[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40153-40156]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16001]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0593]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Eye Tracking
Experimental Studies To Explore Consumer Use of Food Labeling
Information and Consumer Response to Online Surveys

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing
that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by August
2, 2013.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-New and
title ``Eye Tracking Experimental Studies to Explore Consumer Use of
Food Labeling Information and Consumer Response to Online Surveys.''
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400T,
Rockville, MD 20850<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Eye Tracking Experimental Studies To Explore Consumer Use of Food
Labeling Information and Consumer Response to Online Surveys--(OMB
Control Number 0910-NEW)

I. Background

    Eye tracking is a consumer research technique often used to
determine where a person is looking while interacting with a visual
display, such as a product package and elements of information on the
package. The technique collects eye movement data, i.e., fixations and
saccades (jumps of the eye), which may be superimposed on the display
image to reveal: (1) Which parts of the display captured the viewer's
attention, (2) the order and path in which visual elements were seen,
and (3) the length of time they were viewed. These data provide
detailed information on what individuals pay attention to on product
packages, how long they spend looking at different package elements,
and how visual attention may be related to their reaction to the images
(Refs. 1 to 4, 7). Data from eye tracking studies can also help improve
questionnaire design. Different respondents may pay differing degrees
of attention to the elements of a survey question or response options.
Eye tracking data can help to identify the need and strategies for
improving the design (Refs. 5 and 6). Finally, eye tracking data can
provide information on the decision strategies that individuals use
under different levels of time pressure, which can help reveal the
influence of time on busy individuals' food choices (Refs. 4 and 7).
    As a public health agency, FDA helps consumers make informed
dietary decisions by regulating nutrition information on food labels,
among other activities. An understanding of how visual elements (e.g.,
labeling statements such as claims, disclosure statements, logos, and
Nutrition Facts label) influence consumers' perceptions and choices of
products can assist us in developing labeling information to help
consumers make informed dietary decisions. In addition, we use self-
administered questionnaires in online experimental studies to assess
consumer reactions to nutrition information on food packages. An
understanding of how respondents react to survey materials that are
presented visually will enhance our ability in collecting better
consumer data to help us fulfill our missions.
    The proposed data collection will use eye tracking research to
examine consumers' eye movements to achieve three goals: (1) To better
understand consumer reaction to specific food labeling information, (2)
to better understand survey respondent reaction to specific survey
questions related to nutrition and health, and (3) to better understand
how time pressure influences the priority and quality of decision
making and survey response. In order to observe consumers' eye movement
in different types of settings, we propose to conduct two separate
studies, one in each of two different settings. Study 1 is a laboratory
study that will ask participants to view on a computer screen mockups
of food labels and perform tasks as well as answer other survey
questions. Study 2 is an in-store study that will record eye movement
data from grocery shoppers while they shop for preselected product
categories. The studies will use two different survey instruments.
Study participants will come from two separate convenience samples.

A. Study 1 (Laboratory Study)

    Study 1 is a controlled randomized experiment. It has two
objectives. The first objective is to collect data on how consumers
view and process label information. The data will be used to test the
hypothesis that one or more label and information characteristics will
cause variations in viewing and processing. In this proposed study, we
will focus specifically on the following characteristics: (1) Presence
and type of nutrition symbols, together with presence of claims, on the
Principal Display Panel (PDP) of a conventional food; (2) presence of a
disclosure statement (21 CFR 101.13(h)(1)-(3)) on the PDP of a
conventional food that makes a nutrient content claim; (3) format of
the Nutrition Facts label on a conventional food product; (4) presence
of a Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act disclaimer on the PDP
of

a dietary supplement product that makes a structure/function claim; (5)
presence and length of a qualified health claim on the PDP of a dietary
supplement product; and (6) type of product.
    Label images will be created to allow the study to focus on
consumer reaction to specific components of information on a food
label. All images will be mockups resembling food labels that may be
found in the marketplace but without any real or fictitious brand name.
    The second objective of Study 1 is to examine how time pressure
affects information processing. We will use the data to test the
hypothesis that time pressure will cause variations in participant
reactions (notice, attention, use, perception, and intention) to
information. To test this hypothesis, the study will, at certain
selected questions, expose participants to two randomly assigned time
conditions, such as no time limit and 10 seconds per question.
    The study will also include certain questions selected from
previous online research we have sponsored in order to examine which
part(s) of a question or which response options participants notice and
pay attention to when they are asked to answer the question.
    In the study, we plan to collect data from 200 participants using a
15-minute computer-assisted self-administered questionnaire and a 5-
minute debriefing questionnaire. Forty interviews are planned for each
of 5 locations across the contiguous 48 States. Participants will be
recruited from residents at each location, and the study will aim to
have a reasonable degree of diversity in participant gender, age, and
education. On a computer screen, participants will first view a series
of label images. Then participants will answer a set of questions
related to their reactions to the label images they see on the computer
screen. Each participant will be randomly assigned to an experimental
condition that differs primarily in label components and time limit. To
help understand the data, the study will also collect information on
each participant's background, such as health status, label reading
behavior, and dietary preferences.

