[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8476-8478]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03986]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0720; FRL-9973-07]

Registration Review; Draft Human Health and/or Ecological Risk
Assessments for Several Pesticides; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's draft human
health and ecological risk assessments for the registration review of
acetamiprid, acibenzolar, ametryn, ammonia/ammonium sulfate, butralin,
glyphosate, naphthenate salts, prometon,

pyrithiobac-sodium, and pymetrozine. It also announces the availability
of EPA's draft human health risk assessment for the registration review
of cypermethrin.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, to the docket identification (ID)
number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the Table in
Unit IV, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For pesticide specific information contact: The Chemical Review
Manager for the pesticide of interest identified in the Table in Unit
IV.
    For general questions on the registration review program, contact:
Dana Friedman, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the Chemical Review Manager identified in the Table in Unit IV.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Background

    Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform
its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. As part of the registration review process,
the Agency has completed comprehensive draft human health and/or
ecological risk assessments for all pesticides listed in the Table in
Unit IV. After reviewing comments received during the public comment
period, EPA may issue a revised risk assessment, explain any changes to
the draft risk assessment, and respond to comments and may request
public input on risk mitigation before completing a proposed
registration review decision for the pesticides listed in the Table in
Unit IV. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's
registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge,
including its effects on human health and the environment.

III. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed
in the Table in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural
Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with
widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must
perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

IV. What action is the agency taking?

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability
of EPA's human health and ecological risk assessments for the
pesticides shown in the following table, and opens a 60-day public
comment period on the risk assessments.

                      Table--Draft Risk Assessments Being Made Available for Public Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Registration review case name and                                                  Chemical review manager and
                 No.                                  Docket ID No.                      contact information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetamiprid Case 7617...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0329                          Margaret Hathaway,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Acibenzolar Case 7031...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0755                          Leigh Rimmer,
                                                                                [email protected] (703)
                                                                                347-0553.
Ametryn Case 2010...................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0249                          Christian Bongard,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Ammonia & Ammonium Sulfate Case       EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0684                          Stephen Savage,
 No(s): 7440 & 5073.                                                                 savage[email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Butralin Case 2075..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0720                          Brittany Pruitt,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Cypermethrin Case 2130..............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0167                          Susan Bartow,
                                                                                [email protected] (703)
                                                                                603-0065.
Glyphosate Case 0178................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0361                          [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Naphthenate Salts Case 3099.........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0455                          Rachel Ricciardi,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Prometon Case 2545..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0290                          Brittany Pruitt,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Pymetrozine Case 7611...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0368                          Marianne Mannix,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Pyrithiobac-soduim Case 7239........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0661                          Linsey Walsh,
                                                                                [email protected] (703)
                                                                                347-8030.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is providing an opportunity,
through this notice of availability, for interested parties to provide
comments and input concerning the Agency's draft human health and/or
ecological risk assessments for the pesticides listed in the Table in
Unit IV. For the pyrethroid cypermethrin (cypermethrin, zeta-
cypermethrin, and alpha-cypermethrin), the ecological assessment for
all of the pyrethroids was previously published for comment in the
Federal Register in November 29, 2016 (81 FR 85952; FRL-9953-53); EPA
is now publishing the single chemical human health risk assessment for
cypermethrin. The Agency will consider all comments received during the
public comment period and make changes, as appropriate, to a draft
human health and/or ecological risk assessment. EPA may then issue a
revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk
assessment, and respond to comments.
    Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or
information in response to this document. To be considered during a
pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
     To ensure that EPA will consider data or information
submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information
during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider
data or information submitted at a later date.
     The data or information submitted must be presented in a
legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must
accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript
must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or
videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or
electronic form.
     Submitters must clearly identify the source of any
submitted data or information.
     Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or
information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However,
submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider
the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.
    As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for
each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the
duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions
required in the final decision on the registration review case have
been completed.

