[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 231 (Friday, December 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 74143]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26278]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-046]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed November 18, 2022 10 a.m. EST Through November 28, 2022 10 a.m.
EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make
public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's
comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20220178, Draft, FHWA, AR, Walnut Ridge--Missouri State Line
(Future I-57), Comment Period Ends: 01/17/2023, Contact: Randal Looney
501-324-6430.
EIS No. 20220179, Final Supplement, USACE, LA, West Shore Lake
Pontchartrain Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction Study, Review
Period Ends: 01/03/2023, Contact: Landon D. Parr<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20220141, Draft, USCG, WA, Expansion and Modernization of Base
Seattle, Comment Period Ends: 12/16/2022, Contact: Dean Amundson 510-
637-5541.

    Revision to FR Notice Published 10/07/2022; Extending the Comment
Period from 12/02/2022 to 12/16/2022.

    Dated: November 28, 2022.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2022-26278 Filed 12-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30178-30179]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11381]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0380]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Willamette River, Portland, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the upper deck of the Steel Bridge,
mile 12.1, and the Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4, both crossing the
Willamette River, at Portland, OR. The deviation is necessary to
accommodate the annual Rose Festival Parade event, which crosses the
Steel Bridge and Burnside Bridge. This deviation allows the upper deck
of the Steel Bridge and Burnside Bridge to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position and need not open for marine traffic to allow for
the safe movement of event participants.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. on June 11,
2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0380] is available
at 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 deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge
Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TriMet Public Transit and Multnomah County
have requested that the upper deck of the Steel Bridge and the Burnside
Bridge remain in the closed-to-navigation position to accommodate the
annual Rose Festival Parade event. The Steel Bridge, mile 12.1, and the
Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4, both cross the Willamette River.
    The Steel Bridge is a double-deck lift bridge with a lower lift
deck and an upper lift deck which operate independent of each other.
When both decks are in the down position the bridge provides 26 feet of
vertical clearance. When the lower deck is in the up position, the
bridge provides 71 feet of vertical clearance. This deviation does not
affect the operating schedule of the lower deck which opens on signal.
The normal operating schedule for the upper deck of the Steel Bridge
operates in accordance with 33 CFR 117.897(c)(3)(ii).
    The Burnside Bridge provides a vertical clearance of 64 feet in the
closed-to-navigation position. The normal operating schedule for the
Burnside Bridge operates in accordance with 33 CFR 117.897(c)(3)(iii).
The Steel Bridge and Burnside Bridge clearances are above Columbia
River Datum 0.0.

    The deviation period is from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. on June 11, 2016 to
accommodate the route of the annual Rose Festival Parade event. The
deviation allows the upper deck of the Steel Bridge, mile 12.1, and the
Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4, both crossing the Willamette River, to
remain in the closed-to-navigation position and need not open for
maritime traffic from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. on June 11, 2016. Waterway usage
on this part of the Willamette River includes vessels ranging from
commercial tug and barge to small pleasure craft.
    Vessels able to pass through the Steel Bridge and Burnside Bridge
in the closed positions may do so at any time. The bridges will be able
to open for emergencies, and there is no immediate alternate route for
vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the
waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the
change in operating schedule for the bridges so that vessel operators
can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the
temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: May 9, 2016.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2016-11381 Filed 5-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 89441]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28543]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. FA21-5-000]

Commonwealth Edison Company; Notice of Designation of Commission
Staff as Non-Decisional

    With respect to an order issued by the Commission on December 8,
2023, in the above-captioned docket, with the exceptions noted below,
the staff of the Office of Enforcement (OE) are designated as non-
decisional in deliberations by the Commission in this docket.\1\
Accordingly, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2202 (2022), they will not serve as
advisors to the Commission or take part in the Commission's review of
any offer of settlement. Likewise, as non-decisional staff, pursuant to
18 CFR 385.2201 (2022), they are prohibited from communicating with
advisory staff concerning any deliberations in this docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Commonwealth Edison Company, 185 FERC ] 61,179 (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exceptions to this designation of OE staff as non-decisional are:

Jennifer Gordon
Laura Vallance
Olga Anguelova
Kim Horner
Todd Kuzniewski
Nkosi Brooks

    Dated: December 20, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-28543 Filed 12-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 103 (Friday, May 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 30936]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14143-000]

West Maui Pumped Storage Water Supply, LLC; Notice of Preliminary
Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions
To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On April 1, 2011, West Maui Pumped Storage Water Supply, LLC, filed
an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
West Maui Pumped Storage Project, which would use effluent water from
the existing West Maui sewage treatment plant, located near Kaanapali,
in Maui County, Hawaii. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if
issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed pumped storage project would consist of the following
new and existing facilities: (1) A 90-foot-high, 3,800-foot-long lower
dam and 50-acre reservoir; (2) a 21,000-foot-long, 57-inch-diameter
penstock; (3) a 250-foot-high, 400-foot-long upper dam and 30-acre
reservoir; (4) a turnout to supply project effluent water to an
existing irrigation system; (5) a powerhouse with two 15-megawatt
Francis type pump/generating units; (6) a 9-mile-long, 138-kilovolt
transmission line; (7) a 22,000-foot-long road providing access to the
penstock and upper dam; and (8) appurtenant facilities. The estimated
annual generation of the West Maui Pumped Storage Project would be
110,000 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Bart M. O'Keeffe, West Maui Pumped Storage Water
Supply, LLC, P.O. Box 1916, Discovery Bay, CA 94505; phone: (925) 634-
1550.
    FERC Contact: Jim Hastreiter; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http:// www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14143) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: May 20, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-13149 Filed 5-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Friday, June 24, 2016 3:56 PM
To:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
updated FAQ #3 and updated Enclosure 2 (redline, clean, pdf)

Hello all  -  Attached you will find the third (#3) set of FAQs for the Coke ICR. Please note changes in previous question #13 and new FAQ #16 and #17.
      Under FAQ #16, I have clarified that quench water samples need to be taken from the effluent of the quench tower, therefore TDS tests performed for compliance purposes cannot be used in lieu of new testing because compliance tests are taken from the quench water as applied to the coke. In addition, we have requested the results of the compliance tests be submitted along with ICR test data and have requested that the compliance tests be done as close as possible in timing with the coke ICR samples. Sorry for this change but this will better allow us to correlate quench water test data with air emissions data.