B. Study 2 (In-Store Study)

    In Study 2, we plan to collect observations of what information
grocery shoppers notice and pay attention to while they do their
shopping in the store. The study will gather eye movement data to
provide an indepth understanding of subconscious and conscious factors
that influence food purchases. Specifically, the study will explore the
role that the Principal Display Panel and other label information and
components play in purchase decisions. We will use the data to test the
hypotheses that product familiarity or personal needs will cause
variations in information seeking and that design elements (e.g.,
prominence, text vs. graphics) will cause variations in information
seeking. To keep the study within a manageable scope, only shoppers who
plan to shop for one or more of preselected product categories will be
eligible to participate. Other than product categories, however,
participants will not be restricted to which products they examine,
what label information they view, or how much time they spend in
completing any part of the study. To help understand the data, the
study will also collect information on each participant's background,
such as health status and shopping practices. In Study 2 we plan to
collect data from 60 participants who will each spend an average of 45
minutes in the study, including a practice session, the shopping trip,
and a debriefing. The study will be conducted in two different
locations. Participants will be recruited at storefronts.
    Both the laboratory study (Study 1) and the in-store study (Study
2) are part of our continuing effort to enable consumers to make
informed dietary choices. We will use the studies to assess consumer
attention to and use of various pieces of information on food packages
and the information's influence on product perceptions and choices. The
assessment will provide us with background information to help identify
and develop more effective labeling information and education in the
future. In addition, we will use data from Study 1 to assess consumer
behaviors when they are asked to respond to a sample of questions used
in the Agency's consumer research. The assessment will help enhance our
ability to conduct research that provides useful information. Wherever
possible, we will also attempt to compare findings from the two studies
to assess the degree to which results observed in the laboratory
reflect actual behaviors in the market. For example, do laboratory and
in-store participants pay attention to different labeling elements when
they make a shopping choice? Results of the study will not be used to
develop population estimates.
    In the Federal Register of June 15, 2012 (77 FR 35983), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. We received three comments. One comment
addressed matters that were outside the scope of the information
collection provisions and will not be discussed here. We respond to the
remaining comments in this document. For ease of reading, we preface
each comment with a numbered ``Comment;'' and each response by a
corresponding ``Response.'' We have numbered each comment to help
distinguish between different topics. The number assigned to each
comment is for organizational purposes only and does not signify the
comment's value, or importance, or the order in which it was received.
    (Comment 1) One comment recommended that we examine the accuracy of
the eye tracking methodology in identifying label reading patterns
before considering applying the methodology more broadly.
    (Response) FDA agrees that it is important to assess the degree of
accuracy the methodology can provide and we have taken this into
consideration.
    (Comment 2) One comment questioned whether the use of eye tracking
methodology is essential to the regulation of food labeling.
    (Response) Part of our mission is to help the public get accurate
and science-based information needed to use foods to maintain and
improve health (Ref. 8). To help accomplish this mission, we state in
our 2011-2015 Strategic Plan that we will strengthen social and
behavioral sciences to help consumers make informed decisions about
regulated products (Ref. 9). As part of the strategy, the plan
identifies needs in knowing the audience, ensuring audience
understanding of information, and evaluating effectiveness of
communication about regulated products (Ref. 9). We will use the
proposed studies to assess consumer attention to and use of various
pieces of information on food packages and the information's influence
on product perceptions and choices. These findings can extend and
compliment findings from other consumer research FDA conducts and help
us identify and develop more effective food labeling information and
education in the future. Therefore, the use of eye tracking methodology
is valuable to our mission in providing the public accurate and
science-based information.
    (Comment 3) One comment questioned the practical utility of the
information to be collected in the proposed studies. The comment stated
that Study 1 would not yield nationally representative results because
it uses a convenience sample and suggests this limitation be noted in
the supporting