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

    Dated: January 26, 2018.
Yu-Ting Guilaran,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2018-03986 Filed 2-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31860-31866]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13413]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0146]
RIN 2127-AK64

Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Hybrid III Test Dummy, ES-2re Side
Impact Crash Test Dummy

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects or makes minor changes to some of the
drawings incorporated by reference into NHTSA regulations by a final
rule published on June 16, 2008, concerning a 50th percentile adult
male side crash test dummy called the ``ES-2re'' test dummy. The
corrections and adjustments to the drawings respond to requests from
test dummy manufacturers First Technology Safety Systems (FTSS) and
Denton ATD (Denton). This final rule also corrects dimensional errors
in a figure which depicts the pendulum used in the neck qualification
tests of several of the crash test dummies, including the Hybrid III
and ES-2re test dummies.

DATES: The effective date of this final rule is November 29, 2011. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
November 29, 2011.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of
this final rule must be received not later than July 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. (A copy of the petition will
be placed in the docket.)
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
submissions received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). A copy of
the petition will be placed in the docket. You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call
Peter Martin, NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards (telephone 202-
366-5668) (fax<PHONE_NUMBER>). For legal issues, you may call Deirdre
Fujita, NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) (fax
202-366-3820). The mailing address for these officials is the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    NHTSA published a final rule on June 16, 2008 (73 FR 33903, Docket
No. NHTSA-08-0111) that responded to various petitions for
reconsideration of a previous final rule \1\ incorporating a mid-size
adult male crash test dummy, called the ``ES-2re'' test dummy, into 49
CFR part 572, Subpart U. The ES-2re is used in an upgraded Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 214, ``Side impact protection,'' and
in the agency's New Car Assessment Program. The June 16, 2008 final
rule incorporated by reference a drawing package, parts list, and
user's manual, all dated February 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ That final rule adopting the ES-2re into 49 CFR part 572 was
published December 14, 2006 (71 FR 75303, Docket No. NHTSA-04-
25441).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After publication of the June 16, 2008 final rule, NHTSA received
requests from dummy manufacturers FTSS and Denton to correct errors in
or make minor changes to the ES-2re drawing package. Many of these
requested changes were wholly corrective, while others, although minor,
were more substantive and notice of such changes appeared beneficial.
Rather than respond to the requested changes piecemeal, the agency
decided to address all the requested changes in a rulemaking proceeding
that commenced with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published
February 5, 2010 (75 FR 5931; Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0194).
    The February 5, 2010 NPRM provided a detailed discussion of the
proposed changes to the ES-2re drawing package and parts list. In
addition, the NPRM proposed to clarify the inclusion of load sensors
and to correct dimensional errors in Figure 22 of 49 CFR part 572,
which is a figure illustrating the pendulum used in the neck
qualification test for the ES-2re and other adult crash test dummies
(e.g., the Hybrid III 50th percentile adult male).
    NHTSA received no comments on the NPRM. We are adopting the changes
proposed in the NPRM for the reasons discussed in that document.

