[Federal Register: November 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 217)]
[Notices]
[Page 65790-65791]
[DOCID:fr09no06-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-38-000]

Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Tariff Filing

November 2, 2006.
    Take notice that on October 31, 2006, Eastern Shore Natural Gas
Company (Eastern Shore) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the revised tariff sheets listed
below. Such revised tariff sheets are proposed to be effective November
1, 2006.

Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 4
Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 5
Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 6

    Eastern Shore states that copies of the filing have been served
upon its customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring 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 in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of
the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 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 online 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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-18931 Filed 11-8-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 15)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 3877-3878]
[DOCID:fr25ja10-13]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0928; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-28]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Killeen, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Killeen, TX.
Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at the renamed Skylark Field
Airport, Killeen, TX. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the
safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for
SIAPs at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 11, 2010.

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. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2009-0928/Airspace Docket No. 09-
ASW-28, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in 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 and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2009-0928/
Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-28.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's
should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface for the newly established SIAPs
at Skylark Field Airport, Killeen, TX. The airport name would be
changed from Killeen Municipal Airport, to Skylark Field Airport, in
accordance with the FAAs National Aeronautical Charting Office.
Controlled airspace is needed for the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.

    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 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.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 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 add additional controlled airspace at Skylark Field
Airport, Killeen, TX.

List 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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Killeen, TX [Amended]

Robert Gray Army Airfield (AAF), TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]04'02'' N., long. 97[deg]49'44'' W.)
Hood Army Airfield (AAF), TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]08'19'' N., long. 97[deg]42'52'' W.)
Gray VOR/DME
    (Lat. 31[deg]01'58'' N., long. 97[deg]48'50'' W.)
Skylark Field Airport, TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]05'09'' N., long. 97[deg]41'11'' W.)
Iresh NDB
    (Lat. 31[deg]01'27'' N., long. 97[deg]42'29'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.6-mile radius of Robert Gray AAF and within a 6.3-mile
radius of Hood AAF and within 1.8 miles each side of the 037[deg]
radial of the Gray VOR/DME extending from the 7.6-mile radius to
14.6 miles northeast of the airfield, and within 1.8 miles each side
of the 217[deg] radial of the Gray VOR/DME extending from the 7.6-
mile radius to 14.6 miles southwest of the airfield, and within 1.7
miles each side of the 064[deg] radial of the Gray VOR/DME extending
from the 7.6-mile radius to 13.9 miles northeast of the airfield,
and within 1.7 miles each side of the 244[deg] radial of the Gray
VOR/DME extending from the 7.6-mile radius to 13.9 miles southwest
of the airfield, and within 2 miles each side of the 150[deg]
bearing from Robert Gray AAF extending from the 7.6-mile radius to
11.6 miles southeast of the airfield, and within 2 miles each side
of the 339[deg] bearing from Robert Gray AAF extending from the 7.6-
mile radius to 10.3 miles north of the airfield, and within a 6.5-
mile radius of Skylark Field Airport and within 4 miles each side of
the 197[deg] bearing from the Skylark Field Airport extending from
the 6.5-mile radius to 9.6 miles south of the airport and within 2.1
miles each side of the 197[deg] bearing from the Iresh NDB extending
from the 6.5-mile radius to 10.1 miles south of the airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on January 11, 2010.

Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-1361 Filed 1-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17977-17979]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08613]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0236; Notice No. 25-19-03-SC]

Special Conditions: Boeing Model 787 Series Airplanes; Seats With
Inertia Locking Devices

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for Boeing Model 787
series airplanes. These airplanes will have a novel or unusual design
feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the
airworthiness standards for transport-category airplanes. This design
feature is seats with inertia locking devices. The applicable
airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety
standards for this design feature. These proposed special conditions
contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator
considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that
established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: Send comments on or before May 29, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2019-0236 using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or

signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.).
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478).
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Lennon, Cabin and Airframe
Safety Section, AIR-675, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On February 14, 2019, Boeing applied for a change to Type
Certificate No. T00021SE for seats with inertia locking devices in
Model 787 series airplanes. The Model 787 series airplane is a twin-
engine transport-category airplane with a maximum takeoff weight of
560,000 pounds and seating for 440 passengers.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Boeing must show that the Model 787 series airplanes, as
changed, continue to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
listed in Type Certificate No. T00021SE, or the applicable regulations
in effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier
amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for Boeing Model 787 series airplanes
because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are
prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, Boeing Model 787 series airplanes must comply with the
fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the
noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    Boeing Model 787 series airplanes will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design features:
    Seats with inertia locking devices (ILD).