statement accompanying the Federal Register 30-day notice. The comment
also questioned whether the sample size of Study 2 (60 participants)
would be sufficient to yield detailed conclusions.
    (Response) The 60-day notice stated that the studies would not be
used to develop national estimates. We repeat this statement in the
supporting statement. Though the sample size of Study 2 is constrained
by the available resource, the study will provide preliminary yet
useful insights into consumer viewing experiences with food shopping.
    (Comment 4) A comment asserted that wearing eye tracking eyeglasses
and a headset for biometric measurement in Study 2 would cause study
subjects to behave differently from how they shop typically, thus
weakening the reliability of the data. Instead, the comment suggests
using a virtual store methodology in a computer-assisted central
location test.
    (Response) The comment did not provide evidence to support its
concern or to illustrate the advantages of a virtual store methodology
over an eye tracking methodology. Therefore, because we do not have a
sufficient basis to conclude that the comment's suggested methodology
would be better suited for our purposes than the eye tracking
methodology described in the 60-day notice, we decline to change the
methodology for Study 2.
    (Comment 5) A comment questioned the use of the word ``healthy'' in
certain questions because the word has a regulatory meaning and
consumers may not understand the regulatory criteria for the claim
``healthy.'' The comment suggested replacing ``healthy'' with
``nutritious.'' The comment also expressed concern about questions that
ask participants their inferences about the relationships between a
product and the risk of diabetes and obesity or overweight. The comment
reasoned that these health conditions should not be asked about because
there are no current authorized health claims permitted for these
conditions.
    (Response) We disagree with the comment. The studies are not to
examine whether or how consumers understand labeling regulations.
Rather, part of the purpose of the studies is to better understand how
consumers infer from labeling the characteristics of food products. As
stated in the comment, consumers may not understand regulatory criteria
for claims, including ``healthy,'' and there are no authorized health
claims that link a food to diabetes or obesity. Yet consumers make
product inferences and decisions based on their own experiences and
knowledge, with or without any understanding about labeling
regulations. Hence, for consumer research purposes, it is valid and
meaningful to include these terms and product-risk relationships as a
measure of consumer product inferences.
    (Comment 6) A comment questioned the relevance of a series of Study
1 questions related to participants' inferences of what health
conditions to which a product may be related. The comment explained
that these questions are not consistent with established policy
regarding health claims.
    (Response) We understand and acknowledge this concern. Upon further
consideration of the purposes of the study and the time length of the
interview, we have revised the content of the study and removed the
questions the comment discussed.
    (Comment 7) A comment made several editorial suggestions and
clarifications to the proposed questionnaires. For example, the comment
suggested that ``lesser amount of fat'' in one Study 1 question be
corrected grammatically, that ``if you are allowed to eat xx g of
carbohydrate as a snack'' in another Study 1 question be revised to say
``if you wish to eat a food with xx g of carbohydrate as a snack.'' The
comment also asked that Study 2 clarify that the participants can
select multiple items in a product category and revise the wording in
one question to reflect this. The comment further asked that Study 2
clarify that the interviewer will escort the participants to the store
aisle for the target product category.
    (Response) We have considered and incorporated the suggestions,
when appropriate, in the revised questionnaires. For example, in Study
1 we did not make the suggested correction on ``less amount of fat'' or
the suggested revision on carbohydrate. Instead, being mindful of the
length of the study instrument, these questions were removed and
replaced with other questions. At the same time, we have made the two
clarifications in Study 2.
    (Comment 8) A comment suggested that we make the label and package
designs available for public review.
    (Response) We have included the label and package designs in the
supporting statement.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Number of
           Activity                Number of     responses per   Total annual    Average burden     Total hours
                                  respondents     respondent       responses      per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laboratory pretest invitation.              30               1              30  0.033 (2                       1
                                                                                minutes).
Laboratory pretest............              15               1              15  1...............              15
Laboratory study invitation...             500               1             500  0.033 (2                      17
                                                                                minutes).
Laboratory study..............             200               1             200  0.333 (20                     67
                                                                                minutes).
In-store study invitation.....             300               1             300  0.083 (5                      25
                                                                                minutes).
In-store study................              60               1              60  0.75 (45                      45
                                                                                minutes).
    Total.....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ................             170
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

II. References

    The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov. (FDA
has verified all the Web site addresses in this reference section, but
we are not responsible for any subsequent changes to the Web sites
after this document publishes in the Federal Register.)

    1. Jones, G. and M. Richardson, ``An Objective Examination of
Consumer Perception of Nutrition Information Based on Healthiness
Ratings and Eye Movements,'' Public Health Nutrition, vol. 10, pp.
238-244, 2007.
    2. Bialkova, S. and H. C. M. van Trijp, ``What Determines
Consumer Attention to Nutrition Labels?'' Food Quality and
Preference, vol. 21, pp. 1042-1051, 2010.