II. Changes in Response to FTSS

    NHTSA is making the following changes to the drawing package and
parts list for the ES-2re dummy in response to FTSS. In the NPRM, NHTSA
provided a detailed discussion of the changes requested by FTSS and our
rationale underlying our tentative decision to grant or deny each
request. In this final rule, the agency is adopting these amendments
for the reasons discussed in the NPRM.
    1. Drawing 175-1011, Top Plate UNLC Blank. NHTSA is removing the
[Oslash] symbol from the dimensions M[Oslash]5.0, M[Oslash]6.0,
M[Oslash]6, and M[Oslash]2.5.
    2. Drawing 175-3502, Pivot Stop Plate, Left. Note 4 is
fixed by replacing RH with LH.
    3. Drawing 175-6006, Pubic Symphysis Structural Replacement. The
Part Mark located at the center of the part is removed from the
drawing.
    4. Drawing 175-6012, Hip Pivot Pin. Dimension ``16.994 +0.000/-
0.011'' is changed to ``16.990 +0.000/-0.011.''
    5. Drawing 175-6010, Iliac Wing Assembly, Left. Drawing dimension
``17.0556'' is changed to (17), a reference dimension. Dimension
``R0.5'' is added. Dimension ``[Oslash]20.03  0.05'' is
changed to ``[Oslash]20.05  0.05.'' The material reference
block is amended to specify the material to be ``PU Resin''
(polyurethane).
    6. Drawing 175-6063, Femur Bearing Plate, Left. The ``48.3000
 0.0001'' dimension is changed to ``48.3.'' The 17.5000
dimension for hole depth in zone C-2 is changed to (17.5) to indicate a
reference. Zone D-1 is amended by eliminating an extra ``R'' in the
R23.5 dimension.
    7. Drawing 175-6068, Femur Bearing Plate, Right. We are removing
the

parenthesis from around dimension ``(48.3).''
    8. Drawing 175-6002, Iliac Wing Assembly, Right. We are changing
drawing dimension ``[Oslash]20.03'' to ``[Oslash]20.05
0.05.'' We also add dimension ``R0.5.''
    9. Drawing 175-2003, Plate, Neck Head & Torso Interface. Section C-
C of the drawing showing the thickness of the Helicoil is changed to M6
x 1 x 4.5. Item 1 on the parts list is changed to part number 5000729
Helicoil M6 x 1 x 4.5. We also add dimension ``4X R3.2 to the Surface''
on Detail Z.
    10. Drawing 175-3011, CAM Buffer Pad. Drawing dimensions
[Oslash]5.0, 90.0, 5.0, and 21.2  0.2 are replaced with
dimensions [Oslash]5, 90, 5, and 21.2  0.3, respectively.
    11. Drawing 175-7058, Friction Plate Retaining Stud. The Datum A
tolerance of 0.0003 is changed to 0.003.
    12. Drawing 175-7085-1, Knee Flesh, Left. The drawing is amended to
add a definition for ``A'' to match drawing 175-7085-2, which specifies
that ``A = 1\3/4\.''
    13. Drawing 175-7090-1, Thigh Molded, Left. Drawing dimensions (2x
[Oslash][Oslash]24) is changed to (2x [Oslash]24) and (2x [Oslash]14)
is changed to (2x14).
    14. Drawing 175-9013, Bearing. Revision record B is corrected to
read ``ADDED REF. TO MATERIAL SPECIFICATION.''
    15. Drawing 175-9014, Pin Machined. Revision indicator for revision
``B'' (REV B) is added next to the material reference.
    16. Drawing SA572-571-1, Lower Neck Load Cell Assembly. The
specification for load cell weight is made a reference. The drawing is
also amended to indicate that the reference weight specification
applies to item 1 (the lower neck load cell) only, and not the entire
assembly.

III. Changes in Response to Denton

    NHTSA is making the following changes to the drawing package and
parts list for the ES-2re dummy in response to Denton. The changes and
reasons underlying these changes are fully discussed in the NPRM.
    1. Drawing No. 175-1001, Skull Machined. The distance between the
upper 2 holes is changed from 71.2 mm apart to 71.1 mm apart.
    2. Drawing No. 175-4006, Rib Rail Assembly. We are amending the
drawing to add an option to the drawing that allows use of a button
head cap screw (BHCS) BHCS M3 x .5 x 8.
    3. Drawing No. 175-4012, V-rail. The drawing is changed such that
the tapped holes are specified as optional.