Discussion

    Boeing has proposed to install, in Model 787 series airplanes,
Thompson Aero Seating Ltd. passenger seats that can be translated in
the fore and aft direction by an electrically powered motor (actuator)
that is attached to the seat primary structure. Under typical service-
loading conditions, the motor internal brake is able to translate the
seat and hold the seat in the translated position. However, under the
inertial loads of emergency-landing loading conditions specified in 14
CFR 25.562, the motor internal brake may not be able to maintain the
seat in the required position. The ILD is an ``active'' device intended
to control seat movement (i.e., a system that mechanically deploys
during an impact event) to lock the gears of the motor assembly in
place. The ILD mechanism is activated by the higher inertial load
factors that could occur during an emergency landing event. Each seat
place incorporates two ILDs; one on either side of the seat pan. Only
one ILD is required to hold an occupied seat in position during worst-
case dynamic loading specified in Sec.  25.562.
    The ILD will self-activate only in the event of a predetermined
airplane loading condition such as that occurring during crash or
emergency landing, and will prevent excessive seat forward translation.
A minimum level of protection must be provided if the seat-locking
device does not deploy.
    The normal means of satisfying the structural and occupant
protection requirements of Sec.  25.562 result in a non-quantified, but
nominally predictable, progressive structural deformation or reduction
of injury severity for impact conditions less than the maximum
specified by the rule. A seat using ILD technology, however, may
involve a step change in protection for impacts below and above that at
which the ILD activates and deploys to retain the seat pan in place.
This could result in structural deformation or occupant injury output
being higher at an intermediate impact condition than that resulting
from the maximum impact condition. It is acceptable for such step-
change characteristics to exist, provided the resulting output does not
exceed the maximum allowable criteria at any condition at which the ILD
does or does not deploy, up to the maximum severity pulse specified by
the requirements.
    The ideal triangular maximum severity pulse is defined in Advisory
Circular (AC) 25.561-1B. For the evaluation and testing of less-severe
pulses for purposes of assessing the effectiveness of the ILD
deployment setting, a similar triangular pulse should be used with
acceleration, rise time, and velocity change scaled accordingly. The
magnitude of the required pulse should not deviate below the ideal
pulse by more than 0.5g until 1.33 t1 is reached, where
t1 represents the time interval between 0 and t1
on the referenced pulse shape as shown in AC 25.561-1B. This is an
acceptable method of compliance to the test requirements of the special
conditions.
    Proposed conditions 1 through 5 address ensuring that the ILD
activates when intended in order to provide the necessary protection of
occupants. This includes protection of a range of occupants under
various accident conditions. Proposed conditions 6 through 10 address
maintenance and reliability of the ILD, including any outside
influences on the mechanism, to ensure it functions as intended.
    The proposed special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to
Boeing Model 787 series airplanes. Should Boeing apply at a later date
for a change to the type certificate to include another model
incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, these special
conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only one novel or unusual design feature on one
model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702,
44704.

The Proposed Special Conditions

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Boeing Model 787 series airplanes.
    In addition to the requirements of Sec.  25.562, passenger seats
incorporating inertia locking device (ILD)s must meet the following:
    1. Level of Protection Provided by ILD--It must be demonstrated by
test that the seats and attachments, when subject to the emergency-
landing dynamic conditions specified in Sec.  25.562, and with one ILD
not deployed, do not experience structural failure that could result
in:
    a. Separation of the seat from the airplane floor.
    b. Separation of any part of the seat that could form a hazard to
the seat occupant or any other airplane occupant.
    c. Failure of the occupant restraint or any other condition that
could result in the occupant separating from the seat.
    2. Protection Provided Below and Above the ILD Actuation
Condition--If step-change effects on occupant protection exist for
impacts below and above that at which the ILD deploys, tests must be
performed to demonstrate that the occupant is shown to be protected at
any condition at which the ILD does or does not deploy, up to the
maximum severity pulse specified by Sec.  25.562. Test conditions must
take into account any necessary tolerances for deployment.
    3. Protection Over a Range of Crash Pulse Vectors--The ILD must be
shown to function as intended for all test vectors specified in Sec.
25.562.
    4. Protection During Secondary Impacts--The ILD activation setting
must be demonstrated to maximize the probability of the protection
being available when needed, considering a secondary impact that is
above the severity at which the device is intended to deploy up to the
impact loading required by Sec.  25.562.
    5. Protection of Occupants other than 50th Percentile--Protection
of occupants for a range of stature from a two-year-old child to a
ninety-five percentile male must be shown.
    6. Inadvertent Operation--It must be shown that any inadvertent
operation of the ILD does not affect the performance of the device
during a subsequent emergency landing.
    7. Installation Protection--It must be shown that the ILD
installation is protected from contamination and interference from
foreign objects.
    8. Reliability--The performance of the ILD must not be altered by
the effects of wear, manufacturing tolerances, aging/drying of
lubricants, and corrosion.
    9. Maintenance and Functional Checks--The design, installation and
operation of the ILD must be such that it is possible to functionally
check the device in place. Additionally, a functional check method and
a maintenance check interval must be included in the seat installer's
instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) document.
    10. Release Function--If a means exists to release an inadvertently
activated ILD, the release means must not introduce additional hidden
failures that would prevent the ILD from functioning properly.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on April 10, 2019.
Paul Siegmund,
Acting Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-08613 Filed 4-26-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81512-81514]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32658]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-1204; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-147-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Aviation Communication &
Surveillance Systems (ACSS) Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance
System (TCAS) Units

