' N., 066[deg]59'01'' W. No vessel may enter, transit,
moor, or anchor within this safety zone unless authorized by the COTP
or designated representative.
    The COTP will cause public notifications to be made by all
appropriate means including but not limited to Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.

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. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    The Coast Guard determined that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action for the following reasons: The safety zone will be
relatively short in duration and it covers only a small portion of the
navigable waterways. Vessels may transit the navigable waterway outside
of the safety zone. Moreover, vessels desiring entry into the safety
zone may be authorized to do so by the COTP or designated
representative. Advanced public notifications will also be made to the
local maritime community by Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

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 will 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
contact 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

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
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 the extension of the effective period of a safety zone
for ten months. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact 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:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-1037 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-1037  Safety Zone: Eastport Breakwater Terminal,
Eastport, Maine.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, within the following position(s)
44[deg]54'26'' N., 066[deg]59'00'' W., 44[deg]54'25'' N.,
066[deg]58'54'' W., 44[deg]54'19'' N., 066[deg]58'55'' W.,
44[deg]54'19'' N., 066[deg]59'01'' W., (NAD). Friar Roads, Eastport,
Maine. All positions are approximate.
    (b) Effective Period. This rule is effective and enforced from 3:00
p.m. on January 30, 2017 to 11:59 p.m. October 1, 2017.
    (c) Notification. Coast Guard Sector Northern New England will give
actual notice to mariners for the purpose of enforcement of this
temporary safety zone. Also, Sector Northern New England will notify
the public to the greatest extent possible of any period in which the
Coast Guard will suspend enforcement of this safety zone.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 apply.
    (2) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of
this part, entry into or movement within this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated
representatives.
    (3) The ``designated representative'' is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The designated representative
may be on board a Coast Guard vessel, or on board a federal, state, or
local agency vessel that is authorized to act in support of the Coast
Guard.

    (4) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel or his
designated representatives by siren, radio, flashing light or other
means, the operator of the vessel shall proceed as directed.
    (5) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within this
safety zone shall contact the Captain of the Port or his designated
representatives via VHF channel 16 to obtain permission to do so.

    Dated: January 17, 2017.
M.A. Baroody,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Northern New England.
[FR Doc. 2017-03985 Filed 2-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 182 (Thursday, September 19, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57542-57545]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22784]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0789; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-127-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede airworthiness directive (AD) 2012-12-
08, which applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 777-200 and -300
series airplanes. AD 2012-12-08 requires an inspection for the part
number of the fuse pin, and replacement of the pin if necessary. Since
we issued AD 2012-12-08, we have determined that additional airplanes
may be subject to the identified unsafe condition. This proposed AD
would retain the actions required by AD 2012-12-08 and add airplanes to
the applicability. We are proposing this AD to prevent structural
damage to the side and drag brace lock assemblies, which could result
in

landing gear collapse during touchdown, rollout, or taxi.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 4,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melanie Violette, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2013-0789;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-127-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On June 7, 2012, we issued AD 2012-12-08, Amendment 39-17088 (77 FR
37781, June 25, 2012) (``AD 2012-12-08''), for certain The Boeing
Company Model 777-200 and -300 series airplanes. (A correction of AD
2012-12-08 was published in the Federal Register on July 20, 2012 (77
FR 42625)). AD 2012-12-08 requires an inspection for the part number of
the fuse pin, and replacement of the pin if necessary. AD 2012-12-08
resulted from reports of cracked retract actuator fuse pins that could
fail earlier than the previously determined safe life limit of the
pins. A fractured retract actuator fuse pin can cause the main landing
gear (MLG) to extend without restriction and attempt to lock into
position under high dynamic loads. We issued AD 2012-12-08 to prevent
structural damage to the side and drag brace lock assemblies, which
could result in landing gear collapse during touchdown, rollout, or
taxi.

