[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 23, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56680-56684]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23076]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0493; Product Identifier 2019-NM-043-AD; Amendment
39-19762; AD 2019-20-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

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

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-18-
15, which applied to certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited
Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. AD 2011-18-15 required initial and
repetitive torque checks of the bolt preload; detailed inspection of
the barrel nuts and cradle for cracking, pitting, and corrosion if the
bolt preload is correct; and replacement of certain hardware if
necessary. This AD continues to require those actions. This AD also
requires new inspections and replacement of certain hardware, which
would terminate the repetitive torque checks and inspections; and
removes airplanes from the applicability. This AD was prompted by in-
service reports of cracked barrel nuts found at the front spar
locations of the wing-to-fuselage attachment joints, and a loose washer
in the barrel nut assembly. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective November 27, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 27,
2019.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd., Q-Series Technical Help
Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; phone:
416-375-4000; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet:
https://dehavilland.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th
St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2019-0493.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0493; 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 final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

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

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2011-24R1, dated
January 21, 2019 (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 series airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket
on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0493.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2011-18-15, Amendment 39-16797 (76 FR
54093, August 31, 2011) (``AD 2011-18-15''). AD 2011-18-15 applied to
certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400 series
airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 9, 2019
(84 FR 32664). The NPRM was prompted by in-service reports of cracked
barrel nuts found at the front spar locations of the wing-to-fuselage
attachment joints, and a loose washer in the barrel nut assembly. The
NPRM proposed to continue to require initial and repetitive torque
checks of the bolt preload; detailed inspection of the barrel nuts and
cradle for cracking, pitting, and corrosion if the bolt preload is
correct; and replacement of hardware if necessary. The NPRM also
proposed to require new inspections and replacement of certain
hardware, which would terminate the repetitive torque checks and
inspections; and remove airplanes from the applicability. We are
issuing this AD to address cracked barrel nuts and a loose washer in
the barrel nut assembly, which could result in failure of the barrel
nuts, compromising the structural integrity of the wing-to-fuselage
attachments, and possible separation of the wing from the airplane
during flight. See the MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Explanation of Changes Made to This Final Rule

    The FAA has revised this final rule to identify the legal name of
the manufacturer as published in the most recent type certificate data
sheet (TCDS) for the affected airplane models.
    The FAA has revised paragraph (n) of this AD to refer to De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (the current TCDS holder) as the
appropriate contact for the referenced repair drawing.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. The
FAA has determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    The FAA also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued the following service information.
     Service Bulletin A84-57-25, Revision A, dated July 16,
2018. This service information describes procedures for initial and
repetitive torque checks of the bolt preload, detailed inspection of
the barrel nuts and cradle for cracking, pitting, and corrosion if the
bolt preload is correct, and replacement of hardware if necessary.
     Service Bulletin 84-57-26, Revision C, dated July 16,
2018. This service information describes procedures for a visual
inspection of the saddle washer and retainer for any damage (cracks)
and corrosion, and replacement of the existing wing front spar barrel
nuts, bolts, and preload indicating washers.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 54 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2011-18-15...  15 work-hours x $85 per          $10,492         $11,767        $635,418
                                         hour = $1,275.
New actions...........................  15 work-hours x $85 per           10,492          11,767         635,418
                                         hour = $1,275.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable us to
provide cost estimates for the on-condition repairs specified in this
AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2011-18-15, Amendment 39-16797 (76 FR 54093, August 31, 2011), and
adding the following new AD:

2019-20-09 De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.): Amendment 39-19762; Docket No.
FAA-2019-0493; Product Identifier 2019-NM-043-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 27, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2011-18-15, Amendment 39-16797 (76 FR 54093,
August 31, 2011) (``AD 2011-18-15'').