    3. van Herpen, E. and H. C. M. van Trijp, ``Front-of-Pack
Nutrition Labels, Their Effect on Attention and Choices When
Consumers Have Varying Goals and Time Constraints,'' Appetite, vol.
57, pp. 148-160, 2011.
    4. Fox, R. J., D. M. Krugman, J. E. Fletcher, and P. M. Fischer,
``Adolescents' Attention to Beer and Cigarette Print Ads and
Associated Product Warnings,'' Journal of Advertising, vol. 27, pp.
57-68, 1998.
    5. Galesic, M., R. Tourangeau, M. P. Couper, and F. G. Conrad,
``Eye-Tracking Data: New Insights on Response Order Effects and
Other Cognitive Shortcuts in Survey Responding,'' Public Opinion
Quarterly, vol. 72, pp. 892-913, 2008.
    6. Graesser, A. C., Z. Cai, M. M. Louwerse, and F. Daniel,
``Question Understanding Aid (QUAID): A Web Facility That Tests
Question Comprehensibility,'' Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 70, pp.
3-22, 2006.
    7. Reutskaja, E., R. Nagel, C. F. Camerer, and A. Rangel,
``Search Dynamics in Consumer Choice Under Time Pressure: An Eye-
Tracking Study,'' American Economic Review, vol. 101, pp. 900-926,
2011.
    8. FDA, ``What We Do.'' Available at http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/default.htm.
    9. FDA, ``Strengthen Social and Behavioral Science to Help
Consumers and Professionals Make Informed Decisions About Regulated
Products,'' Section 8 in Strategic Plan for Regulatory Science.
Available at http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/RegulatoryScience/ucm268150.htm.

    Dated: June 25, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-16001 Filed 7-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 173 (Friday, September 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42564-42565]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19070]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

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 19a-1; SEC File No. 270-240, OMB Control No. 3235-0216

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``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.
    Section 19(a) (15 U.S.C. 80a-19(a)) of the Investment Company Act
of 1940 (the ``Act'') \1\ makes it unlawful for any registered
investment company to pay any dividend or similar distribution from any
source other than the company's net income, unless the payment is
accompanied by a written statement to the company's shareholders which
adequately discloses the sources of the payment. Section 19(a)
authorizes the Commission to prescribe the form of such statement by
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 80a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 19a-1 (17 CFR 270.19a-1) under the Act, entitled ``Written
Statement to Accompany Dividend Payments by Management Companies,''
sets forth specific requirements for the information that must be
included in statements made pursuant to section 19(a) by or on behalf
of management companies.\2\ The rule requires that the statement
indicate what portions of distribution payments are made from net
income, net profits from the sale of a security or other property
(``capital gains'') and paid-in capital. When any part of the payment
is made from capital gains, rule 19a-1 also requires that the statement
disclose certain other information relating to the appreciation or
depreciation of portfolio securities. If an estimated portion is
subsequently determined to be significantly inaccurate, a correction
must be made on a statement made pursuant to section 19(a) or in the
first report to

shareholders following the discovery of the inaccuracy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 4(3) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-4(3)) defines
``management company'' as ``any investment company other than a face
amount certificate company or a unit investment trust.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of rule 19a-1 is to afford fund shareholders adequate
disclosure of the sources from which distribution payments are made.
The rule is intended to prevent shareholders from confusing income
dividends with distributions made from capital sources. Absent rule
19a-1, shareholders might receive a false impression of fund gains.
    Based on a review of filings made with the Commission, the staff
estimates that approximately 11,818 series of registered investment
companies that are management companies may be subject to rule 19a-1
each year,\3\ and that each portfolio on average mails two statements
per year to meet the requirements of the rule.\4\ The staff further
estimates that the time needed to make the determinations required by
the rule and to prepare the statement required under the rule is
approximately 1 hour per statement. The total annual burden for all
portfolios therefore is estimated to be approximately 23,636 burden
hours.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This estimate is based on statistics compiled by Commission
staff as of April 30, 2017. The number of management investment
company portfolios that make distributions for which compliance with
rule 19a-1 is required depends on a wide range of factors and can
vary greatly across years. Therefore, the calculation of estimated
burden hours is based on the total number of management investment
company portfolios, each of which may be subject to rule 19a-1.
    \4\ A few portfolios make monthly distributions from sources
other than net income, so the rule requires them to send out a
statement 12 times a year. Other portfolios never make such
distributions.
    \5\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 11,818
management investment company portfolios x 2 statements per year x 1
hour per statement = 23,636 burden hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The staff estimates that approximately one-third of the total
annual burden (7,879 hours) would be incurred by a paralegal with an
average hourly wage rate of approximately $205 per hour,\6\ and
approximately two-thirds of the annual burden (15,757 hours) would be
incurred by a compliance clerk with an average hourly wage rate of $66
per hour.\7\ The staff therefore estimates that the aggregate annual
cost of complying with the paperwork requirements of the rule is
approximately $2,655,157 ((7,879 hours x $205 = $1,615,195) + (15,757
hours x $66 = $1,039,962)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Hourly rates are derived from the Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association (``SIFMA''), Management and
Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry 2013, modified to
account for an 1,800-hour work-year and inflation, and multiplied by
5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits, and
overhead.
    \7\ Hourly rates are derived from SIFMA's Office Salaries in the
Securities Industry 2013, modified to account for an 1,800-hour
work-year and multiplied by 2.93 to account for bonuses, firm size,
employee benefits and overhead.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To comply with state law, many investment companies already must
distinguish the different sources from which a shareholder distribution
is paid and disclose that information to shareholders. Thus, many
investment companies would be required to distinguish the sources of
shareholder dividends whether or not the Commission required them to do
so under rule 19a-1.
    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules. Compliance with the collection of information
required by rule 19a-1 is mandatory for management companies that make
statements to shareholders pursuant to section 19(a) of the Act. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burdens
of the collections of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burdens of the collections of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: September 5, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-19070 Filed 9-7-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 146 (Thursday, July 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 45536]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18740]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017; FRL-9930-51]