Actions Since AD 2012-12-08 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2012-12-08, it was discovered that an
interchangeability error in the Boeing 777 Illustrated Parts Catalog
(IPC) permitted replacing the new pin (-3) with the old pin (-1).
Therefore, we have determined that additional airplanes may be subject
to the identified unsafe condition.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083,
Revision 2, dated May 2, 2013. For information on the procedures and
compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2013-0789.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the
requirements of AD 2012-12-08, this proposed AD would retain all
requirements of AD 2012-12-08. Those requirements are referenced in the
service information identified previously, which, in turn, is
referenced in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD. This proposed AD would
add airplanes to the applicability statement of AD 2012-12-08.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 129 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                        Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection........................  5 work-hours x $85 per                 $0             $425          $54,825
                                     hour = $425.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                        Labor cost               Parts cost            Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pin Replacement......................  1 work-hour x $85 per    $700 per pin...........  $785 per pin.
                                        hour = $85 per pin.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2012-12-08, Amendment 39-17088 (77 FR 37781, June 25, 2012; corrected
July 20, 2012 (77 FR 42625)), and adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2013-0789; Directorate Identifier
2013-NM-127-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November 4,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2012-12-08, Amendment 39-17088 (77 FR
37781, June 25, 2012; corrected July 20, 2012 (77 FR 42625)).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200 and -300
series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083, Revision 2,
dated May 2, 2013.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that additional
airplanes may be subject to the identified unsafe condition. We are
issuing this AD to prevent structural damage to the side and drag
brace lock assemblies, which could result in landing gear collapse
during touchdown, rollout, or taxi.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Part Number Inspection and Replacement

    Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD, at the
applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083, Revision 2,
dated May 2, 2013: Inspect the retract actuator fuse pin to
determine the part number, and replace any retract actuator fuse pin
having part number 112W1769-1, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-
0083, Revision 2, dated May 2, 2013. A review of airplane
maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the
part number of the retract actuator fuse pin can be conclusively
determined from that review. Do all applicable replacements at the
applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083, Revision 2,
dated May 2, 2013.

(h) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083,
Revision 2, dated May 2, 2013, specifies a compliance time ``after
the Revision 2 date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    (1) For airplanes identified in Group 1 of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083, Revision 2, dated May 2,
2013: As of July 30, 2012 (the effective date of AD 2012-12-08,
Amendment 39-17088 (77 FR 37781, June 25, 2012; corrected July 20,
2012 (77 FR 42625)), no person may install a retract actuator fuse
pin having part number 112W1769-1 on any airplane.
    (2) For airplanes identified in Group 2 of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083, Revision 2, dated May 2,
2013: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
retract actuator fuse pin having part number 112W1769-1 on any
airplane.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of AD 2012-12-08, Amendment 39-17088 (77 FR 37781,
June 25, 2012; corrected July 20, 2012 (77 FR 42625)) using Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0083, dated February 5,
2009, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777-32-0083, Revision 1, dated February 17, 2011, which is
not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector

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

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Melanie
Violette, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 13, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-22784 Filed 9-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 229)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 73984-73987]
[DOCID:fr30no10-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 1, 14, and 17

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0560]
RIN 0910-AG55

Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug
Administration

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend
certain of its general regulations to include tobacco products, where
appropriate, in light of FDA's authority to regulate these products
under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco
Control Act). With these amendments, tobacco products will be subject
to the same general requirements that apply to other FDA-regulated
products. This proposed rule is a companion document to the direct
final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments by February 14,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2010-
N-0560 and/or RIN number 0910-AG55, by any of the following methods:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:
     FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and docket number and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. All comments received may be posted without change to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. For additional information on submitting comments, see the
``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerie A. Voss, Center for Tobacco
Products, Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., rm. 240G,
Rockville, MD 20850, 1-877-CTP-1373<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Why is this rule being issued as a companion proposed rule?