(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 through 4437 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by in-service reports of cracked barrel
nuts found at the front spar locations of the wing-to-fuselage
attachment joints, and a loose washer in the barrel nut assembly.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracked barrel nuts and a
loose washer in the barrel nut assembly, which could result in
failure of the barrel nuts, compromising the structural integrity of
the wing-to-fuselage attachments, and possible separation of the
wing from the airplane during flight.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Initial and Repetitive Checks and Inspections, With
Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2011-18-15, with revised service information. At the applicable time
specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this AD: Do a torque check
to determine if the bolt preload is correct, and if the preload is
correct, before further flight, do a detailed inspection of each
barrel nut and cradle for cracking, pitting or corrosion, in
accordance with paragraph 3.B., part A, of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-25, dated
July 20, 2011; or Bombardier Service Bulletin A84-57-25, Revision A,
dated July 16, 2018. After the effective date of this AD, only
Bombardier Service Bulletin A84-57-25, Revision A, dated July 16,
2018, may be used. Repeat the torque check and, as applicable, the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours
or 12 months, whichever occurs first.
    (1) For airplanes that have accumulated 1,900 or more total
flight hours as of September 15, 2011 (the effective date of AD
2011-18-15), or for which it has been 12 months or more since the
date of issuance of the original Canadian airworthiness certificate
or the date of issuance of the original Canadian export certificate
of airworthiness as of September 15, 2011: Within 100 flight hours
or 10 days after September 15, 2011, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes that have accumulated less than 1,900 total
flight hours as of September 15, 2011 (the effective date of AD
2011-18-15), and for which it has been less than 12 months since the
date of issuance of the original Canadian airworthiness certificate
or the date of issuance of the original Canadian export certificate
of airworthiness as of September 15, 2011: Prior to the accumulation
of 2,000 total flight hours or within 12 months since the date of
issuance of the original Canadian standard airworthiness certificate
or the date of issuance of the original Canadian export certificate
of airworthiness, whichever occurs first.

(h) Retained Corrective Actions for Incorrect Bolt Preload, With
Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2011-18-15, with revised service information. If any bolt preload is
found to be incorrect (i.e., the ring can be rotated during any
torque check required by paragraph (g) of this AD), before further
flight, replace all hardware at that location (except the saddle
washer and retainer) in accordance with paragraph 3.B., part B, of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin
A84-57-25, dated July 20, 2011; or paragraph 3.B. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26,
Revision C, dated July 16, 2018. After the effective date of this
AD, only Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26, Revision C, dated
July 16, 2018, may be used.

(i) Retained Corrective Actions for Barrel Nut/Cradle Discrepancies,
With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2011-18-15, with revised service information. If any crack, pitting,
or corrosion of the barrel nut or cradle is found

during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before
further flight, replace all hardware at that location (except the
saddle washer and retainer) in accordance with paragraph 3.B., part
B, of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service
Bulletin A84-57-25, dated July 20, 2011; or paragraph 3.B. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26,
Revision C, dated July 16, 2018. After the effective date of this
AD, only Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26, Revision C, dated
July 16, 2018, may be used.

(j) New Requirement of This AD: Replacement and Visual Inspection

    Within 12,000 flight hours or 72 months after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a visual inspection of the
saddle washer and retainer for any damage (cracks) or corrosion; and
replace the wing front spar barrel nuts, bolts, and preload
indicating washers; in accordance with paragraph 3.B. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26,
Revision C, dated July 16, 2018.

(k) New Corrective Actions for Damage (Cracks) or Corrosion

    If any damage (cracks) or corrosion is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (j) of this AD: Before further
flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (p)(2) of this AD.

(l) New Provision of This AD: Terminating Actions for Repetitive Torque
Checks and Detailed Inspections

    Accomplishment of the applicable actions required by paragraphs
(j) and (k) of this AD, at all four barrel nut locations, terminates
the repetitive torque checks and detailed inspections of paragraph
(g) of this AD.

(m) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on
any airplane, a barrel nut having part number DSC228-16.