Product Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide Registrations;
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of March 12, 2015,
and June 3, 2015, concerning receipt of requests to voluntarily cancel
certain pesticide registrations and its follow-up product cancellation
order, respectively. In both notices, EPA inadvertently listed the
pesticide product Biobor JF (EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>1). The registrant
did not request voluntary cancellation for this product. Therefore, EPA
is not cancelling the pesticide product Biobor JF (EPA Reg. No. 065217-
00001). This document removes the cancellation order for Biobor JF (EPA
Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>1) listed in both the March 12, 2015, and June 3,
2015, Federal Register notices.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Nevola, Pesticide Re-Evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the Federal Register notices of March 12,
2015 (80 FR 12996) (FRL-9923-27) and June 3, 2015 (80 FR 31596) (FRL-
9926-88) a list of those who may be potentially affected by this
action.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What does this correction do?

    EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of March 12, 2015, (80
FR 12996) (FRL-9923-27) and June 3, 2015 (80 FR 31596) (FRL-9926-88),
concerning receipt of requests to voluntarily cancel certain pesticide
registrations and its follow-up product cancellation order,
respectively. In both notices, EPA inadvertently listed the pesticide
product Biobor JF (EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>1). The registrant did not
request voluntary cancellation for this product and this document
corrects the inclusion of this product registration for voluntary
cancellation. Therefore, EPA is not cancelling the pesticide product
Biobor JF (EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>1). This document removes the
cancellation order for Biobor JF (EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>1) listed in
both the March 12, 2015, and June 3, 2015, Federal Register notices.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et. seq.

    Dated: July 17, 2015.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2015-18740 Filed 7-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 124)]
[Notices]
[Page 36317]
[DOCID:fr26jn08-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. RP08-392-000 and 001]

Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Extended Comment Period

June 18, 2008.
    Take notice that on June 17, 2008, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC
(Texas Gas) filed a request to change the effective date of its filing
submitted on May 30, 2008 in Docket No. RP08-392-000 (Third Revised
Volume No. 1) from July 1, 2008 to September 15, 2008. Texas Gas' May
30, 2008 filing included a provision that allowed its customers to
comment on its May 30, 2008 filing for 90 days after the May 30, 2008
filing date. The comment period is being extended until August 27, 2008
to provide an additional comment period.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate 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 August 27, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-14446 Filed 6-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 248 (Friday, December 28, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67095-67096]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28153]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-8563]

Suspension of Community Eligibility

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule identifies communities where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) that are scheduled for suspension on the effective dates
listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain
management requirements of the program. If the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the community has
adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the
effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will not
occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in the
Federal Register on a subsequent date. Also, information identifying
the current participation status of a community can be obtained from
FEMA's Community Status Book (CSB). The CSB is available at https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-community-status-book.

DATES: The effective date of each community's scheduled suspension is
the third date (``Susp.'') listed in the third column of the following
tables.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you want to determine whether a
particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for
further information, contact Adrienne L. Sheldon, PE, CFM, Federal
Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP enables property owners to purchase
Federal flood insurance that is not otherwise generally available from
private insurers. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer
local floodplain management measures aimed at protecting lives and new
construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits the sale
of NFIP flood insurance unless an appropriate public body adopts
adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement
measures. The communities listed in this document no longer meet that
statutory requirement for compliance with program regulations, 44 CFR
part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be suspended on the
effective date in the third column. As of that date, flood insurance
will no longer be available in the community. We recognize that some of
these communities may adopt and submit the required documentation of
legally enforceable floodplain management measures after this rule is
published but prior to the actual suspension date. These communities
will not be suspended and will continue to be eligible for the sale of
NFIP flood insurance. A notice withdrawing the suspension of such
communities will be published in the Federal Register.
    In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that
identifies the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in these communities.
The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated in the
fourth column of the table. No direct Federal financial assistance
(except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act not in connection with a flood) may be
provided for construction or acquisition of buildings in identified
SFHAs for communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for
more than a year on FEMA's initial FIRM for the community as having
flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act
of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition against
certain types of Federal assistance becomes effective for the
communities listed on the date shown in the last column. The
Administrator finds that notice and public comment procedures under 5
U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and unnecessary because communities
listed in this final rule have been adequately notified.
    Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification
letters addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the
community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management
measures are met prior to the effective suspension date. Since these
notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less
than 30 days.
    National Environmental Policy Act. FEMA has determined that the
community suspension(s) included in this rule is a non-discretionary
action and therefore the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) does not apply.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Administrator has determined that
this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act because the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended,
Section 1315, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage unless
an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management
measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed no
longer comply with the statutory requirements, and after the effective
date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the communities
unless remedial action takes place.
    Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR
51735.
    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This rule involves no policies
that have

federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.
    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule meets the
applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.
    Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule does not involve any collection
of information for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

    Flood insurance, Floodplains.

    Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:

PART 64--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp.; p. 376.

Sec.  64.6   [Amended]

0
2. The tables published under the authority of Sec.  64.6 are amended
as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Effective date
                                                 authorization/
                                   Community    cancellation of    Current effective map   Date certain  Federal
       State and location             No.        sale of flood             date            assistance  no longer
                                                  insurance in                              available  in SFHAs
                                                   community
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Region IV

Florida: Inglis, Town of, Levy         120586  January 10, 1986,  Jan. 18, 2019.........  Jan. 18, 2019.
 County.                                        Emerg; January
                                                10, 1986, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
South Carolina:
    Greenville, City of,               450091  January 15, 1974,  ......do *............   Do.
     Greenville County.                         Emerg; February
                                                1, 1980, Reg;.
                                               January 18, 2019,
                                                Susp.
    Greenville County,                 450089  February 12,       ......do..............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      1974, Emerg;
                                                December 2,
                                                1980, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
            Region X
Oregon:
    Clackamas County,                  415588  April 2, 1971,     ......do..............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      Emerg; March 1,
                                                1978, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Sandy, City of, Clackamas          410023  June 25, 1974,     ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; December
                                                11, 1979, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
Washington:
    Bellingham, City of,               530199  April 30, 1975,    ......do..............   Do.
     Whatcom County.                            Emerg; September
                                                2, 1982, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Blaine, City of, Whatcom           530273  June 10, 1975,     ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 16,
                                                1979, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Everson, City of, Whatcom          530200  August 16, 1974,   ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; August 2,
                                                1982, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Ferndale, City of, Whatcom         530201  May 27, 1975,      ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; June 1,
                                                1983, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Lummi Indian Reservation,          530331  October 14, 1997,  ......do..............   Do.
     Whatcom County.                            Emerg; January
                                                16, 2004, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Lynden, City of, Whatcom           530202  May 27, 1975,      ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; November
                                                3, 1982, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Nooksack, City of, Whatcom         530203  November 28,       ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    1975, Emerg;
                                                September 2,
                                                1982, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Sumas, City of, Whatcom            530204  February 14,       ......................   Do.
     County.                                    1975, Emerg; May
                                                15, 1985, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
    Whatcom County,                    530198  February 18,       January 18, 2019......  January 18, 2019.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      1972, Emerg;
                                                September 30,
                                                1977, Reg;
                                                January 18,
                                                2019, Susp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ......do = Ditto.
Code for reading third column: Emerg.--Emergency; Reg.--Regular; Susp.--Suspension.

    Dated: December 19, 2018.
Eric Letvin,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, Federal Insurance and
Mitigation Administration--FEMA Resilience, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-28153 Filed 12-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register: September 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 186)]
[Notices]
[Page 54651-54652]
[DOCID:fr26se07-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

September 21, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP00-404-020. RP07-330-002.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits Substitute Third
Revised Sheet 260A et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 09/17/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070918-0100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-167.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits Rate Schedule FTS-1
negotiated rate agreement with Peoples Energy Wholesale Marketing, LLC,
to be effective 11/1/07.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0056.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-168.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Co submits an amendment to Rate Schedule
ETS negotiated rate agreement with Wisconsin Electric Power Co.