IV. Corrections to Figure 22

    This final rule corrects several dimensional values in Figure 22,
``Pendulum Specifications,'' of 49 CFR part 572. This pendulum is used
in neck qualification tests for the ES-2re as well as other adult crash
test dummies, including the Hybrid III 50th percentile male and 5th
percentile female frontal crash test dummies, the SID-IIsD 5th
percentile female side impact dummy, and the SID and SID/HIII side
impact crash test dummies. The dimensional corrections are listed below
and shown in Figure 1 of this preamble, below:
     The 8.28 millimeter (mm) (32.6 inch (in)) dimension is
changed to 828 mm (32.6 in);
     The 4.8 mm (188 in) dimension is changed to 4.8 mm (0.188
in);
     The 198.6 mm (7.75 in) dimension is changed to 196.8 mm
(7.75 in).
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JN11.010

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O.
13563, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This rulemaking action is not considered a significant regulatory
action under E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563, or DOT's regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). This rule only corrects or
makes slight changes to some of the drawings of the ES-2re test dummy
and to the pendulum used in the neck qualification tests. These changes
will not affect the cost of any of the part 572 test dummies. Because
the economic impacts of this final rule are so minimal, no further
regulatory evaluation is necessary.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a proposed
or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule
on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions), unless the head of the agency
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The Small Business
Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a small
business,

in part, as a business entity ``which operates primarily within the
United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
    We have considered the effects of this rulemaking under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that the rulemaking action
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This action will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities because correcting or making
minor changes to the drawings and the specification for the pendulum
does not impose any requirements on anyone. NHTSA does not require
anyone to manufacture or use the test dummies.

National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this final rule for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it will not have any
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the final rule does not have federalism implications because the rule
does not have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This rule will not impose any requirements on anyone.
Businesses will be affected only if they choose to manufacture or test
with the dummy.
    Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the preemptive effect
of today's final rule. NHTSA's safety standards can have preemptive
effect in two ways. This final rule amends 49 CFR part 572 and is not a
safety standard.\2\ This part 572 final rule does not impose any
requirements on anyone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ With respect to the safety standards, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemptive
provision: ``When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under
this chapter, a State or a political subdivision of a State may
prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same
aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment
only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under
this chapter.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). Second, the Supreme Court has
recognized the possibility of implied preemption: State requirements
imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed
by State tort law, can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment
and execution of a NHTSA safety standard. When such a conflict
exists, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes the State
requirements unenforceable. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co.,
529 U.S. 861 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Civil Justice Reform

    With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729, February 7, 1996) requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the
Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement.
    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows.
    The issue of preemption is discussed above in connection with E.O.
13132. NHTSA notes further that there is no requirement that
individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or pursue other
administrative proceeding before they may file suit in court.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid control number from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). This rule will not have any requirements
that are considered to be information collection requirements as
defined by the OMB in 5 CFR part 1320.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs NHTSA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. There
are no voluntary consensus standards relevant to this final rule.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
Public Law 104-4, requires Federal agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule
for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA
generally requires the agency to identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most
cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objectives of the rule.
    This final rule does not impose any unfunded mandates under the
UMRA. This rule does not meet the definition of a Federal mandate
because it does not impose requirements on anyone. It amends 49 CFR
part 572 by correcting or making minor changes to some of the drawings
for a test dummy that the agency uses and for a pendulum used to
calibrate test dummies. This rule affects only those businesses that
choose to manufacture or test with the dummy, and being corrective in
nature, only affects them in a small way. It does not result in costs
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or Tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or to the private sector.

Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:

--Has the agency organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
--Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
--Could the agency improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?

--What else could the agency do to make this rulemaking easier to
understand?

    If you have any responses to these questions, please send them to
NHTSA.

Regulation Identifier Number

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572

    Motor vehicle safety, Incorporation by reference.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 572 as
follows:

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DEVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 572 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Subpart E--Hybrid III Test Dummy

0
2. In Sec.  572.33(c)(3), Figure 22 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  572.33  Neck.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JN11.011

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
* * * * *

Subpart U--ES-2re Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, 50th Percentile
Adult Male

0
3. Section 572.180 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)and (a)(2),
and paragraph (c)(1), to read as follows:

Sec.  572.180  Incorporated materials.