(n) Retained Special Flight Permit Provisions, With Revised Compliance
Language

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD
2011-18-15, with revised compliance language. Special flight
permits, as described in 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199, may be issued to
operate the airplane to a location where the requirements of this AD
can be accomplished, but concurrence by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA, is required before issuance of the special flight
permit. Before using any approved special flight permits, notify
your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics
inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector,
your local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO). Operators must
request a repair drawing from Bombardier, Inc., or De Havilland
Aircraft of Canada Limited, which provides recommendations for a
one-time special flight permit. After the effective date of this AD,
only De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited may provide the repair
drawing. The repair drawing will be applicable to the operator's
aircraft serial number only. Special flight permits may be permitted
provided that the conditions specified in paragraphs (n)(1) through
(5) of this AD are met.
    (1) Only one barrel nut out of four is cracked, one cradle is
cracked, or one washer is loose; all other strut (wing front spar)
bolt locations must be free of damage.
    (2) The airplane must operate with reduced airspeed not to
exceed 180 KIAS (knots indicated air speed). No passengers and no
cargo are onboard.
    (3) The airplane must not operate in known or forecast
turbulence, other than light turbulence.
    (4) The airplane descent rate on landing flare-out is not to
exceed 5 feet per second.
    (5) Heavy braking or hard turning of the airplane upon landing
is to be avoided if possible.

(o) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph restates the provisions of paragraph (j) of
AD 2011-18-15, with revised formatting and updated service
information. This paragraph provides credit for torque checks,
initial inspections, and replacements required by paragraphs (g) and
(h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using the service information specified in
paragraphs (o)(1)(i) through (v) of this AD, which is not
incorporated by reference in this AD. The repetitive torque checks,
and as applicable, the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD must be continued at the time specified.
    (i) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-19, dated February
1, 2008.
    (ii) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-19, Revision A,
dated February 6, 2008.
    (iii) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-19, Revision B,
dated March 6, 2008.
    (iv) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-19, Revision C,
dated August 20, 2008.
    (v) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-19, Revision D,
dated August 12, 2011.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraphs (h) through (k) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using the service
information specified in paragraphs (o)(2)(i) through (iii) of this
AD. This service information is not incorporated by reference in
this AD.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26, dated March 21, 2013.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26, Revision A, dated
July 18, 2014.
    (iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26, Revision B, dated
February 26, 2015.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using the service information
specified in paragraphs (o)(3)(i) and (ii) of this AD.
    (i) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84-57-25, dated July 20,
2011, which was incorporated by reference in AD 2011-18-15.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin A84-57-25, Revision A, dated
July 16, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in this AD.

(p) Other FAA AD Provisions

    (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 local Flight Standards District 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; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
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.
    (3) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2011-18-15 are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

(q) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2011-24R1, dated January 21, 2019, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2019-0493.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (r)(4) and (5) of this AD.

(r) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
November 27, 2019.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin A84-57-25, Revision A, dated
July 16, 2018.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-26, Revision C, dated
July 16, 2018.
    (4) For service information identified in this AD, contact De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123
Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; phone: 416-375-
4000; fax:

416-375-4539; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://dehavilland.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 7, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-23076 Filed 10-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48980-48981]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19963]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9716-2]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby
given of a proposed consent decree to address a lawsuit filed by
American Bottom Conservancy in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Illinois: American Bottom Conservancy v. Jackson,
No. 3:12-cv-00296-GPM-SCW (S.D. IL). On August 16, 2011, Plaintiff
filed a deadline suit to compel the Administrator to respond to an
administrative petition seeking EPA's objection to a CAA Title V
operating permit issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
for U.S. Steel Corporation's Granite City Works facility. Under the
terms of the proposed consent decree, EPA would agree to respond to the
petition by December 3, 2012, or within 30 days of the entry date of
this Consent Decree, whichever is later.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
September 14, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2012-0577, online at www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method);
by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaytrue Ting, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    This proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit alleging that
the Administrator failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty to grant or
deny, within 60 days of submission, an administrative petition to
object to a CAA Title V permit issued by the Illinois Environmental
Protection