    Filed Date: 09/18/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0055.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-169.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Co submits an amendment to Rate Schedule
ETS negotiated rate agreement with Wisconsin Gas, LLC under RP99-301.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-170.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Co submits an amendment to Rate Schedule
FTS-3 negotiated rate agreement with Wisconsin Power & Light Co.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-171.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Co submits Rate Schedule FTS-3 negotiated
rate service agreement with Wisconsin Power & Light Co.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP07-699-000.
    Applicants: Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.
    Description: Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd submits Twelfth
Revised Sheet 37A et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 2,
to become effective 11/1/07.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP07-700-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Comp.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
Thirteenth Revised Sheet 17 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised
Volume 1, to be effective 11/1/07.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070919-0073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: RP07-701-000.
    Applicants: OkTex Pipeline Company.
    Description: OkTex Pipeline Company submits revised FERC Gas Tariff
Sheet 5, 5A, 5B, and 5C reflecting a change to its Annual Charge
Adjustment surcharge from $0.0016 to $0.0019 for the period 10/1/07
through 9/30/08.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070920-0146.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 01, 2007.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings 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) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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 dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Acting Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-18941 Filed 9-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 106 (Tuesday, June 2, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33587-33589]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11521]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0277; Airspace Docket No. 20-AEA-5]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Pottsville, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Schuylkill County (Joe
Zerbey) Airport, Pottsville, PA due to the extension of runway 11. This
action would also update the geographic coordinates of the airport, and
Schuylkill Medical Center Heliport, (formerly Pottsville Hospital).
Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations in the area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 17, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to: The U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (202)

366-9826. You must identify the Docket No. FAA-2020-0277; Airspace
Docket No. 20-AEA-5, at the beginning of your comments. You may also
submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class E airspace at Schuylkill County (Joe Zerbey)
Airport, Pottsville, PA, to support IFR operations in the area.

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-
2020-0277 and Airspace Docket No. 20-AEA-5) and be submitted in
triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the
address and phone number.) You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2020-0277; Airspace Docket No. 20-AEA-5.'' The postcard
will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this document may be changed in light of the
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays, at the
office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration,
Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective
September 15, 2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA proposes an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface at Schuylkill County (Joe Zerbey)
Airport, Pottsville, PA from a 6.8-mile radius to a 7-mile radius. In
addition, the FAA proposes to update the airport's geographic
coordinates, and the name and geographic coordinates of Schuylkill
Medical Center Heliport, to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical
database.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (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);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15, 2019, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AEA PA E5 Pottsville, PA [Amended]

Schuylkill County (Joe Zerbey) Airport, PA
    (Lat. 40[deg]42'24'' N, long. 76[deg]22'23'' W)
Schuylkill Medical Center Heliport
    (Lat. 40[deg]41'25'' N, long. 76[deg]11'32'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Schuylkill County (Joe Zerbey) Airport,
and that airspace within a 6-mile radius of the point in space for
Schuylkill Medical Center Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on May 22, 2020.
Andreese C. Davis,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team South, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2020-11521 Filed 6-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25331-25333]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10891]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2011-0177; FRL-9301-8]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP) (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on July 31, 2011. Before submitting the ICR to OMB
for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2011-0177, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency,
Superfund Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Superfund Docket, EPA West 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
2011-0177. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit
http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Knudsen, Assessment and
Remediation Division, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology
Innovation, (Mail Code 5204P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 703-
603-8861; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2011-0177 which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Superfund
Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is 202-566-
0276.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft
collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
State/Tribal governments and individual community members who
voluntarily participate in the remedial phase of the Superfund program
and in associated community involvement activities throughout the
Superfund process.
    Title: National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency
Plan (NCP) (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1463.08, OMB Control No. 2050-0096.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on July 31,
2011. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control

number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of
the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are
listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB
control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR
part 9.
    Abstract: This Information Collection Request is a renewal ICR that
covers the remedial portion of the Superfund Program, as specified in
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 as amended (CERCLA) and the National Oil and Hazardous
Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). All remedial actions
covered by this ICR (e.g., Remedial Investigations/Feasibility Studies)
are stipulated in the statute (CERCLA) and are instrumental in the
process of cleaning up National Priorities List (NPL) sites to be
protective of human health and the environment. Some community
involvement activities covered by this ICR are not required at every
site (e.g., Technical Assistance Grants) and depend very much on the
community and the nature of the site and cleanup. All community
activities seek to involve the public in the cleanup of the sites, gain
the input of community members, and include the community's perspective
on the potential future reuse of Superfund NPL sites. Community
involvement activities can enhance the remedial process and increase
community acceptance and the potential for productive and useful reuse
of the sites.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 80
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 7,970.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: As
required.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 71,165 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $572,415. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $61,245 for States and an estimated cost of $511,170 for
communities.

What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: April 27, 2011.
James E. Woolford,
Office Director, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology
Innovation.
[FR Doc. 2011-10891 Filed 5-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 146 (Tuesday, August 3, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41794-41798]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16431]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0613; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01431-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400, -
401, and -402 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of
cracking found on a main landing gear (MLG) drag strut assembly. This
proposed AD would require a records review to determine if an affected
MLG drag strut assembly is installed, repetitive detailed inspections
for cracking of affected strut assemblies, a one-time magnetic particle
inspection for cracking, and on-condition actions if necessary. The FAA
is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by September
17, 2021.