    This proposed rule is a companion to the direct final rule
regarding amendments to general regulations that is published in the
final rules section of this issue of the Federal Register. The direct
final rule and this companion proposed rule are identical. This
companion proposed rule provides the procedural framework to finalize
the rule in the event that the direct final rule receives any
significant adverse comment and is withdrawn. We are publishing the
direct final rule because the rule is noncontroversial, and we do not
anticipate that it will receive any significant adverse comments. If no
significant adverse comment is received in response to the direct final
rule, no further action will be taken related to this proposed rule.
Instead, we will publish a confirmation document within 30 days after
the comment period ends confirming when the direct final rule will go
into effect.
    If we receive any significant adverse comment regarding the direct
final rule, we will withdraw the direct final rule within 30 days after
the comment period ends and proceed to respond to all of the comments
under this companion proposed rule using usual notice-and-comment
rulemaking procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 553). The comment period for this companion proposed rule runs
concurrently with the direct final rule's comment period. Any comments
received under this companion proposed rule will also be considered as
comments regarding the direct final rule.
    A significant adverse comment is defined as a comment that explains
why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's
underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable
without a change. In determining whether an adverse comment is
significant and warrants terminating a direct final rulemaking, we will
consider whether the comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant
a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process in accordance
with the APA. Comments that are frivolous, insubstantial, or outside
the scope of the rule will not be considered significant or adverse
under this procedure. For example, a comment recommending an additional
change to the rule will not be considered a significant adverse
comment, unless the comment states why the rule would be ineffective
without the additional change. In addition, if a significant adverse
comment applies to part of a rule and that part can be severed from the
remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those parts of the rule
that are not the subject of a significant adverse comment.
    You can find additional information about FDA's direct final
rulemaking procedures in the guidance document entitled ``Guidance for
FDA and Industry: Direct Final Rule Procedures'' (62 FR 62466, November
21, 1997). This guidance document may be accessed at http://
www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm125166.htm.

II. What is the background of the rule?

    The Tobacco Control Act was enacted on June 22, 2009, amending the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) and providing FDA
with the authority to regulate tobacco products (Pub. L. 11-31; 123
Stat. 1776). In enacting the Tobacco Control Act, Congress sought to
ensure that FDA had authority to provide effective oversight and to
impose appropriate regulatory controls on tobacco products. In order to
effectuate these purposes, FDA is amending several provisions of its
general regulations to reflect the Agency's new authority and mandate
regarding tobacco products.

III. What does this companion proposed rule do?

    FDA proposes to make the following amendments to its existing
general regulations, reflecting the Agency's authority over tobacco
products under the Tobacco Control Act:
    1. Revising 21 CFR 1.1(b) to ensure the applicability of
definitions contained in the Tobacco Control Act;
    2. Removing the reference to ``package'' in 21 CFR 1.1(c), as this
definition now also is covered by the Tobacco Control Act and is no
longer provided solely by the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act;
    3. Revising 21 CFR 1.20 to exclude from this definition of
``package'' the

term ``package'' as defined in section 900(13) of the Tobacco Control
Act (21 U.S.C. 387q(13));
    4. Adding paragraph (f) to 21 CFR 14.55 to identify the Tobacco
Products Scientific Advisory Committee as a permanent statutory
advisory committee; and
    5. Adding paragraph (j) to 21 CFR 17.1 and revising 21 CFR 17.2 to
reflect FDA's authority to impose civil monetary penalties on tobacco-
related violations.

IV. What is the legal authority for this proposed rule?

    FDA is issuing this proposed rule under provisions of the FD&C Act,
as amended by the Tobacco Control Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 333, 387,
387a, and 387q).

V. What is the environmental impact of this proposed rule?

    The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) and (i) that this
action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.

VI. What is the economic impact of this proposed rule?

    FDA has examined the impacts of the proposed rule under Executive
Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive
Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Agency believes that
this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under the
Executive order.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because the proposed rule would not impose any new
requirements on tobacco product manufacturers, retailers, or
distributors, the Agency proposes to certify that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment
of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $135 million, using the most current (2009) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not expect this
proposed rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    FDA concludes that the regulatory revisions and amendments
identified in this document are not subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget because they do not constitute a ``collection of
information'' under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

VIII. What are the federalism impacts of this proposed rule?

    FDA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that
the proposed rule, if finalized, would not contain policies that would
have substantial direct effects 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.
Accordingly, the Agency has concluded that the proposed rule does not
contain policies that have federalism implications as defined in the
Executive order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact
statement is not required.

IX. How do you submit comments on this proposed rule?

    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

List of Subjects

21 CFR Part 1

    Cosmetics, Drugs, Exports, Food labeling, Imports, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

21 CFR Part 14

    Administrative practice and procedure, Advisory committees, Color
additives, Drugs, Radiation protection.