Agency for U.S. Steel Corporation's Granite City Works facility. Under
the terms of the proposed consent decree, EPA would agree to respond to
the petition by December 3, 2012, or within 30 days of the entry date
of this Consent Decree, whichever is later. In addition, the proposed
consent decree further states that following signature, EPA shall
promptly deliver notice of such action to the Office of the Federal
Register for prompt publication and, if EPA's response contains an
objection in whole or in part, transmit the signed response to the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, under the
proposed consent decree, EPA would agree to pay a specified amount to
settle all claims for attorneys' fees, costs and expenses in the
lawsuit. The proposed consent decree also states that after EPA
fulfills its obligations under the decree, the case shall be dismissed
with prejudice.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who are not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be
withdrawn, the terms of the decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2012-0577) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at
the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. 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 Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view
public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and to access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in
the appropriate docket identification number then select ``search''.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or on paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless
the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not
included in the official public docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including
copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed
in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
    Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(email) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
email comment directly to the Docket without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: August 7, 2012.
Lorie J. Schmidt,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012-19963 Filed 8-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 223 (Friday, November 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 81825]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27749]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 12d3-1, SEC File No. 270-504, OMB Control No. 3235-0561

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collections of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit these existing collections of information to the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Section 12(d)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C.
80a) generally prohibits registered investment companies (``funds''),
and companies controlled by funds, from purchasing securities issued by
a registered investment adviser, broker, dealer, or underwriter
(``securities-related businesses''). Rule 12d3-1 (``Exemption of
acquisitions of securities issued by persons engaged in securities
related businesses'' (17 CFR 270.12d3-1)) permits a fund to invest up
to five percent of its assets in securities of an issuer deriving more
than fifteen percent of its gross revenues from securities-related
businesses, but a fund may not rely on rule 12d3-1 to acquire
securities of its own investment adviser or any affiliated person of
its own investment adviser.
    A fund may, however, rely on an exemption in rule 12d3-1 to acquire
securities issued by its subadvisers in circumstances in which the
subadviser would have little ability to take advantage of the fund,
because it is not in a position to direct the fund's securities
purchases. The exemption in rule 12d3-1(c)(3) is available if (i) the
subadviser is not, and is not an affiliated person of, an investment
adviser that provides advice with respect to the portion of the fund
that is acquiring the securities, and (ii) the advisory contracts of
the subadviser, and any subadviser that is advising the purchasing
portion of the fund, prohibit them from consulting with each other
concerning securities transactions of the fund, and limit their
responsibility in providing advice to providing advice with respect to
discrete portions of the fund's portfolio.
    Based on an analysis of third-party information, the staff
estimates that approximately 319 fund portfolios enter into subadvisory
agreements each year.\1\ Based on discussions with industry
representatives, the staff estimates that it will require approximately
3 attorney hours to draft and execute additional clauses in new
subadvisory contracts in order for funds and subadvisers to be able to
rely on the exemptions in rule 12d3-1. Because these additional clauses
are identical to the clauses that a fund would need to insert in their
subadvisory contracts to rely on rules 10f-3, 17a-10, and 17e-1 and
because we believe that funds that use one such rule generally use all
of these rules, we apportion this 3 hour time burden equally to all
four rules. Therefore, we estimate that the burden allocated to rule
12d3-1 for this contract change would be 0.75 hours.\2\ Assuming that
all 319 funds that enter into new subadvisory contracts each year make
the modification to their contract required by the rule, we estimate
that the rule's contract modification requirement will result in 239.25
burden hours annually.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Based on information available from Morningstar and the ICI
Fact Book, we estimate that 37 percent of funds are advised by
subadvisers.
    \2\ This estimate is based on the following calculation (3 hours
/ 4 rules = .75 hours).
    \3\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: (0.75
hours x 319 portfolios = 239.25 burden hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection 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: November 14, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-27749 Filed 11-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 6, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39248-39251]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15991]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-1197; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-044-AD;
Amendment 39-16736; AD 2011-14-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and
F4-600R Series Airplanes, and Model C4-605R Variant F Airplanes
(Collectively Called A300-600 Series Airplanes); and Model A310 Series
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    An operator of an A300-600 aeroplane reported finding a cracked
pylon fuel drain pipe on engine 1. * * *
    * * * The pipe drains the double wall of the wing-to-pylon
junction in the event of fuel leakage.
    After investigation, it was concluded that the damage of the
pylon fuel drain pipe had been caused by chafing of the pipe against
over-length screws that had been installed in accordance with the
Illustrated Parts Catalogue (IPC) during a maintenance phase of the
Lower Aft Pylon Fairing (LAPF).
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could, in
combination with fuel leakage in the pylon, lead to an accumulation
of fuel in the lowest point of the LAPF. As high temperatures are
present within the