Updated Enclosure 2: So that you all have an up-to-date Enclosure 2, I had revised Enclosure 2 to reflect the above changes. See attached redline and clean versions of this 6-24-16 update. We made a few other editorial changes and correction of small errors from the last version.

Thank you for your conscientiousness in meeting the Coke ICR submissions and deadlines.

Have a good weekend.
_____________________________________________________________
Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D 243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>  Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

<< Coke ICR FAQs-Set#3-06-24-16.doc >>
<< Coke ICR-Enclosure 2-062416-UPDATE.doc >>
<< Coke ICR-Enclosure 2-062416-UPDATE-REDLINE.doc >>


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 92 (Friday, May 14, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26373-26377]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10257]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0365; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00527-T;
Amendment 39-21553; AD 2021-10-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; ATR--GIE Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain ATR--GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Model ATR42-500
and ATR72-212A airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of temporary
loss of all display units and the integrated electronic standby
instrument (IESI). This AD requires revising the existing aircraft
flight manual (AFM) and applicable corresponding operational procedures
to update a systems limitation, limiting dispatch with certain
equipment inoperative, performing an operational test of a certain
contactor and an electrical test of a certain battery toggle switch,
and corrective actions if necessary, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 14, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 14,
2021.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by June 28, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD, contact
EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; 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,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0365.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0365; 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 AD, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-
3220; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E, dated May 3,
2021 (EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E) (also referred to as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain ATR--GIE Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Model ATR42-500 and ATR72-212A airplanes.
    This AD was prompted by reports of temporary loss of all display
units and the IESI. The investigation is ongoing and the root cause is
not yet known, but the initial investigation revealed that the battery
toggle switch functional item number (FIN) 7PA and the contactor FIN
1PA were two potential contributors to the reported cases. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address temporary loss of all display units and the
IESI, which could result in loss of control of the airplane. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E describes procedures for revising the
existing AFM to update a systems limitation for the transformer
rectifier unit (TRU), limiting dispatch with certain equipment
inoperative (which can be done by amending the operator's minimum
equipment list (MEL)), performing an operational test of the contactor
FIN 1PA for discrepancies (i.e., a lack of power supply to DU 4 or a
static inverter 1 INV FAULT not being displayed on 29VU), performing an
electrical test of the battery toggle switch FIN 7PA, and corrective
actions. Corrective actions include replacement of the contactor FIN
1PA and restoring wiring. EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E also describes
procedures for reporting test results to ATR-GIE Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional.
    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

    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 issuing this AD because the FAA evaluated
all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Requirements of This AD

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA
Emergency AD 2021-0120-E described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.
    EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E requires operators to ``inform all
flight crews'' of revisions to the AFM, and thereafter to ``operate the
aeroplane accordingly.'' However, this AD would not specifically
require those actions as those actions are already required by FAA
regulations. FAA regulations require operators furnish to pilots any
changes to the AFM (for example, 14 CFR 121.137), and to ensure the
pilots are familiar with the AFM (for example, 14 CFR 91.505). As with
any other flightcrew training requirement, training on the updated AFM
content is tracked by the operators and recorded in each pilot's
training record, which is available for the FAA to review. FAA
regulations also require pilots to follow the procedures in the
existing AFM including all updates. 14 CFR 91.9 requires that any
person operating a civil aircraft must comply with the operating
limitations specified in the AFM. Therefore, including a requirement in
this AD to operate the airplane according to the revised AFM would be
redundant and unnecessary. Further, compliance with such a requirement
in an AD would be impracticable to demonstrate or track on an ongoing
basis; therefore, a requirement to operate the airplane in such a
manner would be unenforceable.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially 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. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA Emergency AD
2021-0120-E is incorporated by reference in this final rule. This AD,
therefore, requires compliance with EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E in
its entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Using
common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular section
in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only with that
section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to ``all required
actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD requirement is
not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance
Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified in EASA
Emergency AD 2021-0120-E that is required for compliance with EASA
Emergency AD 2021-0120-E is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0365.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because temporary loss of all display units and the IESI could result
in loss of control of the airplane. In addition, the compliance time
for the required action is shorter than the time necessary for the
public to comment and for publication of the final rule. Therefore, the
FAA finds good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public
comment are impracticable. In addition, for the reasons stated above,
the FAA finds that good cause exists for making this amendment
effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0365; Project Identifier MCAI-
2021-00527-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this final rule because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Shahram
Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any
commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated
as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this AD interim action. If final action is later
identified, the FAA might consider further rulemaking then.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The requirements of the RFA do not apply when an agency finds good
cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and
comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt
this rule without notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 15 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.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 work-hours x $85 per hour = $255...........................              $0             $255           $3,825
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting or incorporating operational limitations.

    Operators that have certain equipment affected by this AD are
required to incorporate certain operational limitations. One way of
doing so is revising the operator's existing FAA-approved MEL to
include those operational limitations. If an operator chooses to revise
their existing FAA-approved MEL, the FAA has determined that this
revision takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the
FAA recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator.
Since operators incorporate MEL changes for their affected fleet(s),
the FAA has determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate
than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the FAA estimates the total
cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).
    The FAA estimates that it takes about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the
cost of reporting the test results on U.S. operators to be $1,275, or
$85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170....          $1,700           $1,870
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid

OMB control number. The control number for the collection of
information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost
associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance
section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions,
as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the
burden should be directed to Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX
76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this 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, and
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-10-20 ATR--GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional: Amendment
39-21553; Docket No. FAA-2021-0365; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-
00527-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective May 14,
2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to ATR--GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional
Model ATR42-500 and ATR72-212A airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) Emergency AD 2021-0120-E, dated May 3, 2021 (EASA Emergency
AD 2021-0120-E).

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24, Electrical
power.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of temporary loss of all display
units and the integrated electronic standby instrument (IESI). The
FAA is issuing this AD to address temporary loss of all display
units and the IESI, which could result in loss of control of the
airplane.

(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 Emergency AD 2021-0120-E.