    (a) * * *
    (1) A parts/drawing list entitled, ``Parts/Drawings List, Part 572
Subpart U, Eurosid 2 with Rib Extensions (ES2re), September 2009,''
incorporated by reference in Sec.  572.181.
    (2) A drawings and inspection package entitled ``Parts List and
Drawings, Part 572 Subpart U, Eurosid 2 with Rib Extensions (ES-2re,
Alpha Version), September 2009,'' consisting of:
    (i) Drawing No. 175-0000, ES-2re Dummy Assembly, incorporated by
reference, see Sec. Sec.  572.181, 575.182, 572.184;
    (ii) Drawing No. 175-1000, Head Assembly, incorporated by reference
in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.182;
    (iii) Drawing No. 175-2000, Neck Assembly Test/Cert, incorporated
by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.183;
    (iv) Drawing No. 175-3000, Shoulder Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.184;
    (v) Drawing No. 175-3500, Arm Assembly, Left, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.185;

    (vi) Drawing No. 175-3800, Arm Assembly, Right, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181, and 572.185;
    (vii) Drawing No. 175-4000, Thorax Assembly with Rib Extensions,
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.185;
    (viii) Drawing No. 175-5000, Abdominal Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.186;
    (ix) Drawing No. 175-5500, Lumbar Spine Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.187;
    (x) Drawing No. 175-6000, Pelvis Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.188;
    (xi) Drawing No. 175-7000-1, Leg Assembly--left incorporated by
reference in Sec.  572.181;
    (xii) Drawing No. 175-7000-2, Leg Assembly--right incorporated by
reference in Sec.  572.181;
    (xiii) Drawing No. 175-8000, Neoprene Body Suit, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181 and 572.185; and,
    (xiv) Drawing No. 175-9000, Headform Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.181, 572.183, 572.187;
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The Parts/Drawings List, Part 572 Subpart U, Eurosid 2 with Rib
Extensions (ES2re) referred to in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the
Parts List and Drawings, Part 572 Subpart U, Eurosid 2 with Rib
Extensions (ES-2re, Alpha Version) referred to in paragraph (a)(2) of
this section, and the PADI document referred to in paragraph (a)(3) of
this section, are available in electronic format through
Regulations.gov and in paper format from Leet-Melbrook, Division of New
RT, 18810 Woodfield Road, Gaithersburg, MD 20879, telephone (301) 670-
0090.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 572.181 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)
to read as follows:

Sec.  572.181  General description.

    (a) The ES-2re Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, 50th Percentile Adult
Male, is defined by:
    (1) The drawings and specifications contained in the ``Parts List
and Drawings, Part 572 Subpart U, Eurosid 2 with Rib Extensions (ES-
2re, Alpha Version), September 2009,'' (incorporated by reference, see
Sec.  572.180), which includes the technical drawings and
specifications described in Drawing 175-0000, the titles of which are
listed in Table A;

                                 Table A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Component assembly                       Drawing No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head Assembly.............................  175-1000
Neck Assembly Test/Cert...................  175-2000
Neck Bracket Including Lifting Eyebolt....  175-2500
Shoulder Assembly.........................  175-3000
Arm Assembly-Left.........................  175-3500
Arm Assembly-Right........................  175-3800
Thorax Assembly with Rib Extensions.......  175-4000
Abdominal Assembly........................  175-5000
Lumbar Spine Assembly.....................  175-5500
Pelvis Assembly...........................  175-6000
Leg Assembly, Left........................  175-7000-1
Leg Assembly, Right.......................  175-7000-2
Neoprene Body Suit........................  175-8000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (2) ``Parts/Drawings List, Part 572 Subpart U, Eurosid 2 with Rib
Extensions (ES2re), September 2009,'' containing 9 pages, incorporated
by reference, see Sec.  572.180,
    (3) A listing of available transducers-crash test sensors for the
ES-2re Crash Test Dummy is shown in drawing 175-0000 sheet 4 of 6,
dated February 2008, incorporated by reference, see Sec.  572.180,
    (4) Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly and Inspection (PADI) of
the ES-2re Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, February 2008, incorporated by
reference, see Sec.  572.180,
    (5) Sign convention for signal outputs reference document SAE J1733
Information Report, titled ``Sign Convention for Vehicle Crash
Testing'' dated December 1994, incorporated by reference, see Sec.
572.180.
    (b) Exterior dimensions of ES-2re test dummy are shown in drawing
175-0000 sheet 3 of 6, dated February 2008, incorporated by reference,
see Sec.  572.180.
    (c) Weights of body segments (head, neck, upper and lower torso,
arms and upper and lower segments) and the center of gravity location
of the head are shown in drawing 175-0000 sheet 2 of 6, dated February
2008, incorporated by reference, see Sec.  572.180.
* * * * *