LAPF, and without ventilation, this could result in fuel (vapour)
ignition and consequent fire.
* * * * *

    We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 10, 2011.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 10,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2010
(75 FR 76926). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. The MCAI states:

    An operator of an A300-600 aeroplane reported finding a cracked
pylon fuel drain pipe on engine 1.The pipe, Part Number (P/
N) A71715020, had separated and the end was found 5.5 inches from
the pylon aft bulkhead. A similar case was also reported on an
A300F4-608ST aeroplane.
    The affected pylon fuel drain pipe runs from the top of the
pylon primary structure to the aft part of the pylon rear secondary
structure and is partly attached under the pylon lower spar. The
pipe drains the double wall of the wing-to-pylon junction in the
event of fuel leakage.
    After investigation, it was concluded that the damage of the
pylon fuel drain pipe had been caused by chafing of the pipe against
over-length screws that had been installed in accordance with the
Illustrated Parts Catalogue (IPC) during a maintenance phase of the
Lower Aft Pylon Fairing (LAPF).
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could, in
combination with fuel leakage in the pylon, lead to an accumulation
of fuel in the lowest point of the LAPF. As high temperatures are
present within the LAPF, and without ventilation, this could result
in fuel (vapour) ignition and consequent fire.
    To address and correct this unsafe condition, EASA * * *
required an inspection [for missing pipes, or distortions or holes]
of the pylon fuel drain pipe and the attachment screws and,
depending on findings, the necessary corrective actions. In case
over-length screws are found to be installed, depending on location
and aeroplane configuration, these must be replaced.
* * * * *

    Required actions also include visually inspecting to determine the
length and part number of the drain pipe attachment screws on the LAPF
on the left- and right-hand pylons. Corrective actions include
replacing or repairing the pipe, or replacing screws with incorrect
part numbers with new screws. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Extend the Compliance Time

    UPS requested that we extend the compliance time from 30 days to 30
months after the effective date of the AD. Per the commenter, the NPRM
stated that the over-length screws installed on the affected aircraft
were installed in accordance with the illustrated parts catalog (IPC),
and that the correct attachment screws are clearly identified in the
UPS A300-600 IPC, so there is a minimal probability of installing an
over-length screw. The commenter stated that the compliance time of 30
days is too restrictive and believes that extending the threshold to 30
months for those operators whose IPC does not list an over-length
fastener would provide an equivalent level of safety and better fit
within an operator's routine maintenance program and eliminate any
undue burden associated with a restrictive timetable.
    We do not agree to extend the compliance time. The FAA received
information confirming that over-length screws could have been
introduced in production due to some erroneous drawings. Further,
before 2007, not all IPCs were correct. Some of the IPCs for aircraft
fitted with Pratt & Whitney engines were corrected in 2007. All IPCs
were checked in 2010, and remaining erroneous IPCs were corrected.
Although UPS may have the correct IPC, since some over-length screws
could have been installed during production, a fleet inspection is
needed to address the identified unsafe condition. However, under the
provisions of paragraph (k) of this AD, we will consider requests for
approval of an extension of the compliance time if sufficient data are
submitted to substantiate that the new compliance time would provide an
acceptable level of safety. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Request To Use Thicker Washer as Advised in Service Information Letter