(h) Exceptions to EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E

    (1) Where EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E refers to its effective
date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Paragraph (1) of EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E specifies
amending ``the applicable AFM [aircraft flight manual],'' but this
AD requires amending ``the applicable existing AFM and applicable
corresponding operational procedures.''
    (3) Where paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-
E specify to ``inform all flight crews, and, thereafter, operate the
aeroplane accordingly,'' this AD does not require those actions as
those actions are already required by existing FAA operating
regulations.
    (4) Where paragraph (5) of EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E
specifies actions if ``discrepancies are detected,'' for this AD a
``discrepancy'' is defined as a lack of power supply to DU 4 or a
static inverter 1 INV FAULT not being displayed on 29VU.
    (5) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E
does not apply to this AD.
    (6) Paragraph(s) (6) and (7) of EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E
specify to report test results to ATR within a certain compliance
time. For this AD, report test results at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h)(6)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the test was done on or after the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the test.
    (ii) If the test was done before the effective date of this AD:
Submit the report within 10 days after the effective date of this
AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) 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
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or ATR--GIE
Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional's EASA Design Organization
Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory as required by this AD. Send comments
regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden to Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Shahram Daneshmandi,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) 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.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Emergency AD
2021-0120-E, dated May 3, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA Emergency AD 2021-0120-E, contact EASA, Konrad-
Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find
this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0365.
    (5) You may view this material 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: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 5, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-10257 Filed 5-11-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 194)]
[Notices]
[Page 58735]
[DOCID:fr07oc05-106]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Notice of Adjustment of Disaster Grant Amounts

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: FEMA gives notice of an increase of the maximum amount for
Small Project Grants to State and local governments and private
nonprofit facilities for disasters declared on or after October 1,
2005.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2005 and applies to major disasters declared
on or after October 1, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James A. Walke, Recovery Division,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-
3834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act)
prescribes that FEMA must annually adjust the maximum grant amount made
under section 422, Small Project Grants, Simplified Procedure, relating
to the Public Assistance program, to reflect changes in the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of
Labor.
    FEMA gives notice of an increase of the maximum amount of any Small
Project Grant made to the State, local government, or to the owner or
operator of an eligible private nonprofit facility, under section 422
of the Stafford Act, to $57,500 for all disasters declared on or after
October 1, 2005.
    FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers of 3.6 percent for the 12-month period
ended in August 2005. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor released the information on September 15, 2005.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Public
Assistance Grants.)
R. David Paulison,
Acting Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department
of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 05-20294 Filed 10-6-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


ATTACHMENT 3

Premanufacture Notice (PMN) Form and Instructions

EPA Form 7710-25

[For electronic copies of the PMN Form and Instructions, see   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/pmnforms.htm"  http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/pmnforms.htm  and follow the appropriate links.]

ATTACHMENT 4

Calculation of Hourly Wage Rates

(Excerpt from Economic Impact Analysis)

APPENDIX A:      INFLATORS AND WAGE RATES

This appendix provides a brief discussion of the wage rates, inflators, and methods that were used to derive the final (fully loaded( wages used in the calculation of quantified costs.  Base hourly wages for relevant labor categories were loaded with factors for benefits and overhead to derive a loaded hourly rate.  If the loaded hourly rate was not already in year 2007 dollars, it was then inflated to year 2007 dollars by multiplying by the appropriate inflation factor.  The derivation of fully loaded wages in year 2007 dollars, for each of the labor categories used in the report, is discussed in Section A.1 and is summarized in Table A.1.  The derivation of the different inflation factors used to inflate wages to year 2007 dollars is discussed in Section A.2 and is summarized in Table A.2.

A.1.	Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates tc \l2 "A.1.	Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates

A.1.1	Technical, Managerial, and Clerical Labor

The basic method used to derive loaded wage rates for technical, managerial, and clerical personnel is described more fully in  Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (Rice, 2002).

December 2007 average wages for technical, managerial, and clerical labor were taken from the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for all goods-producing, private industries (BLS, 2008).

The additional cost of benefits, such as paid leave and insurance ((fringe benefits(), specific to each labor category, are also taken from the same BLS series.  Fringe benefit as a percentage of wage is then calculated separately for each labor category.  For example, the average wage rate in December 2007 for technical labor was $33.25; the average fringe benefit

was $16.54.  So fringe benefit as a percentage of wage rate for technical labor was 16.54/33.25, or approximately 49.7%.

An additional loading factor of 17 percent is applied to wages for overhead.  This overhead loading factor is added to the benefits loading factor, and the total is then applied to the base wage to derive the fully loaded wage.  The fully loaded wage for technical labor, for example, is $33.25*(1+0.497 + 0.17) = $33.25*(1.667) = $55.44.

Fully loaded costs for managerial and clerical labor were calculated in a similar manner.

Table A.1  Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates

Labor Category

Data Sources

Uninflated wages and fringes / hour

Fringe benefits as % of wage

Over-

head as % of wage*

Fringe + Overhead factor

Loaded Wage Rate

before inflation

Inflation factor

Loaded Wage Rate

(2003 dollars)

Date

Wages

$

Fringe benefits

$

Technical

BLS Employer Costs for Employee Compensation.  Private industry, goods-producing industries, Profess. specialty & technical. Dec 03. [BLS, 2008]

Dec

2007

$33.25

$16.54

49.7%

17%

1.667

$55.44

1

$55.44

Managerial

BLS Employer Costs for Employee Compensation. Private industry, goods-producing industries, Exec, admin, & managerial. Dec 03. [BLS, 2008]

Dec 2007

$41.40

$19.74

47.7%

17%

1.647

$68.18

1

$68.18

Clerical

BLS Employer Costs for Employee Compensation.  Private industry, goods-producing industries, Admin support, incl. clerical. Dec 03. [BLS, 2008]

Dec

2007

$16.40

$8.28

50.5%

17%

1.675

$27.47

1

$27.47

*An overhead rate of 17 percent applied to wages is used for consistency with recent EPAB economic analyses for two major rulemakings: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program, June 10, 2002, and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report, August 2002.

Note: Calculations are based on unrounded values, so the total may not equal the product of the rounded factors.

A.2.	Derivation of Inflation Factors

In general, wages were inflated using the appropriate Employment Cost Index (ECI), seasonally adjusted.  Complete information on the derivation of the inflation factors used is given in Table A.2 below.