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
various aircraft equipped with certain ACSS TCAS units. This proposed
AD would require upgrading software. This proposed AD results from
reports of anomalies with TCAS units during a flight test over a high
density airport. The TCAS units dropped several reduced surveillance
aircraft tracks because of interference limiting. We are proposing this
AD to prevent TCAS units from dropping tracks, which could compromise
separation of air traffic and lead to subsequent mid-air collisions.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 11,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems, LLC, 19810 North 7th
Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85027-4741; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(623) 445-7004; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.acss.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at

the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind, Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abby Malmir, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
California 90712-4137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-1204;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-147-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports of anomalies with the Aviation
Communication & Surveillance Systems (ACSS) Traffic Alert and Collision
Avoidance System (TCAS) units during a flight test over a high density
airport. The TCAS units dropped several reduced surveillance aircraft
tracks because of interference limiting. When the TCAS unit
interrogated aircraft in a high density airport area, some of the
targets disappeared from the cockpit display or were not recognized.
One occurrence of dropped tracks occurred for 30 to 40 seconds of a 90-
minute flight segment. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to
possible loss of separation of air traffic and possible mid-air
collision.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed the ACSS service information specified in the
following table. The service information describes procedures for
upgrading software for the ACSS TCAS to improve tracking of nearby
Mode-S intruders in high density environments.

                      Relevant Service Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   ACSS Publication
     ATA Service Bulletin No.             No.                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4066010-34-6036..................       8008230-001  May 25, 2010.
7517900-34-6040..................       8008229-001  May 12, 2010.
7517900-34-6041..................       8008231-001  May 24, 2010.
7517900-34-6042..................       8008236-001  May 27, 2010.
9000000-34-6016..................       8008233-001  June 4, 2010.
9000000-34-6017..................       8008234-001  June 4, 2010.
9000000-34-6018..................       8008238-001  June 4, 2010.
9003000-34-6006..................       8008235-001  June 4, 2010.
9003500-34-6014..................       8008221-001  May 27, 2010.
9003500-34-6015..................       8008222-001  May 27, 2010.
9003500-34-6016..................       8008223-001  May 27, 2010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 9,000 airplanes of
U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 2 work-hours
per product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is
$85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost up to $2,870 per product.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD to the
U.S. operators to be up to $27,360,000, or up to $3,040 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,

    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

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

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems, LLC: Docket No. FAA-
2010-1204; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-147-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by February 11, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Aviation Communication & Surveillance
Systems (ACSS) Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
units with the part numbers (P/Ns) specified in the ACSS service
bulletins identified in Table 1 of this AD, as installed on, but not
limited to, various transport and small airplanes, certificated in
any category.