    UPS requested FAA concurrence that using an alternative washer, P/N
NSA5149-3, as recommended by Airbus in Service Information Letter 54-
035, Revision 01, dated July 9, 2010, will not have an impact on the
AD. This washer would be used in lieu of P/N NSA5149-4 under the head
of the attachment screws, to prevent cracking of the LAPF.
    We partially agree with the commenter's request. The alternative
washer is a recommended improvement, but not a modification addressing
an unsafe condition/airworthiness issue. As the Service Information
Letter mentions, both washers are fully interchangeable; the last IPC
update (2010) also reflects this interchangeability. Therefore, we
confirm that use of either washer is adequate. In this regard, and to
avoid the need for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) on this
issue in the future, we have added the washer having P/N NSA5149-3 to
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the change described previously. We determined that this
change will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 168 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 4 work-

hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $57,120, or
$340 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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2011-14-01 Airbus: Amendment 39-16736. Docket No. FAA-2010-1197;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-044-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective August
10, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620,
and B4-622 airplanes; Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes;
Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes; Model A300 C4-605R Variant
F airplanes; and Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324,
and -325 airplanes; certificated in any category; all serial
numbers.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54:
Nacelles/pylons.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    An operator of an A300-600 aeroplane reported finding a cracked
pylon fuel drain pipe on engine 1. * * *
    * * * The pipe drains the double wall of the wing-to-pylon
junction in the event of fuel leakage.
    After investigation, it was concluded that the damage of the
pylon fuel drain pipe had been caused by chafing of the pipe against
over-length screws that had been installed in accordance with the
Illustrated Parts Catalogue (IPC) during a maintenance phase of the
Lower Aft Pylon Fairing (LAPF).
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could, in
combination with fuel leakage in the pylon, lead to an accumulation
of fuel in the lowest point of the LAPF. As high temperatures are
present within the LAPF, and without ventilation, this could result
in fuel (vapour) ignition and consequent fire.
* * * * *

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.

Inspection and Corrective Actions

    (g) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, do a
general visual inspection for missing pipes, or distortions or
holes, of the fuel drain pipes of the LAPF, and if no missing pipes,
distortions, and holes are found, do a general visual inspection to
determine the length and part number of the drain pipe attachment
screws on the LAPF on the left-hand and right-hand pylons, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A300-54A6039, Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010
(for Model A300-600 series airplanes); or A310-54A2040, Revision 02,
dated June 10, 2010 (for Model A310 series airplanes).
    (1) If missing pipes, distortions, or holes of the fuel drain
pipes are detected during any inspection required by paragraph (g)
of this AD, before further flight, replace the drain pipe, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A300-54A6039, Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010
(for Model A300-600 series airplanes); or A310-54A2040, Revision 02,
dated June 10, 2010 (for Model A310 series airplanes); or contact
Airbus for repair instructions and do the repair; except where the
applicable service bulletin specifies using washers having part
number (P/N) NSA5149-4, washers having P/N NSA5149-3 may
alternatively be used.
    (2) If screw length is outside the measurement specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A300-54A6039, Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010 (for Model A300-600
series airplanes); or A310-54A2040, Revision 02, dated June 10, 2010
(for Model A310 series airplanes); or screws having incorrect part
numbers are found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, before further flight, replace the screws with screws
having P/N NAS1102E3-10, NAS1102E3-12, or NAS560HK3-2, as applicable
to location and airplane (engine) configuration, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A300-54A6039, Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010 (for Model A300-600
series airplanes); or A310-54A2040, Revision 02, dated June 10, 2010
(for Model A310 series airplanes); except where the applicable
service bulletin specifies using washers having P/N NSA5149-4,
washers having P/N NSA5149-3 may alternatively be used.
    (h) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install screws
on the LAPF, other than screws having P/N NAS1102E3-10, NAS1102E3-
12, or NAS560HK3-2, as applicable to location and airplane (engine)
configuration, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-54A6039,

Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010 (for Model A300-600 series
airplanes); or A310-54A2040, Revision 02, dated June 10, 2010 (for
Model A310 series airplanes).