Table A.2  Derivation of Inflation Factors

Report section

Item

Inflator data source

Starting year

Inflator for starting year (A)

Inflator for 2003 (B)

Inflation factor

(B) / (A)

Section 3

Export notification

BLS Employ. Cost Index, Seas. Adj.,  White Collar Occupations Series ECS11102I, Fourth Q, 1992

1992

63.2

103.6

1.639

Appendix C

Agency Extramural costs

BLS Employ. Cost Index, Seas. Adj.,  White Collar Occupations Series ECS11102I, Fourth Q, 1993

1993

65.5

103.6

163.1

APPENDIX B:         AGENCY COSTS

EPA’s costs to review and process industry submissions (SNUNs, requests to modify SNUR, and requests for equivalency determination) are assumed to be the same as EPA costs to review PMNs.  EPA’s costs associated with SNUR submissions are presented in Table B.1.  The EPA staff level (GS-12), staff-year full-time equivalents (FTEs)  and extramural costs such as costs for contractor support are derived from the costs estimated for processing PMN submissions (RIB, 1994).  The percent of cases are from RIB 1994 and from a 1999 SNUR economic analysis (EPAB, 1999).   FTE costs have been calculated  using 2007 GS-12 salary data (OPM, 2008) and a loading factor of 1.6 to reflect fringe benefits and overhead (OPPE, 1992).

The original PMN cost estimates were presented as low and high estimates, based on the most junior (Step 1) and the most senior (Step 10) GS-12 pay rates, respectively. For simplicity, this analysis uses the average of the two pay rates.

The GS-12 costs in the table below are calculated by multiplying the number of FTEs (in the first column) by the fully loaded average salary, $122,854.  This shows EPA staff cost for those chemicals requiring this review step.  The Extramural Cost column shows costs for contractor support and other outside purchases for those chemicals requiring this review step, inflated from 1993 prices to 2007 using the Employment Cost Index, Total Compensation for White-Collar Occupations (BLS, 2008a).  The Weighted Cost column is calculated by multiplying GS-12 staff cost plus extramural costs (Unweighted Cost) by the percentage of cases requiring this review step.  This calculation yields total Agency costs for submission review and processing of $4,203 per case.

Table B.1  Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing

Review Step

EPA

FTE

EPA staff (GS-12) (a)

Extra-mural Cost

Unweighted Cost

Pct.

of Cases

Weighted Cost

1993 dollars

 2007 dollars (b)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)=(2)+(4)

(6)

(7)=(5)*(6)

Prenotice consultation

0.0024

$294.85

4

$6.32

$301.17

41%

$123.48

Administrative prescreen/notice

receipt/user fee

0.0024

$294.85

 92

$145.54

$440.39

100%

$440.39

CRSS (Chemical Review and Search Strategy)

0.0025

$307.14

268

$423.98

$731.12

100%

$731.127

SAT (Structure Activity Team)

0.0006

$73.71

14

$22.15

$95.86

100%

$95.86

Engineering/Exposure

0.0015

$184.28

 56

$88.59

$272.87

100%

$272.87

Exposure/Fate

0.0008

$98.28

0

$0.00

$98.28

100%

$98.28

Focus

0.0009

$98.28

23

$36.39

$134.67

100%

$134.67

Standard Review Functions

0.0219

$2,690.50

511

$808.40

$3,498.90

29%

$1,014.6896

Division Directors Meeting

0.0129

$1,584.82

113

$179.22

$1,764.04

15%

$264.614

Order Development/Negotiation Review

0.0171

$2,100.80

22

$34.80

$2,135.60

3%

$64.07

Post Order Data Review

0.0886

$10,884.86

0

$0.00

$10,844.86

3%

$326.55

Order Modification

0.2167	26,622.46

0

$0.00

$26,622.46

3%

$798.67

New Chemical SNUR Development

0.0277

$3,403.06

85

$134.67

$3,537.53

7%

$247.671

Notices of Commencement

0.0012

$147.42

40

$63.28

$210.70

31%

$65.32

FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Requests

0.0333

$4,091.04

287

$454.03

$4,545.07

1%

$45.45

CBI (Confidential Business Information) Substantiation

0.0004

$49.14

3

$4.75

$47.04

100%

$53.89

TOTAL

$4,778

Sources: FTEs per review step and 1993 extramural costs are from RIB 1994.  Percents of cases are from RIB, 1994 and EPAB, 1999.  GS-12 salaries are from OPM, 2008.

(a) The average of GS-12 Step 1 and GS-12 Step 10 salaries for 2007 was ($66,767 + $86,801) / 2 = $76,784.  This was multiplied by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect fringe benefits and overhead, resulting in a fully loaded cost per FTE of 1.6 X $76,784 = $122,854.

(b) Extramural costs consist of contracting support and other purchases directly attributable to the PMN review process.  They were inflated from 1993 prices to 2007 prices using a factor of 1.433 (see Appendix A).

ATTACHMENT 5

Selection Criteria -- TSCA Section 8(a) Rule vs.  SNUR

SELECTION CRITERIA:	These criteria serve as guidelines and not as rigid standards for the regulatory selection process.

SECTION 8(a) Rules – REQUIREMENTS, TYPES OF DATA, USES:

–    Statutory prerequisites: None (i.e., no required risk findings) other than a legitimate Agency need for such data “as the Administrator may reasonably require” and the use of notice and comment rulemaking for the establishment of reporting requirements.

-__Scope: EPA can require reporting by manufacturers, importers, and processors of both new (PMN) and existing (initial Inventory) chemical substances.

-__Types of data: EPA may use section 8(a) rules to obtain a variety of health and environmental data, including data on chemical identity and structure, uses, volume of production/importation/processing, byproducts, health and environmental effects, exposure, and disposal.

-__Data support functions: Section 8(a) rules provide background exposure-related data to support chemical risk assessment; e.g., data support for section 4 testing decisions, voluntary testing decisions, section 6 rulemaking, section 9 referral actions, follow-up SNURs, and chemical advisories.