                  Table 1--Applicable Service Bulletins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         ACSS
     ATA Service Bulletin No.       Publication No.          Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4066010-34-6036..................       8008230-001  May 25, 2010.
7517900-34-6040..................       8008229-001  May 12, 2010.
7517900-34-6041..................       8008231-001  May 24, 2010.
7517900-34-6042..................       8008236-001  May 27, 2010.
9000000-34-6016..................       8008233-001  June 4, 2010.
9000000-34-6017..................       8008234-001  June 4, 2010.
9000000-34-6018..................       8008238-001  June 4, 2010.
9003000-34-6006..................       8008235-001  June 4, 2010.
9003500-34-6014..................       8008221-001  May 27, 2010.
9003500-34-6015..................       8008222-001  May 27, 2010.
9003500-34-6016..................       8008223-001  May 27, 2010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject

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

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of anomalies with TCAS units
during a flight test over a high density airport. The TCAS units
dropped several reduced surveillance aircraft tracks because of
interference limiting. The Federal Aviation Administration is
issuing this AD to prevent TCAS units from dropping tracks, which
could compromise separation of air traffic and lead to subsequent
mid-air collisions.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Upgrade Software

    (g) Within 48 months after the effective date of this AD,
upgrade software for the ACSS TCAS, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable ACSS service bulletin
identified in Table 1 of this AD.

    Note 1: ACSS Publication Number 8008233-001, dated June 4, 2010,
ATA Service Bulletin 9000000-34-6016, contains three part numbers
(P/Ns 9000000-10007, -20007, and -55007) which were never produced.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to Attn: Abby Malmir, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and
Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-
5351; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 13, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-32658 Filed 12-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


SF 83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NESHAP for Portland Cement ( 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LLL)

1. Identification of the Information Collection 1( a) Title of the Information Collection NESHAP for Portland Cement ( 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LLL)

1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAP) for the regulations published at 40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL were proposed on March 24, 1998, and promulgated on June 14, 1999. These regulations apply to the following facilities: each new, existing or reconstructed kiln, in line kiln/ raw mill and greenfield raw material dryer at these facilities, except for kilns and in line kiln/ raw mills that burn hazardous waste and are subject to 40 CFR 63, subpart EEE. In addition, the rule applies to each new, existing or reconstructed clinker cooler; raw mill; finish mill; raw material, clinker or finished product storage bin; conveying system transfer point; bagging system and bulk loading and unloading system at facilities that are major sources; and to each existing, reconstructed or new brownfield raw material dryer at facilities that are major sources. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL.

In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources subject to the NESHAP.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least five years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) regional office.

Approximately 107 sources are currently subject to the regulation, and it is estimated that no additional sources will become subject to the regulation over the next three years.

The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) approved the currently active Information Collection Request ( ICR) without any " Terms of Clearance."

2. Need for and Use of the Collection 2 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection The EPA is charged under section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants. These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction. In addition, section 114( a) states that the Administrator may require any owner or operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

( A) Establish and maintain such records; ( B) make such reports; ( C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; ( D) sample such emissions ( in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); ( E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; ( F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with section 114( a)( 3); and ( G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, hazardous air pollutant ( HAP) emissions from portland cement manufacturing facilities cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data The control of emissions of HAPs from portland cement manufacturing facilities requires not only the installation of properly designed equipment, but also the operation and maintenance of that equipment. Emissions of HAPs from portland cement manufacturing facilities are the result of operation of the affected facilities. The subject standards are achieved by the capture of particulate HAP emissions using fabric filters or electrostatic precipitators control, temperature control for the reduction of dioxins and furans ( D/ F), and feed selection for reduction of other organic HAP. The notifications required in the applicable regulations are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to ensure that the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the regulations are being met. Performance test reports are needed as these are the Agency's record of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standards, and to serve as a record of the operating conditions under which compliance was achieved. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations. The information generated by the monitoring, recordkeeping and 3 reporting requirements described in this ICR is used by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NESHAP continue to operate the control equipment and achieve compliance with the regulation. Adequate monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting are necessary to ensure compliance with the applicable regulations, as required by the Clean Air Act. The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard( s) ensure compliance with the applicable regulations that were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act. The collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria The recordkeeping and reporting requested is required under 40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL.

3( a) Nonduplication The standards do not require the duplication in the collection and reporting of information. If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directly to the appropriate Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) regional office. Otherwise, the information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency. If a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2005 ( 70 FR 24020). No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

3( c) Consultations Upon review of the standard, information available and the data, the Agency has determined the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the " Active" ICR is fully supported and necessary to fulfil the requirements of the Clean Air Act ( CAA). Pertinent comments received since the last ICR renewal have been reviewed, including those submitted in response to the first federal register notice announcing the renewal of this ICR. We have determined that no further consultations with industry are necessary in order to calculate the burden for this renewal. It should be noted that the respondents, the industry trade associations, and other interested parties were provided an opportunity to comment on the burden associated with the standard as it was being developed.