    Issued: May 24, 2011.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-13413 Filed 6-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41304-41305]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16516]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 105

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0397]
RIN 1625-AC06

Navigation and Navigable Waters; Technical, Organizational, and
Conforming Amendments; Correction

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard published a final rule in the Federal Register
on July 1, 2013, making non-substantive corrections throughout Title 33
of the Code of Federal Regulations. In fixing a non-substantive
typographical error, that document inadvertently replaced two words.
This rule corrects that action and reverts the inadvertently replaced
language to its original wording.

DATES: Effective on July 10, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Paul Crissy, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Viewing Documents Associated With This Rule

    To view the original notice and its accompanying document, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

B. Background

    On July 1, 2013, the Coast Guard published its annual technical
amendment to make non-substantive changes to Title 33 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (78 FR 39163). This rule coincided with the annual
recodification of Title 33 that occurs on July 1, 2013.

C. Need for Correction

    The Coast Guard published a document in the Federal Register for

this technical amendment. In 33 CFR 105.257(b)(2), the word
``facility'' was mistakenly changed to ``vessel.'' Additionally, the
acronym ``FSO'' was mistakenly changed to ``VSO.'' The intended edit of
Sec.  105.257(b)(2) was only to delete an extra space from the
parenthetical listing the Coast Guard's Homeport Web site--no other
edits were to be made. This rule restores use of the words ``facility''
and ``FSO'' to the affected paragraph.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 105

    Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Security measures.

    Accordingly, 33 CFR part 105 is corrected by making the following
correcting amendment:

PART 105--MARITIME SECURITY: FACILITIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 105 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 70103; 50 U.S.C.
191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  105.257  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  105.257(b)(2), remove the word ``vessel'', and add, in its
place, the word ``facility''; remove the text ``VSO'' and add, in its
place, the text ``FSO''.

    Dated: July 3, 2013.
Kathryn A. Sinniger,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013-16516 Filed 7-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: January 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 11)]
[Notices]
[Page 3060-3061]
[DOCID:fr16ja09-107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2003-N-0103] (formerly Docket No. 2003N-0069)

Release of Task Force Report; Guidance for Industry and FDA:
Interim Evidence-Based Ranking System for Scientific Data; Withdrawal
of Guidance

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
withdrawal of the guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry and FDA:
Interim Evidence-Based Ranking System for Scientific Data'' that was
issued on July 10, 2003.

DATES:  The withdrawal is effective January 16, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Paula R. Trumbo, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-830), Food and Drug Administration,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD, 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice published in the Federal
Register of July 11, 2003 (68 FR 41387), FDA announced the availability
of a guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry and FDA: Interim
Evidence-Based Ranking System for Scientific Data.'' This guidance is
being withdrawn because it is obsolete.

    Dated: January 13, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-959 Filed 1-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on October 26, 2005

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-22648

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   America West Airlines, Inc.    filed   10/3/2005 for:

XX  Exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the United States, on the one hand, and Antigua, Barbados,
Bahamas, Belize, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia and Turks & Caicos, on the
other hand, and authority to integrate this authority with its existing
certificate and exemption authority.