21 CFR Part 17

    Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, it is
proposed that 21 CFR parts 1, 14, and 17 be amended to read as follows:

PART 1--GENERAL ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 1 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 1453, 1454, 1455; 19 U.S.C. 1490, 1491; 21
U.S.C. 321, 331, 333, 334, 335a, 343, 350c, 350d, 352, 355, 360b,
362, 371, 374, 381, 382, 387, 387a, 393; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 243,
262, 264.

    2. In Sec.  1.1 revise paragraph (b); and in the first sentence of
paragraph (c), remove ``package in Sec.  1.20 and of'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  1.1  General.

* * * * *
    (b) The definitions and interpretations of terms contained in
sections 201 and 900 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 321 and 387) shall be applicable also to such terms when used in
regulations promulgated under that act.
    3. Amend Sec.  1.20 by revising the introductory text to read as
follows:

Sec.  1.20  Presence of mandatory label information.

    Except as otherwise provided by section 900(13) of the Family
Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (21 U.S.C. 387(13)) defining
``package,'' the term package means any container or wrapping in which
any food, drug, device, or cosmetic is enclosed for use in the delivery
or display of such commodities to retail purchasers, but does not
include:
* * * * *

PART 14--PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE A PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE

    4. The authority citation for part 14 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. App. 2; 15 U.S.C. 1451-1461, 21 U.S.C. 41-
50, 141-149, 321-394, 467f, 679, 821, 1034; 28 U.S.C. 2112; 42
U.S.C. 201, 262, 263b, 264; Pub. L. 107-109; Pub. L. 108-155

    5. Amend Sec.  14.55 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  14.55  Termination of advisory committees.

* * * * *
    (f) The Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee is a
permanent statutory advisory committee established by section 917 of
the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (21 U.S.C. 387q)
(Pub. L. 111-31) and is not subject to termination and renewal under
paragraph (a) of this section.

PART 17--CIVIL MONEY PENALTIES HEARINGS

    6. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 331, 333, 337, 351, 352, 355, 360, 360c,
360f, 360i, 360j, 371; 42 U.S.C. 262, 263b, 300aa-28; 5 U.S.C. 554,
555, 556, 557.

    7. Amend Sec.  17.1 by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:

Sec.  17.1  Scope.

* * * * *
    (j) Section 303(f) of the act authorizing civil money penalties for
any person who violates a requirement of the Family Smoking Prevention
and Tobacco Control Act which relates to tobacco products.
    8. Revise Sec.  17.2 to read as follows:

Sec.  17.2  Maximum penalty amounts.

    The following table shows maximum civil monetary penalties
associated with the statutory provisions authorizing civil monetary
penalties under the act or the Public Health Service Act.