3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection 4 Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards. Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and emission limitations are met. If the information required by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

3( e) General Guidelines Neither the reporting nor recordkeeping requirements violate the regulations established by Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) at 5 CFR 1320.5. However, most NESHAP standards and a few NSPS standards require records to be kept more than three years. In general, these standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including reports and notifications, for five years. The five year record retention requirement is consistent with the permit program at 40 CFR part 70, and the five year statute of limitations on which the permit program is based.

The retention of records for five years allows EPA to establish the compliance history of the respondent for purposes of determining the appropriate level of enforcement action. Historically, EPA notes that the most flagrant violations have extended beyond a five year period. If records are retained for less than five years, EPA would be deterred from pursuing the most flagrant violations due to the destruction of records documenting noncompliance.

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

3( g) Sensitive Questions The recordkeeping and reporting requirements do not contain sensitive questions.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are portland cement manufacturing facilities. The United States Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) code for the respondents affected by the standards is 3241 which corresponds to the North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) 32731 for portland cement manufacturing facilities. 5 4( b) Information Requested ( i) Data Items All data in this ICR that is recorded and/ or reported is required by NESHAP for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL).

A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports Notification of applicability 63.9( b)( 1& 2)

Notification of actual startup 63.9( b)( 4)

Notification of construction/ reconstruction 63.9( b)( 5)

Request for extension of compliance 63.9( c)

Notification of special compliance requirements 63.9( d)

Notification of initial performance test 63.9( e), 63.7( b)

Notification of opacity and visible emission observations 63.9( f)

Notification of the continuous emission monitoring performance evaluation 63.9( g)

Notification of compliance status 63.9( h)

Adjustments to time periods or postmark deadlines for submittal and review of required communications 63.9( i)

Change in information already provided 63.9( j)

Reports Operations and maintenance plan 63.1350( a)

Report of performance test 63.10( d)( 2)

Opacity and visual emission observation 63.10( d)( 3)

Progress reports 63.10( d)( 4)

Periodic startup, shutdown, malfunction reports 63.10( d)( 5)( i)

Immediate startup, shutdown, malfunction reports 63.10( d)( 5)( ii) 6 Reports Reporting results of continuous monitoring system performance evaluations 63.10( e)( 2)

Excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report 63.10( e)( 3)

Reporting continuous opacity monitoring system data produced during a performance test 63.10( e)( 4)

Waiver of recordkeeping and reporting requirements 63.10( f)

A source must maintain the following records:

Recordkeeping All reports and notifications 63.10( b)

Startups, shutdowns, malfunctions, periods where the continuous monitoring system is inoperative 63.10( b)( 2)

Record of applicability 63.10( b)( 3)

Records for sources with continuous monitoring systems 63.10( c)

Records are required to be retained for five ( 5) years. The first two ( 2) years of records must be retained at the facility 63.1355( a), 63.10( b)( 1)

( ii) Respondent Activities Respondent Activities Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate CMS for: 1) opacity; 2) to record the temperature of the exhaust gases to monitor D/ F; 3) to record the rate of carbon injection and the carrier gas parameter, if using activated carbon injection to control D/ F; and 4) to measure Total Hydrocarbons ( THC), if applicable.

Perform initial performance test, Reference Method 5 test for Particulates, Method 9 test for Opacity, Method 23 test for dioxin/ furans ( D/ F), and Performance Specification 8A of Appendix B to part 60 for THC, if applicable. Repeat performance tests, if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above. 7 Respondent Activities Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of disclosing and providing information.

Adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

Electronic Reporting At the present, many respondents to CAA standards use monitoring equipment that automatically records parameter data. Although personnel at the affected facility must evaluate the data, this internal automation has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at the plant site.

Also regulatory agencies, in cooperation with the respondents, continue to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically. However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used. At this time, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use electronic reporting.

5. The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 5( a) Agency Activities EPA conducts one or more of the following activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information.

Agency Activities Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests, if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records. 8 Agency Activities Input, analyze, and maintain data in the AIRS ( Aerometric Information Retrieval System) Facility Subsystem ( AFS) database.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management The required data and reports can be evaluated on site by conducting a partial compliance evaluation, full compliance evaluation or inspection, or through an off site review of compliance monitoring records and reports. Evaluation reports and inspection results are maintained by the Agency or delegated authority.

The results of these evaluations are entered into the Air Facility Subsystem ( AFS) which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance. AFS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government owned facilities. EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters. EPA and delegated authorities can retrieve and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner/ operator for five years.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility A majority of the affected facilities are large entities ( e. g., large businesses). However, the impact on small entities ( i. e., small businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the regulation. Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities. The Agency considers these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities. To the extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be reduced.