America West states that it requests this authority in order to offer
service under a code-share arrangement with US Airways, its sister
airline.   America West also seeks the flexibility to operate these
services with its own aircraft.

Applicant rep: Joanne W. Young<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst: Gerald
Caolo<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX	Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:  October 26, 2005, through
0ctober 26, 2007 .

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreements
governing operations between the United States and the points listed, or
in the absence of such agreement, with the overall state of aviation
relations between the United States and the points listed.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

	XX  The holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Conditions:

The code-share operations conducted under this authorization are subject
to the following conditions:

The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must comply
with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendment to the Department’s regulations
concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.  Notwithstanding
any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our approval here
is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the subject foreign
air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier holding out such
service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere; that the carrier
selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on the ticket)
accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share journey for all
obligations established in its contract of carriage with the passenger;
and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier be unaffected;
and

The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that neither
America West nor US Airways shall give any force or effect to any
contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to these
conditions.

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided under this exemption shall be consistent with all
applicable agreements between the United States and the foreign
countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in award of the route
integration authority granted should be construed as conferring upon
America West rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond
rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless
America West notifies the Department of its intent to serve such a
market and unless and until the Department has completed any necessary
carrier selection procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be
authorized to exercise such rights; and (b) should there be a request by
any carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are included in
America West’s authority by virtue of the route integration exemption
granted here, but that are not then being used by America West, the
holding of such authority by route integration will not be considered as
providing any preference for America West in a competitive carrier
selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be entitled to
use the authority at issue.

________________________________________________________________________
______

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the exemption services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

				APPENDIX

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

  America West states that on September 27, 2005, America West Holdings
Corporation merged with US Airways Group, Inc.  As a result, America
West became a subsidiary of US Airways Group.  Although selling tickets,
advertising, and marketing itself under the “US Airways” brand name,
America West will continue to operate under its own certificate of
public convenience and necessity and authorities until America West and
US Airways are integrated under a single certificate.

 PAGE

 PAGE   3


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 169 (Friday, August 30, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45692-45694]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18763]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0610; Product Identifier 2019-NM-094-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Airbus SAS Model A319-112, A319-115, A319-132, A320-214,
A320-216, A320-232, A320-233, A320-251N, A320-271N, A321-211, A321-231,
A321-232, A321-251N, and A321-253N airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by reports of finding container/galley end stop bumpers
damaged in service. This proposed AD would require replacement of the
affected bumpers with serviceable bumpers, as specified in a European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which will be incorporated by
reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 15,
2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, at Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view
this IBR material 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 in the AD
docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0610.

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-
0610; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0610;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-094-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM based on those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact the agency receives about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0106, dated May 15, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0106'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A319-112, A319-115, A319-132,
A320-214, A320-216, A320-232, A320-233, A320-251N, A320-271N, A321-211,
A321-231, A321-232, A321-251N, and A321-253N airplanes. The MCAI
states:

    Several reports were received of finding container/galley end
stop bumpers damaged in service. Deformed end stops could break or
lose their function to maintain container/galley in their position
on the aeroplane.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to container/galley
detachment under certain forward loading conditions, possibly
resulting in injury to aeroplane occupants.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the
applicable SB [service bulletin], providing instructions to modify
and re-identify affected galleys.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
modification of the affected galleys by replacement of the affected
bumpers with serviceable bumpers