          Civil Monetary Penalties Authorities Administered by FDA and Adjusted Maximum Penalty Amounts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Former
                                 maximum                       Date of last
        U.S.C. section           penalty       Assessment     penalty figure    Adjusted maximum penalty amount
                               amount  (in       method        or adjustment             (in dollars)
                               dollars)\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    21 U.S.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
333(b)(2)(A).................       55,000  For each of the             2008  60,000.
                                             first two
                                             violations in
                                             any 10-year
                                             period.
333(b)(2)(B).................    1,100,000  For each                    2008  1,200,000.
                                             violation after
                                             the second
                                             conviction in
                                             any 10-year
                                             period.
333(b)(3)....................      110,000  Per violation...            2008  120,000.
333(f)(1)(A).................       16,500  Per violation...            2008  16,500 (not adjusted).
333(f)(1)(A).................    1,100,000  For the                     2008  1,200,000.
                                             aggregate of
                                             violations.
333(f)(2)(A).................       55,000  Per individual..            2008  60,000.
333(f)(2)(A).................      275,000  Per ``any other             2008  300,000.
                                             person''.
333(f)(2)(A).................      550,000  For all                     2008  600,000.
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(3)(A).................       10,000  For all                     2007  10,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(3)(B).................       10,000  For each day the            2007  10,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation is
                                             not corrected
                                             after a 30-day
                                             period
                                             following
                                             notification
                                             until the
                                             violation is
                                             corrected.
333(f)(4)(A)(i)..............      250,000  Per violation...            2007  250,000 (not adjusted).
333(f)(4)(A)(i)..............    1,000,000  For all                     2007  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(4)(A)(ii).............      250,000  For the first 30-           2007  250,000 (not adjusted).
                                             day period (or
                                             any portion
                                             thereof) of
                                             continued
                                             violation
                                             following
                                             notification.
333(f)(4)(A)(ii).............    1,000,000  For any 30-day              2007  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             period, where
                                             the amount
                                             doubles for
                                             every 30-day
                                             period of
                                             continued
                                             violation after
                                             the first 30-
                                             day period.
333(f)(4)(A)(ii).............   10,000,000  For all                     2007  10,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(9)(A).................      \1\ N/A  Per violation...            2009  15,000 (not adjusted).
333(f)(9)(A).................          N/A  For all                     2009  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(9)(B)(i)(I)...........          N/A  Per violation...            2009  250,000 (not adjusted).
333(f)(9)(B)(i)(I)...........          N/A  For all                     2009  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(9)(B)(i)(II)..........          N/A  For the first 30-           2009  250,000 (not adjusted).
                                             day period (or
                                             any portion
                                             thereof) of
                                             continued
                                             violation
                                             following
                                             notification.
333(f)(9)(B)(i)(II)..........          N/A  For any 30-day              2009  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             period, where
                                             the amount
                                             doubled for
                                             every 30-day
                                             period of
                                             continued
                                             violation after
                                             the first 30-
                                             day period.
333(f)(9)(B)(i)(II)..........          N/A  For all                     2009  10,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(9)(B)(ii)(I)..........          N/A  Per violation...            2009  250,000 (not adjusted).
333(f)(9)(B)(ii)(I)..........          N/A  For all                     2009  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(f)(9)(B)(ii)(II).........          N/A  For the first 30-           2009  250,000 (not adjusted).
                                             day period (or
                                             any portion
                                             thereof) of
                                             continued
                                             violation
                                             following
                                             notification.
333(f)(9)(B)(ii)(II).........          N/A  For any 30-day              2009  1,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             period, where
                                             the amount
                                             doubled for
                                             every 30-day
                                             period of
                                             continued
                                             violation after
                                             the first 30-
                                             day period.
333(f)(9)(B)(ii)(II).........          N/A  For all                     2009  10,000,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violations
                                             adjudicated in
                                             a single
                                             proceeding.
333(g)(1)....................      250,000  For the first               2007  250,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation in
                                             any 3-year
                                             period.
333(g)(1)....................      500,000  For each                    2007  500,000 (not adjusted).
                                             subsequent
                                             violation in
                                             any 3-year
                                             period.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the second              2009  250 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             (following a
                                             first violation
                                             with warning)
                                             within a 12-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer with
                                             an approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the third               2009  500 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 24-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer with
                                             an approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the fourth              2009  2,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 24-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer with
                                             an approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the fifth               2009  5,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 36-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer with
                                             an approved
                                             training
                                             program.

333 note.....................          N/A  For the six or              2009  10,000 (not adjusted).
                                             subsequent
                                             violation
                                             within a 48-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer with
                                             an approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the first               2009  250 (not adjusted).
                                             violation by a
                                             retailer
                                             without an
                                             approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the second              2009  500 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 12-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer
                                             without an
                                             approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the third               2009  1,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 24-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer
                                             without an
                                             approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the fourth              2009  2,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 24-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer
                                             without an
                                             approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the fifth               2009  5,000 (not adjusted).
                                             violation
                                             within a 36-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer
                                             without an
                                             approved
                                             training
                                             program.
333 note.....................          N/A  For the six or              2009  10,000 (not adjusted).
                                             subsequent
                                             violation
                                             within a 48-
                                             month period by
                                             a retailer
                                             without an
                                             approved
                                             training
                                             program.
335b(a)......................      275,000  Per violation               2008  300,000.
                                             for an
                                             individual.
335b(a)......................    1,100,000  Per violation               2008  1,200,000.
                                             for ``any other
                                             person''.
360pp(b)(1)..................        1,100  Per violation               2008  1,100 (not adjusted).
                                             per person.
360pp(b)(1)..................      330,000  For any related             2008  355,000.
                                             series of
                                             violations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    42 U.S.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
263b(h)(3)...................       11,000  Per violation...            2008  11,000 (not adjusted).
300aa-28(b)(1)...............      110,000  Per occurrence..            2008  120,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Maximum penalties assessed under The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act do not have a
  ``former maximum penalty.''