-__Follow-up monitoring function: Section 8(a) rules can be used to monitor certain chemical activities which may cause significant new or ongoing exposures to the subject chemicals (i.e., section 8(a) reporting rules can be triggered by the commencement of certain prescribed chemical activities or by prescribed changes in chemical activities); this type of section 8(a) rule ensures that EPA will receive notification and information concerning the chemical activities described in the rule; however, the Agency can only take follow-up action through lengthy rulemaking (via section 4, 5(a)(2), or 6) or by civil action in cases of extreme and imminent hazard (via section 7).

CRITERIA THAT FAVOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SECTION 8(a) RULE

-__A need to gather data for chemical risk assessment, with no perceived need for immediate short-term control action: The basic data support function described above is the primary function of section 8(a) rules.

-__Lesser health and environmental concerns: If EPA intends to develop a follow-up/monitoring rule for a particular chemical substance, the Agency would favor a section 8(a) rule when the level of OPPTS concern regarding health and environmental effects of the chemical is not sufficient to require that follow-up action be immediately available (under section 5(e) or 5(f)) once the reporting requirement is triggered and notification is received by EPA (e.g., the substances is an eye or skin irritant; EPA lacks sufficient data on health and environmental effects for purposes of risk assessment; the substance may cause transient neurotoxic effects; the substances has moderate acute toxicity; the substance may persist in the environment; the substance may cause organ damage or reduced sperm counts; chronic exposure to the substance may result in health effects that generally are reversible).

-__Activities are ongoing: If EPA intends to develop a follow-up/monitoring rule for a particular chemical substance, the Agency would favor a section 8(a) rule when the chemical activities in question are ongoing at the time of rulemaking (i.e., currently taking place or recently ceased and likely to resume) or are likely to be ongoing when the rule is proposed.  By definition, a SNUR would not be possible under such circumstances.

-__A need for long-term monitoring: A section 8(a) rule is favored if OPPTS needs to monitor industry-wide production and exposure trends on a long-term basis, as in the following examples:

(1) The rule may be triggered by a number of different firms over time, and the activity eventually may be considered ongoing (thereby preventing a SNUR);

(2) The rule may be triggered a number of times by the same firm, and the activity may be considered ongoing;

(3) Potential increases in exposure are expected to occur gradually over time and/or at a number of independent sites, making it necessary for the Agency to gather, aggregate, and analyze exposure-related data before making a decision about the potential for unreasonable risk.

SECTION 5(a)(2) SNURS – REQUIREMENTS, TYPES OF DATA, USES:

-__Statutory prerequisites: TSCA does not require a risk finding for SNURs.  The only statutory requirements are (1) that EPA consider “all relevant factors” (including the four exposure-related factors in section 5(a)(2)) before designating a significant new use, and (2) that the use not be ongoing at the time the SNUR is promulgated (i.e., not currently taking place or recently ceased and likely to resume).

-__Scope: SNURs may be applicable to manufacturers, importers, and processors of both new and existing chemical substances.

-__Types of data: EPA is authorized to require SNUR notice submitters to report the same types of data as may be required under section 8(a), plus certain types of test data in certain limited cases (note that health and environmental data must already be in the “possession or control” of the person submitting the notice (other health and environmental data which are known to or reasonably ascertainable by the person submitting the notice, which need only be described)); EPA generally requires SNUR respondents to complete the PMN reporting form.

-__Follow-up monitoring function: SNURs can serve largely the same monitoring/notification/ information function as section 8(a) rules, with three important differences:

(1) A significant new use must be an activity that is not ongoing at the time the SNUR is promulgated;

(2) A SNUR respondent cannot commence the significant new use while EPA is evaluating the data in the SNUR notice;

(3) TSCA authorizes EPA to take immediate follow-up control action under either section 5(e) (the Agency lacks data but determines that the activity may present an unreasonable risk) or section 5(f) (the activity will present an unreasonable risk and section 6 action is necessary).

CRITERIA THAT FAVOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SECTION 5(a)(2) SNUR:

– Greater health and environmental concerns: If the potential health and environmental hazards posed by a chemical substance are of sufficient concern to OPPTS that the Agency wants to be able to do the following:

(1) Monitor potential exposure/risk which may be caused by non-ongoing activities involving the subject chemical;

(2) Prevent these activities from occurring until OPPTS has completed its assessment of the activities and has determined the potential for release and exposure;

(3) Take immediately effective control action (if necessary) via section 5(e) or 5(f) to prevent the activities from occurring (at least on an interim basis) after the completion of Agency review (e.g., the substance is a possible or probably human carcinogen; the substance may cause human teratogenic or reproductive effects; the substance has high acute toxicity; the substance tends to bioaccumulate in living tissue and is slow to biodegrade; chronic exposure to the substance may result in health effects that generally are irreversible).

–    Likely that small businesses engage in the activities: Section 8(a) exempts small manufacturers, importers, and processors (as defined by EPA) from reporting requirements under that section.  The Agency therefore may not receive adequate data from a section 8(a) rule in some cases if a substantial number of the firms subject to the rule qualify as “small.”  If EPA can determine prior to rulemaking that there is a likelihood that respondents will be small firms, the Agency may wish to ensure that it will have access to information from these key potential respondents by developing a SNUR for data-gathering purposes.

OTHER CRITERIA THAT MAY AFFECT THE REGULATORY SELECTION PROCESS (examined in every case):

-__Federal regulatory action and state statutory/regulatory action involving the subject chemical: Relevant to the current need for OPPTS regulatory action, the likelihood of ongoing or future activities, and past experiences involving the subject chemical.

-__Know past and present activities and projected future activities involving the subject chemical (including the size of the firms involved, the volume of production/importation/ processing, potential releases and exposures, etc.): If available, this information is a relevant supplement to all of the section 8(a)/SNUR criteria listed above.

-__Concerns and objective of EPA and the technical staff responsible for the subject chemical: CCD regulatory staff relies heavily on continuing input from management (with regard to long-term regulatory objectives for the subject chemical) and technical staff (with regard to health and environmental concerns and short-term regulatory objectives).

ATTACHMENT 6

Selected SNUR Case History Abstracts

HEXACHLORONORBORNADIENE (CAS # 2432-99-7)

also known as HEX-BCH.

TOXICITY

•	Extremely persistent compound with a great tendency to bioaccumulate.

Slow biodegradation.

Very toxic to fish.

Possible analogue to known carcinogens.