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0106 describes procedures for modification of the
affected galleys by replacement of the affected bumpers with
serviceable bumpers.
    This material 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.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2019-0106, described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a process to
use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information for
compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. As a result,
EASA AD 2019-0106 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final
rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with the
provisions specified in EASA AD 2019-0106, through that incorporation,
except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory
text of this proposed AD. Service information specified in EASA AD
2019-0106 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2019-0106 will
be available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0610 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 274 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Labor cost                   Parts cost         Cost per product         Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 54 work-hours x $85 per hour = Up               $0  Up to $4,590..............  Up to $1,257,660
 to $4,590.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty
coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included
all known costs in the cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    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 proposed 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 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) 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.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2019-0610; Product Identifier 2019-NM-
094-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by October 15, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus SAS airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any
category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2019-0106, dated May 15, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0106'').
    (1) Model A319-112, -115, and -132 airplanes.
    (2) Model A320-214, -216, -232, -233, -251N, and -271N
airplanes.
    (3) Model A321-211, -231, -232, 251N, and -253N airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/
furnishings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of finding container/galley end
stop bumpers damaged in service. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address deformed end stops, which could break or lose their function
to maintain the container/galley in position on the airplane. This
condition, if not corrected, could lead to container/galley
detachment under certain forward loading conditions, possibly
resulting in injury to airplane occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2019-0106.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0106

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where EASA AD 2019-0106 refers to its effective date,
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0106 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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 instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2019-0106, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this EASA AD 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. EASA AD 2019-0106 may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2019-0610.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on August 22, 2019.
Suzanne Masterson,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-18763 Filed 8-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 28, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40388-40390]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15488]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0332]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indiana Harbor Canal, East
Chicago, IN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that
governs the Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59, over the Indiana
Harbor Canal at East Chicago, IN. Indiana Department of Transportation,
the owner and operator of the bridge, has requested to stop continual
drawtender service to the bridge due to a lack of openings. We invite
your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before September 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0332 using Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email If you have questions on this proposed rule, call
or email: Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth Coast
Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register
IGLD85 International Great Lakes Datum of 1985 INDOT Indiana
Department of Transportation
LWD Low Water Datum based on IGLD85
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
U.S.C. United States Code
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59, over the Indiana
Harbor Canal is a double leaf bascule bridge that provides a horizontal
clearance of 68-feet and a vertical clearance of 12-feet in the closed
position with an unlimited vertical clearance in the open position. The
Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59, over the Indiana Harbor Canal
is required to open on signal and there are no previous rulemakings for
this bridge to discuss. The Indiana Harbor Canal is a 3-mile long
commercial waterway that serves several industries near the city of
East Chicago, Indiana including the largest integrated steelmaking
facility in North America and the 1,400 acre Whiting Refinery that
includes the former 1889 Standard Oil of Indiana refinery at the head
of navigation. The Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59, over the
Indiana Harbor Canal is the last drawbridge before the head of
navigation; once the 1889 Standard Oil of Indiana refinery was torn
down the bridge lost its purpose for regular openings and the waterway
silted in around the bridge preventing vessels from approaching.
Approximately thirty years after the removal of the refinery the USEPA
and USACE partnered to remove polluted sediments form the waterway and
established a contaminated dredge spoils area above the bridge. The EPA
and USACE contracted dredging company is working a few weeks each
season and is the only commercial vessel requesting the bridge to open.
There are no records of recreational vessels using the Indiana Harbor
Canal.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The only vessel that has requested an opening at the Indianapolis
Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59, over the Indiana Harbor Canal in thirty
years has been the dredging contractor, and their work schedule is
limited to a few weeks a year due to migratory wildlife concerns in the
summer and ice formation in the winter. INDOT has agreed that a
drawtender will be assigned to the bridge to accommodate vessel traffic
if a 12-hour advance notice is provided.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridge given advanced notice.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A
above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact
on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule promulgates the
operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph
L49, of Chapter 3, Table3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this proposed rule. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; DHS Delegation No.
0170.1.
0
2. In Sec.  117.400 add paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.400   Indiana Harbor Canal.

* * * * *
    (c). The Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59, at East Chicago,
shall open on signal if at least twelve hours' notice is given.

M.J. Johnston,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2021-15488 Filed 7-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P