    Dated: November 23, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-30040 Filed 11-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 241 (Monday, December 16, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76045-76047]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29055]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0879; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-30-AD;
Amendment 39-17694; AD 2013-24-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for General
Electric Company (GE) GE90-110B1 and GE90-115B turbofan engines with
certain high pressure compressor (HPC) rotor stage 2-5 spools
installed. This AD requires removing these spools from service at times
determined by a drawdown plan. This AD was prompted by reports of
cracks in HPC rotor stage 2-5 spool aft spacer arms. We are issuing
this AD to prevent failure of a critical life-limited rotating engine
part, which could result in an uncontained engine failure and damage to
the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective December 31, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 31,
2013.
    We must receive comments on this AD by January 30, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact General
Electric Company, GE Aviation, Room 285, 1 Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH
45215, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view this
service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0879; 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 Office (phone:
800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tomasz Rakowski, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-
7735; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We received reports from GE of cracks in the aft spacer arms of
several HPC rotor stage 2-5 spools, which occurred before the spools
reached their published cyclic life limit. The cracks developed under
the seal teeth coating, so they were undetectable by maintenance
inspections. This AD requires removal of these spools at a reduced
cyclic life threshold, earlier than the published cyclic life limit.
Because some engines have spools installed that already exceed the
reduced cyclic life threshold, this AD provides a drawdown program to
remove the spools within risk guidelines without grounding airplanes.
This AD also prohibits spare spools that exceed the reduced cyclic life
threshold from re-entering service. This AD is intended to prevent HPC
rotor stage 2-5 spool cracks from growing and causing the spool to
separate. This condition, if not corrected, could result in failure of
a critical life-limited rotating engine part, which could result in an
uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed GE Service Bulletin (SB) No. GE90-100 S/B 72-0499,
dated August 14, 2013. The SB lists part serial numbers affected by
this AD.

FAA's Determination

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires removing certain HPC rotor stage 2-5 spools from
service at times determined by a drawdown plan outlined in the
paragraph (f) of the compliance section of this AD.

Differences Between the AD and the Service Information

    The schedule for removal of HPC rotor spools in this AD differs
from that of GE SB GE90-100 S/B 72-0499, dated August 14, 2013. This AD
uses cycles to determine compliance time rather than calendar dates,
which are used in the SB, because the unsafe condition is driven by
cycles rather than time.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because of
the short compliance times for HPC rotor stage 2-5 spools that are at
or over the removal thresholds. Therefore, we find that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and that good
cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2013-0879 and
Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-30-AD at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect two GE90 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry. There is no additional labor cost to comply
with this AD. We estimate that the cost of a replacement HPC rotor
stage 2-5 spool prorated part is $192,800. Based on these figures, we
estimate the total cost of this AD to U.S. operators to be $385,600.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2013-24-17 General Electric Company: Amendment 39-17694; Docket No.
FAA-2013-0879; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-30-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 31, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to General Electric Company (GE) GE90-110B1 and
GE90-115B turbofan engines with high pressure compressor (HPC) rotor
stage 2-5 spools, part numbers (P/Ns) 351-103-106-0, 351-103-107-0,
351-103-141-0, 351-103-142-0, 351-103-144-0, 351-103-145-0, 351-103-
148-0, 351-103-149-0, and 351-103-151-0, with spool serial numbers
listed in paragraph 4, Appendix A of GE Service Bulletin (SB) No.
GE90-100 S/B 72-0499, dated August 14, 2013.