II.	REFERRING OFFICE’S CONCERNS/NEEDS

•	Monitor: its manufacture, importation, and processing; intended end uses, and potential worker exposure and environmental releases.

Once production levels reach a certain point, EPA will reconsider its decision not to text HEX-BCH.

III.	USES

A.	Past and Ongoing

Commercial batch manufacture and processing.

Intermediate in the production of isodrin which is an intermediate in the production of

endrin (both pesticides).

B.	Small Business

Capable of production by a small firm.

IV.	REGULATORY BACKGROUND

Listed on the Preliminary Assessment Information Rule.  (One-time reporting only).

Listed on the section 8(d) model health and safety data reporting rule (40 CFR Part 716).

Local limit on its discharge in a public treatment system.  Limit based on plant’s treatment capacity and not on human health or environmental risk.

V.	RECOMMENDATION/RATIONALE: Section 8(a) rule for ongoing uses and significant new use rule for non-ongoing uses.

Well documented high toxicity concern.

Small businesses potential.

Satisfies referring office’s needs.

No federal regulation exists to provide a governmental entity with an opportunity to

 evaluate potential human and environmental exposures to HEX-BCH from its

manufacture, importation, processing, and intended end use; and to protect human beings

and the environment from potentially adverse exposures before they occur.

METHYL N-BUTYL KETONE (CAS # 591-78-6)

also known as MBK.

TOXICITY

           •            Causes central and peripheral neuropathy in humans.  Nerve damage is irreversible at concentrations as low as 50 ppm.

Absorbed readily through the skin.

Eye and skin irritant.

Limited evidence suggests testicular atrophy.

II.	REFERRING OFFICE’S CONCERNS/NEEDS

•	Monitor: its resumption of commercial manufacture, importation, and processing; intended end uses, and potential worker and consumer exposure.

III.	USES

A.	Past

Commercial manufacture, importation and processing.

Solvent in lacquers, sealers, varnish removers, oils, fats, and waxes.  (i.e., consumer products).

B.	Ongoing

Importation for toxicological research and development.

C.	Small Business

Capable of production by a small firm.

IV.	REGULATORY BACKGROUND

Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard (8 hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) 100 ppm).

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists TWA 5 ppm.  No binding effect.

National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health TWA 5 ppm.  No binding effect.

V.	RECOMMENDATION/RATIONALE: Significant new use rule.

Well documented high toxicity concern.

Small businesses potential.

Satisfies referring office’s needs.

No federal regulation exists to provide a governmental entity with an opportunity to

evaluate potential human and environmental exposures to MBK from its manufacture,

 importation, processing, and intended end use; and to protect human beings and the

 environment from potentially adverse exposures before they occur.

URETHANE (CAS  # 51-79-6)

Urethane is a name commonly but improperly applied to high molecular weight polyurethanes used as foams, elastomers, and coatings.  These products are not made from the urethane, and do not generate urethane upon decomposition.

TOXICITY

            •	Urethane is well established as a carcinogen.  Malignant tumors have occurred in many species of animals following the administration of urethane by the oral, inhalation, topical, subcutaneous, and intraperitoneal routes.  Urethane is also a transplacental carcinogen that readily traverses the placenta and affects the fetus.

Toxic fumes when heated; liver toxin; bone marrow depressant.

II.	REFERRING OFFICE’S CONCERNS/NEEDS

•	Monitor: its resumption of manufacture, importation, and processing; intended end uses, and potential worker and consumer exposure.

III.	USES

A.	Past

Commercial manufacture, importation and processing.

Intermediate in the production of N-hydroxymethyl derivatives, which are useful as cross-linking agents for imparting wash-and-wear properties to fabrics.

Human medicine: sclerosing agent for varicose veins and hemorrhoids, anti-neoplastic agent, hypnotic, treatment of chronic leukemia, and multiple myeloma.

Pharmaceutical intermediate.

B.	Ongoing

Toxicological research.

C.	Small Business

Capable of production by a small firm.

IV.	REGULATORY BACKGROUND

Banned by the Food and Drug Administration as an active and inactive ingredient in drugs.  FDA also prohibited the use of a food preservative that produces urethane when it is used tin acidic beverages.

Designated by EPA as a Toxic Hazardous Waste #238.

Listed as a Hazardous material under the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act.

V.	RECOMMENDATION/RATIONALE: Significant new use rule.

Well documented high toxicity concern.

Small businesses potential.

Satisfies referring office’s needs.

No federal regulation exists to provide a governmental entity with an opportunity to

 evaluate potential human and environmental exposures from urethane’s manufacture,

importation, processing, and intended end use; and to protect human beings and the

environment from potentially adverse exposures before they occur.

The consequences of not collecting this information is to allow, without EPA review, human and environmental exposures to toxic chemical substances.

PENTABROMOETHYLBENZENE (CAS  # 85-22-3)

also known as PEB.

TOXICITY

	•	Carcinogenicity observed in other structurally related compounds having a

                        polyhalogenated aromatic moiety.

Persistent compound with a great tendency to bioaccumulate.

Slow biodegradation.

II.	REFERRING OFFICE’S CONCERNS/NEEDS

•	Monitor: its resumption of commercial manufacture, importation, and processing; intended end uses, and potential worker exposure and environmental release.

If production is to be reinstated, EPA will reconsider its decision not to test HEX-BCH.

III.	USES

A.	Past and Ongoing

Has been used in the past as an additive-type flame retardant.

No known ongoing uses.

B.	Small Business

Capable of production by a small firm.

V.	REGULATORY BACKGROUND

The Interagency Testing Committee designed PEB for priority consideration in its 15th report.

Listed on the section 8(d) model health and safety data reporting rule (40 CFR Part 716).

Listed on the Preliminary Assessment Information Rule.  (40 CFR Part 712).

Proposed, pursuant to section 4(a)(1)(A) findings, that chemical fate and environmental effects testing be performed.

Proposed Test Rule withdrawn due to termination of all known manufacture and processing operations.

V.	RECOMMENDATION/RATIONALE: Significant new use rule.

Structurally analogous to substances of carcinogenic concern.

Small businesses potential.

Satisfies referring office’s needs.