5( d) Collection Schedule The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown in Table 1.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry. The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork 9 Reduction Act. Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified. Responses to this information collection are mandatory.

The 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.

6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden The respondent burden is shown in Table 1. The labor hours in Table 1 are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the standard, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs ( i) Estimating Labor Costs This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial $ 97.46 ($ 46.41 + 110%) Technical $ 83.71 ($ 39.86 + 110%) Clerical $ 42.55 ($ 20.26 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, " Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group." The rates are from column 1, " Total compensation." The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

( ii) Estimating Capital/ Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs The types of industry costs associated with the information collection activity in the regulations are for labor and continuous emission monitoring ( CEM). The capital/ startup costs are one time costs when a facility becomes subject to the regulation. The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor and other costs such as photocopying and postage.

( iii) Capital/ Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs 10 Capital/ Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs ( A) Continuous Monitoring Device ( B) Capital/ Startup Cost for One Respondent ( C) Number of New Respondents ( D) Total Capital/ Startup Costs, ( B X C) ( E) Annual O& M Cost for One Respondent ( F) Number of Respondents with O& M ( G) Total O& M Costs, ( E X F)

Continuous Emission Monitors $ 220,000 0 0 $ 7,400 107 $ 791,800 The total capital/ startup cost for this ICR is the total of column D. This is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( a), Total annualized capital/ startup costs.

The total operation and maintenance ( O& M) costs for this ICR is the total of column G. This is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( b), Total annual costs ( O& M).

The total respondent costs in block 14 have been calculated as the addition of the capital/ startup costs, and the annual operation and maintenance costs. The average annual costs for capital/ startup and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( c), Total annualized cost requested. The numbers in block 14 of the OMB 83 I form are rounded to show the cost in thousands of dollars.

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs The only costs to the Agency are those associated with analysis of the reported information. EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of records maintained by the respondents and the publication and distribution of collected information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is shown in Table 2, attached.

This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

Managerial $ 56.02 ( GS 13, Step 5, $ 35.01 x 1.6) Technical $ 41.57 ( GS 12, Step 1, $ 25.98 x 1.6) Clerical $ 22.50 ( GS 6, Step 3, $ 14.06 x 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management ( OPM) " 2005 General Schedule" which excludes locality rates of pay.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs 11 Number of respondents is calculated using the following table that addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents Respondents That Submit Reports Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports Year ( A) Number of New Respondents 1 ( B) Number of Existing Respondents ( C) Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports ( D) Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents ( E) Number of Respondents ( E= A+ B+ C D)

1 0 107 0 0 107 2 0 107 0 0 107 3 0 107 0 0 107 Average 0 107 0 0 107 1 New respondents include sources with constructed, reconstructed and modified affected facilities.

To avoid double counting respondents, column D is subtracted. The average Number of Respondents over the three year period of this ICR is shown in column D. This number appears on the OMB 83 I form in block 13( a), Number of respondents.

The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the following table:

Total Annual Responses ( A)

Information Collection Activity ( B)

Number of Respondents ( C)

Number of Responses ( D) Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports ( E) Total Annual Responses E=( BxC)+ D Notification of performance test 64.2 1.1 0 70.6 Notification of opacity and visible emission observation 64.2 1 0 64.2 Report of periodic performance tests 64.2 1.1 0 64.2 12 Total Annual Responses ( A)

Information Collection Activity ( B)

Number of Respondents ( C)

Number of Responses ( D) Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports ( E) Total Annual Responses E=( BxC)+ D Excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report 107 2 0 214 Immediate startup, shutdown, malfunction reports 5 1 0 5 Total 418 The number of Total Annual Responses is shown in column E. This number is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 13( b), Total annual responses.

The Total Hours Requested is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 13( c). The total annual labor cost may be found in Table 1.

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is shown in Table 2.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden The decrease in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due to an adjustment. The adjustment decrease in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due to a correction to the tables, which did not properly account for all reporting requirements incurred by existing facilities. The increase in O& M costs is due to an increase in equipment maintenance costs.

6( g) Burden Statement The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 42 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to 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; to 13 adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; to train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Numbers for EPA's regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number OECA 2005 0040, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D. C. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is ( 202) 566 1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select " search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. You can also send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number OECA 2005 0040 and OMB Control Number 2060 0416 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.