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (i) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service bulletins identified in table 1 of this
AD are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
actions specified in this AD.

                                        Table 1--Credit Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Airbus Mandatory
           For model--             Service Bulletin--           Revision--                     Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A300-600 series airplanes.......  A300-54A6039.......  Original....................  January 19, 2010.
A310 series airplanes...........  A310-54A2040.......  Original....................  January 19, 2010.
A310 series airplanes...........  A310-54A2040.......  01..........................  March 11, 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No Reporting

    (j) Although Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletins A300-54A6039,
Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010; and A310-54A2040, Revision 02,
dated June 10, 2010; specify to submit certain information to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: Although the MCAI or service information tells you to
submit information to the manufacturer, paragraph (j) of this AD
does not require that information.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (k) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

Related Information

    (l) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2010-0085, dated May 3, 2010; Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A300-54A6039, Revision 01, dated March 11, 2010; and Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-54A2040, Revision 02, dated June 10,
2010; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (m) You must use Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-54A6039,
Revision 01, excluding Appendix 01 and including Appendices 02 and
03, dated March 11, 2010; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-
54A2040, Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01 and including Appendices
02 and 03, dated June 10, 2010; as applicable; to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 16, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-15991 Filed 7-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 91999-92000]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30479]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0091]

Proposed Information Collection Submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget; Request for Comments

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR)
abstracted below is being forwarded to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and comments. A Federal Register Notice with a
60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following information
collection was published on September 20, 2016 (81 FR 65709).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 18, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the burden estimate, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: NHTSA Desk Officer, 725 17th Street NW., Washington,
DC 20503.
    Comments are invited on the following:
    i. Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    ii. The accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection;
    iii. Ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    iv. Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Yvonne Clarke, NHTSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For access to the docket to read background documents, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street address listed above. Follow the
online instructions for accessing the dockets.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Vehicle Performance Guidance.
    OMB Control Number: Not assigned.
    Type of Request: New Information Collection.
    Abstract: On September 20, 2016, the Department of Transportation
published its Federal Automated Vehicles Policy. Recognizing the
potential that highly automated vehicles (HAVs) have to enhance safety
and mobility, the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy sets out an
approach to enable the safe deployment of L2 and HAV systems. An HAV
system is defined as one that corresponds to Conditional (Level 3),
High (Level 4), and Full (Level 5) Automation, as defined in SAE J3016.
HAV systems rely on the automation system (not on a human driver) to
monitor the driving environment for at least certain aspects of the
driving task. An L2 system, also described in SAE J3016, is different
because the human driver is never relieved of the responsibility to
monitor the driving environment.
    The speed with which increasingly complex L2 and HAV systems are
evolving challenges DOT and NHTSA to take approaches that ensure these
technologies are safely introduced, provide safety benefits today, and
achieve their full safety potential in the future. Consistent with its
statutory purpose to reduce traffic accidents and deaths and injuries
resulting from traffic accidents, NHTSA seeks to collect from, and
recommend the recordkeeping and disclosure of information by vehicle
manufacturers and other entities as described in Federal Automated
Vehicles Policy. Specifically, NHTSA's recommendations in the policy
section titled ``Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles''
(hereafter referred to as ``Guidance'') are the subject of this
voluntary information collection request. This Guidance outlines
recommended best practices, many of which should be commonplace in the
industry, for the safe pre-deployment design, development, and testing
of HAV and L2 systems prior to commercial sale or operation on public
roads. Further, the Guidance identifies key areas to be addressed by
manufacturers and other entities prior to testing or deploying HAV or
L2 systems on public roadways.
    To assist NHTSA and the public in evaluating how safety is being
addressed by manufacturers and other entities developing and testing
HAV and L2 systems, NHTSA is recommending the following documentation,
recordkeeping, and disclosures that aid in that mission. The burden
estimates contained in this notice are based on the Agency's present
understanding of the HAV and L2 systems market. NHTSA seeks comment on
the burden estimates in this notice in whole or in part.
    Currently NHTSA expects up to approximately 45 OEMS and other
entities producing level 3 through 5