No federal regulation exists to provide a governmental entity with an opportunity to

evaluate potential human and environmental exposures to PEB from its manufacture, importation, processing, and intended end use; and to protect human beings and the environment from potentially adverse exposures before they occur.

   9   Many Labor hourly rates in this analysis are lower than hourly rates for the same labor categories in an earlier SNUR economic analysis (EPAB, 1999). EPA does not mean to suggest that actual hourly rates declined.  Rather, the apparent decline is due to a changed method of calculating hourly costs for the same labor categories.  There were three changes: (1) Previously, the 17% overhead was applied to wages-plus-fringe benefits.  Now it is applied only to wages.  This change reduces calculated overhead.  (2) Before, most wage rates were based on older data and then inflated to current dollars. Here, most wage rates are based on recent data. (3) Finally, fringe benefits were based on an assumed percent of wages.  Here, private industry fringe benefits are based on actual fringe benefits taken from recent BLS data.

Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Private industry workers, Goods-producing industries, white-collar occupations, as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. The December 2007 values for these series were extracted onFebruary 29, 2008.

   .

    10 An overhead rate of 17 percent applied to wages is used for consistency with recent EPAB economic analyses for two major rulemakings: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program, June 10, 2002, and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report, August 2002. In reports for an earlier SNUR (EPAB, 1999), the 17% was applied to wages-plus-fringe benefits.  Applying it only to wages reduces calculated overhead.

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 61 (Monday, March 30, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17490-17494]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06504]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0717; Product Identifier 2019-NM-133-AD; Amendment
39-19879; AD 2020-06-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -
113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212,
-214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -
131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. This AD was prompted
by a report of cracking found on the frame of the right-hand side
sliding window in the flight deck. This AD requires repetitive
inspections for cracking of the vertical stiffeners of the left- and
right-hand sides of the window frames and corrective actions if
necessary, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 4, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 4, 2020.

ADDRESSES: For the EASA material incorporated by reference (IBR) in
this AD, contact the EASA, 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.
    For the Airbus material incorporated by reference in this AD,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, Rond-Point Emile
Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36
96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
internet https://www.airbus.com.
    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 https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0717.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0717; 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: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0173, dated July 18, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0173'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model
A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model
A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and
Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.
Model A320-215 airplanes are not on the U.S. Register; this AD
therefore does not include those airplanes in the applicability.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS
Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -
131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216,
-231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -
212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on October 28, 2019 (84 FR 57660). The NPRM was prompted by a
report of cracking found on the frame of the right-hand side sliding
window in the flight deck. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive
inspections for cracking of the vertical stiffeners of the left- and
right-hand sides of the window frames and corrective actions if
necessary.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracking of the vertical
stiffeners of the left- and right-hand sides of the window frames,
which could affect the structural integrity of the airplane. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    Delta Airlines (DAL) stated its concurrence with the intent of the
NPRM.

Request To Allow the Use of Additional Service Information

    Airbus asked to allow the use of the following Airbus technical
adaptations (TAs) during accomplishment of the related Airbus service
bulletins (as identified only in section 13 of each TA), noting that
they pertain to an RC (required for compliance) section of the
applicable service information. Airbus stated that the TAs will ensure
that the

eccentric is properly reinstalled in the sliding window frame after
removal.

 Airbus TA 80662272/007/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29, 2019
(Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1402, dated May 17, 2018)
 Airbus TA 80662272/008/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29, 2019
(Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1403, dated May 17, 2018)
 Airbus TA 80662272/009/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29, 2019
(Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1406, dated May 17, 2018)
 Airbus TA 80662272/010/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29, 2019
(Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1407, dated May 17, 2018)
 Airbus TA 80696258/006/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29, 2019
(Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1404, dated May 17, 2018)
 Airbus TA 80696258/007/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29, 2019
(Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1405, dated May 17, 2018)

    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request for the reason
provided. The FAA has added paragraph (h)(4) to this AD to reference
these TAs.
    Airbus also asked that the requirements in the proposed AD related
to these TAs be defined more robustly than merely referring to EASA AD
2019-0173.
    The FAA partially agrees. Paragraph (h)(4) of this AD is an
exception to EASA AD 2019-0173 and references the service information
specified in EASA AD 2019-0173. Paragraph (h)(4) of this AD has been
revised to clarify the use of the TAs when complying with the
requirements of this AD.

Request To Add an Airworthiness Limitations Item (ALI) Task

    United Airlines (UAL) asked to add ALI Task 531136 to the proposed
AD, to accomplish with the inspection specified in Airbus Service
Bulletins A320-53-1402 and A320-53-1403, both dated May 17, 2018. UAL
stated that ALI Task 531136 is a new inspection task introduced in
Revision 46 of the maintenance planning document (MPD), and that Airbus
has cancelled ALI Task 531133 in airworthiness limitations section
(ALS) Part 2, Revision 8. UAL noted that Airbus TFU/ISI <IP_ADDRESS>
can be referenced for additional information. UAL added that if ALI
Task 531133 remains active, there will be duplicate inspection
requirements for the same location (the vertical stiffeners).
    The FAA does not agree with the commenter's request. ALS Part 2,
Revision 8, might be mandatory for certain airplanes, but not for all
U.S-registered airplanes. The compliance time for certain airplane
configurations provided in Appendix 1 of EASA AD 2019-0173 is for
inspections performed using ALI Task 531133. The FAA has not received
any information from EASA or Airbus that ALI Task 531133 should be
replaced with ALI Task 531136. Paragraph (6) of EASA AD 2019-0173,
specifies that accomplishment of the inspection per ALI Task 531133-02-
1 on an airplane within the threshold and intervals as defined in
paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2019-0173, constitutes an acceptable method to
comply with the requirements of paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2019-0173 for
that airplane. Therefore, no duplication of the inspection requirements
will occur. The AD has not been changed in this regard.