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in HPC rotor stage 2-5
spool aft spacer arms. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
a critical life-limited rotating engine part, which could result in
an uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) Parts Removal

    Remove from service HPC rotor stage 2-5 spools with serial
numbers listed in paragraph 4, Appendix A of GE SB No. GE90-100 S/B
72-0499, dated August 14, 2013, as follows:
    (1) For spools with fewer than 4,500 cycles since new (CSN) on
the effective date of this AD, before exceeding 5,000 CSN.
    (2) For spools with 4,500 CSN or more but fewer than 5,200 CSN
on the effective date of this AD, within an additional 500 cycles in
service (CIS) after the effective date of this AD but not to exceed
5,500 CSN.
    (3) For spools with 5,200 CSN or more but fewer than 5,600 CSN
on the effective date of this AD, within an additional 300 CIS after
the effective date of this AD but not to exceed 5,800 CSN.
    (4) For spools with 5,600 CSN or more but fewer than 5,800 CSN
on the effective date of this AD, within an additional 200 CIS after
the effective date of this AD but not to exceed 5,850 CSN.
    (5) For spools with 5,800 CSN or more but fewer than 6,000 CSN
on the effective date of this AD, within an additional 50 CIS after
the effective date of this AD but not to exceed 6,000 CSN.
    (6) For spools with 6,000 CSN or more on the effective date of
this AD, before the next flight.
    (7) For spools that are not installed on the effective date of
this AD and are subsequently installed onto any engine after the
effective date of this AD, before exceeding 5,000 CSN.

(g) Prohibition Statement

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install or re-
install onto any engine any HPC rotor stage 2-5 spool with a serial
number listed in paragraph 4, Appendix A of GE SB No. GE90-100 S/B
72-0499, dated August 14, 2013, that exceeds 5,000 CSN.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve
alternative methods of compliance for this AD. Use the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request.

(i) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Tomasz Rakowski,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) General Electric Company (GE) Service Bulletin No. GE90-100
S/B 72-0499, dated August 14, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For GE service information identified in this AD, contact
General Electric Company, GE Aviation, Room 285, 1 Neumann Way,
Cincinnati, OH 45215, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information 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 Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 27, 2013.
Carlos A. Pestana,
Acting Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-29055 Filed 12-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 241 (Monday, December 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71934-71935]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27498]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-218, OMB Control No. 3235-0242]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 206(4)-3

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.

    Rule 206(4)-3 (17 CFR 275.206(4)-3) under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940, which is entitled ``Cash Payments for Client
Solicitations,'' provides restrictions on cash payments for client
solicitations. The rule requires that an adviser pay all solicitors'
fees pursuant to a written agreement. When an adviser will provide only
impersonal advisory services to the prospective client, the rule
imposes no disclosure requirements. When the solicitor is affiliated
with the adviser and the adviser will provide individualized advisory
services to the prospective client, the solicitor must, at the time of
the solicitation or referral, indicate to the prospective client that
he is affiliated with the adviser. When the solicitor is not affiliated
with the adviser and the adviser will provide individualized advisory
services to the prospective client, the solicitor must, at the time of
the solicitation or referral, provide the prospective client with a
copy of the adviser's brochure and a disclosure document containing
information specified in rule 206(4)-3.
    Amendments to rule 206(4)-3, adopted in 2010 in connection with
rule 206(4)-5, specify that solicitation activities involving a
government entity, as defined in rule 206(4)-5, are subject to the
additional limitations of rule 206(4)-5. In December 2020, the
Commission adopted a single marketing rule which merged certain
existing provisions of rule 206(4)-3 into amendments to rule 206(4)-1.
In light of these 2020 amendments, the Commission has rescinded rule
206(4)-3, effective November 2, 2022. Notwithstanding the rescission of
rule 206(4)-3, the Office of Management and Budget (the ``OMB'') has
requested that the Commission submit documents in connection with the
extension of rule 206(4)-3 for the period covering February 28, 2022 to
November 2, 2022, the effective date of the discontinuance of rule
206(4)-3.
    To the extent that the OMB has requested this collection of
information, the information rule 206(4)-3 requires is necessary to
inform advisory clients about the nature of the solicitor's financial
interest in the recommendation so the prospective clients may consider
the solicitor's potential bias, and to protect clients against
solicitation activities being carried out in a manner inconsistent with
the adviser's fiduciary duty to clients. Rule 206(4)-3 is applicable to
all Commission-registered investment advisers. The Commission believes
that approximately 3,829 of these advisers have cash referral fee
arrangements. The rule requires approximately 7.04 burden hours per
year per adviser and results in a total of approximately 26,956 total
burden hours (7.04 x 3,829) for all advisers.
    Please direct your written comments within 60 days to David Bottom,
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
C/O John R. Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an
email to: [email protected].

    Dated: December 1, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-27498 Filed 12-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P