vehicles or features will choose to voluntarily comply with the
guidance set forth in the Federal Automated Vehicle Policy. The agency
also expects that up to 45 manufacturers and other entities who are
currently supplying level 2 functionality to voluntarily comply with
the guidance. The estimated cost for complying with this regulation is
$100 per hour. Therefore, the total annual cost is estimated to be
$13,605,000 (time burden of 136,050 hours x $100 cost per hour).
    Affected Public: Business or other for profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 90.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 90.
    Annual Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 136,050 hrs.
    Frequency of Collection: Annual.
    On September 20, 2016, NHTSA published a notice announcing the
proposed collection of information pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
and providing a 60-day comment period (81 FR 65709). . The Agency
received 11 comments on this notice from the general public, five of
these commenters provided general comments on the Federal Automated
Vehicles Policy (the Policy). The remaining commenters (Daimler Trucks
North America, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Inc.,
Association of Global Automakers, Inc., Motor and Equipment
Manufacturers Association (MEMA), Truck and Engine Manufacturers
Association (EMA), and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
(IIHS)) had comments that were responsive to the 60-Day notice. The
Agency also received a number of substantive comments pertaining to the
ICR as part of the overall general comments on the Policy (Docket #
NHTSA-2016-0090). In general these comments were reflected in the
specific comments received on the 60-Day Notice.
    These comments can be grouped into the following categories:

1. Comments regarding the burden of voluntarily responding to the 15
point Safety Assessment
2. Comments regarding the burden hours imposed by the guidance (e.g.
documentation related to the 15 point Safety Assessment) contained in
the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy
3. Comments regarding the scope of the Safety Assessment Letter
4. Comments regarding submitting Safety Assessment Letters for test
vehicles
5. Comments regarding submitting Safety Assessment Letters for vehicles
meeting SAE International (SAE) Level 2 automation

    It is important to note that the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy
was effective on September 23, 2016, and is intended to be updated on
an annual basis. Therefore the burden hours outlined in the 60-Day
notice and this subsequent 30 Day notice are reflective of that version
of the policy. Comments which suggested changes to the scope of the
Safety Assessment Letter, removal of test vehicles and SAE Level 2
vehicles from the Policy, and similar comments are addressed in the
supporting document. Additionally, the agency has provided and will
continue to provide clarifications to the policy on its Web site.
    The remaining comments regarding the burden of voluntarily
submitting a Safety Assessment Letter and the burden of following the
guidance contained inside the Policy can be summed up as ``NHTSA has
underestimated the burden of following its policy.'' However, none of
the commenters offered substantive information regarding the specific
details of the Agency's underestimation of the burden in following the
Policy's Guidance. In light of these comments, NHTSA has reevaluated
its analysis of the burden hours and looked to voluntary industry
standards such as the International Organization for Standardization's
(ISO) 26262--Road vehicles--Functional safety, SAE J3061--Cybersecurity
Guidebook for Cyber-Physical Vehicle Systems, and NHTSA's own
experience with safety defect investigations as it relates to record
keeping by companies. Based on this analysis and the Agency's
observation that the Policy is not suggesting new documentation
procedures, we have not made any adjustments to the burden hours . . .

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.95.

Nathaniel Beuse,
Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety Research, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-30479 Filed 12-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 202 (Thursday, October 18, 2018)] [Notices] [Page 52826] [FR Doc No: 2018-22717]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-92-000]

GRP Madison, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based

Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of

GRP Madison, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an

accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a

request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future

issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,

DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's

Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone

filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that

document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with

regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18

CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of

liability, is November 1, 2018.

    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

5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in

the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in

the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the

Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an

eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers

    to receive email notification when a document is added to a

subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service,

please email [email protected] or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll

free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 12, 2018.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2018-22717 Filed 10-17-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P