Request for Confirmation That Inspections Are Required Using Both EASA
AD 2019-0173 and Applicable Repair Design Approval Sheet (RDAS)

    DAL requested confirmation that when an RDAS exists for a repair of
the referenced inspection area, the inspection must be accomplished per
both the requirements in EASA AD 2019-0173, and each applicable RDAS.
DAL stated that paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2019-0173 states that aircraft
inspected and repaired before the effective date of the proposed AD per
the instructions documented in an RDAS should ``accomplish the next due
inspection for each repaired area in accordance with, and within the
time period after repair, as specified in Airbus RDAS, as applicable.''
DAL stated that it recognizes that this does not terminate the
inspection criteria. DAL further noted that, if this interpretation is
correct, a duplicate inspection requirements is created, which could
ultimately result in inspection in the same area twice at the same
maintenance check.
    The FAA acknowledges DAL's request and has determined that
clarification is necessary. The FAA agrees that the requirements of
paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2019-0173 do not terminate the repetitive
inspection requirements of paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2019-0173. The FAA
also agrees that there may be duplicate requirements for inspections in
accordance with paragraphs (1) and (5) of the EASA AD; however, if the
description and compliance time for the special detailed inspection
required by the RDAS and paragraph (1) of the EASA AD are identical,
operators need not perform duplicate inspections. If there are
differences between the inspection requirements in the RDAS and EASA AD
paragraph (1), operators can contact the manufacturer for an
alternative method of compliance approved by the FAA, EASA, or EASA's
Design Organization Approval (DOA). The AD has not been changed in this
regard.

Request To Revise Reporting Requirement

    DAL asked that the reporting requirement in paragraph (h)(3) of the
proposed AD be revised to require reporting of only positive findings,
in lieu of both positive and negative findings. DAL stated that, based
on substantial cyclical data collected through accomplishment of ALI
Task 531133 and multiple reports of positive cracking indications,
Airbus has been able to develop and publish standardized repair
instructions for cracking, which have been incorporated into
modification service information. DAL added that, since a sufficient
amount of data has been collected over time to develop these standard
repairs and modifications, only positive findings should be reported.
DAL concluded that, as long as accomplishment of ALI Task 531133
yielded positive findings, paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of the proposed AD
should include a statement that only positive findings should be
reported for inspections done before the effective date of the AD.
    DAL also requested that, if revising paragraph (h)(3) of the
proposed AD to specify reporting of positive inspection findings only,
the FAA revise paragraph (h)(3)(ii) to include a statement that only
positive findings for inspections accomplished prior to the effective
date of the AD require reporting.
    The FAA does not agree with the commenter's requests. The FAA has
received no information suggesting that sufficient data has been
collected to exclude reports of negative findings. EASA AD 2019-0173
requires repetitive inspections after accomplishing the modification,
and there is no terminating action for those inspections. Further, DAL
provided no substantiating data to support its assertion that, so long
as cracking found during ALI Task 531133 inspections was the driver for
inspections using the specified inspection service information, 100
percent of crack findings were found during inspections performed using
inspection service information implemented before the effective date of
this AD. Therefore, the AD has not been changed in this regard.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule 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 IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0173 describes procedures for repetitive inspections
for cracking of the vertical stiffeners of the left- and right-hand
sides of the window frame, and corrective actions if necessary.
Corrective actions include modification, rework, and repair.
    Airbus issued the following TAs, which provide missing torque
values used during reinstallation of the eccentric in the sliding
window frame. These TAs are distinct since they provide torque values
used in reinstallation of the eccentric using service information
specified in EASA AD 2019-0173 (service information that applies to
different actions and locations).
     Airbus TA 80662272/007/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
     Airbus TA 80662272/008/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
     Airbus TA 80662272/009/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
     Airbus TA 80662272/010/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
     Airbus TA 80696258/006/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29,
2019.
     Airbus TA 80696258/007/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29,
2019.
    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.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 988 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.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 work-hours x $85 per hour = $935..........................              $0             $935         $923,780
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    The FAA estimates that it takes about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the
cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be
$83,980, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition modifications that would be required based on the results of
any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this on-condition modification:

                                  Estimated Costs of On-Condition Modification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                                  Labor cost                                       Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 work-hours x $85 per hour = $425............................................             (*)           $425 *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the agency to provide parts cost estimates for the
  on-condition modification specified in this AD.

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

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2020-06-10 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19879; Docket No. FAA-2019-0717;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-133-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 4, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2019-0173, dated July 18, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0173'').
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracking found on the frame
of the right-hand side sliding window in the flight deck. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address cracking of the vertical stiffeners of
the left- and right-hand sides of the window frames, which could
affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

(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 2019-0173.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0173

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0173 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0173 does not apply
to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2019-0173 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus within a certain compliance time. For
this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time specified
in paragraph (h)(3)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date
of this AD.
    (4) This AD allows the use of the torque values specified in
Section 13 of the Airbus technical adaptations (TAs) identified in
paragraphs (h)(4)(i) through (vi) of this AD, when installing a
certain eccentric referenced in the applicable Airbus service
bulletin, as specified in the applicable TA.
    (i) Airbus TA 80662272/007/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29, 2019.
    (ii) Airbus TA 80662272/008/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
    (iii) Airbus TA 80662272/009/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
    (iv) Airbus TA 80662272/010/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
    (v) Airbus TA 80696258/006/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29,
2019.
    (vi) Airbus TA 80696258/007/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29,
2019.

(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) 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.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0173 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.
    (4) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory as
required by this AD; the nature and extent of confidentiality to be
provided, if any. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or
any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

(j) Related Information

    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>.

(k) 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.

    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0173,
dated July 18, 2019.
    (ii) Airbus Technical Adaptation 80662272/007/2019, Issue 1,
dated August 29, 2019.
    (iii) Airbus Technical Adaptation 80662272/008/2019, Issue 1,
dated August 29, 2019.
    (iv) Airbus Technical Adaptation 80662272/009/2019, Issue 1,
dated August 29, 2019.
    (v) Airbus Technical Adaptation 80662272/010/2019, Issue 1,
dated August 29, 2019.
    (vi) Airbus Technical Adaptation 80696258/006/2019, Issue 1,
dated October 29, 2019.
    (vii) Airbus Technical Adaptation 80696258/007/2019, Issue 1,
dated October 29, 2019.
    (3) For information about EASA AD 2019-0173, 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.
    (4) For information about the Airbus service information
incorporated by reference in this AD, contact Airbus SAS,
Airworthiness Office--EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93
44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://www.airbus.com.
    (5) You may view this 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>. This
material may be found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2019-0717.
    (6) You may view this material 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: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on March 16, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-06504 Filed 3-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P