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 https://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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0613; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 516-
794-5531; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0613; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-01431-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Aziz
Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New
York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21,
2020 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for
certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400, -401,
and -402 airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0613.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report of cracking found on an
MLG drag strut assembly. The MLG drag strut had accumulated a total of
26,968 flight cycles and 12,392 flight hours since new, of which 2,830
flight cycles and 1,420 flight hours had accumulated since the last
overhaul. The last overhaul had been conducted one year prior to the
crack finding. It is suspected that the cracking was caused by the
clamping method used by the repair facility during the most recent
overhaul, and was missed during subsequent non-destructive testing
(NDT) inspections required as part of the refurbishment process. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address cracking of the MLG drag strut
assembly and possible failure under compression loads during landing or
ground operations, which could result in asymmetric MLG configuration
and potential runway excursion. See the MCAI for additional background
information.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD
because the FAA evaluated all the relevant information and determined
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require a records review to determine if an
affected MLG drag strut assembly is installed, repetitive detailed
inspections for cracking of affected strut assemblies, a one-time
magnetic particle inspection for cracking, and on-condition actions if
necessary. On-condition actions include replacing the MLG drag strut
assembly and re-identifying the MLG drag strut assembly.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 34 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        Cost per product          Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 11 work-hours x $85 per hour =                $0   Up to $935..............  Up to $31,790.
 Up to $935.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                                     Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        Cost per product          Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 10 work-hours x $85 per hour =               $ *   Up to $850..............  Up to $850.
 Up to $850.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the agency to provide parts cost estimates for the
  actions specified in this proposed AD.

    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of
this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the
cost impact on affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously
Held by Bombardier, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2021-0613; Project
Identifier MCAI-2020-01431-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by September 17, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model
DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category,
serial numbers 4001, 4003, and subsequent.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
Gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracking found on a main
landing gear (MLG) drag strut assembly. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address cracking of the MLG drag strut assembly and possible
failure under compression loads during landing or ground operations,
which could result in asymmetric MLG configuration and potential
runway excursion.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Records Review, Repetitive Inspections, and On-Condition Actions

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Review the
applicable airplane maintenance records to determine if any affected
MLG drag strut assembly identified in figure 1 to the introductory
text of paragraph (g) of this AD is installed. If any affected MLG
drag strut assembly is installed, do the actions specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP03AU21.001

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    (1) Within 80 flight hours after accomplishing the records
review required by paragraph (g) of this AD, do a detailed
inspection for cracking of the affected MLG drag strut assembly, and
do all applicable on-condition actions before further flight, in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 80 flight hours until the magnetic particle inspection
required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD is done.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g)(1): Guidance on the inspections and on-
condition actions required by this AD can be found in Transport
Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21, 2020.
    (2) Within 1,600 flight hours or 12 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, perform a magnetic particle
inspection for cracks of the entire tubular section of the affected
MLG drag strut assembly, and do all on-condition actions before
further flight, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
New York ACO Branch, FAA. Performing the magnetic particle
inspection required by this paragraph terminates the repetitive
detailed inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an
affected MLG drag strut assembly identified in figure 1 to the
introductory text of paragraph (g) of this AD on any airplane unless
the inspections and applicable on-conditions specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) and (2) of this AD are done before further flight.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's TCCA Design Approval
Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must
include the DAO-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21, 2020, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2021-0613.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) For information about TCCA AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21,
2020, contact

TCCA, Transport Canada National Aircraft Certification, 159
Cleopatra Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone 888-663-
3639; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on July 28, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.

[FR Doc. 2021-16431 Filed 8-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 82 (Monday, May 1, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20310]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08658]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0081; FRL-9961-22-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; State of Delaware, District of
Columbia, and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, City of Philadelphia;
Control of Emissions From Existing Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incinerator Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
notify the public that it has received negative declarations for
commercial and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI) units within
the State of Delaware, the District of Columbia, and the City of
Philadelphia in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These negative
declarations certify that CISWI units subject to the requirements of
sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) do not exist within
the jurisdictional boundaries of the State of Delaware, the District of
Columbia, and the City of Philadelphia in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. EPA is accepting the negative declarations in accordance
with the requirements of the CAA. In the Final Rules section of this
Federal Register, EPA is accepting the negative declarations as a
direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this
as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. If
no adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further
activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by May 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2016-0081 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Cate Opila,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information regarding the
negative declarations for CISWI units within the State of Delaware, the
District of Columbia, and the City of Philadelphia in the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania, please see the information provided in the direct
final action, with the same title, that is located in the ``Rules and
Regulations'' section of this Federal Register publication and in the
technical support documentation for this rulemaking. Supporting
documentation, including the technical support document, for this
action is available in the docket for this rulemaking and available
online at www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Commercial and
industrial solid waste incineration units.

    Dated: March 21, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2017-08658 Filed 4-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P